# The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?



## Coyote

*This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.

In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.

These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.


----------



## Shusha

Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:

_“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.

  “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:

a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;

b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;

c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);

d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);

e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;

f)  Other relevant factors.

  “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).

  “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
_
Source
_
_
A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> _
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.



So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.

In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent. 

The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous. 

And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.



1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.  

2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.

3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.


And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
Click to expand...

3. The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.​
Not the ones out of Europe.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
Click to expand...


1. No, the Jews, more properly called Hebrews, invaded Canaan from elsewhere.  This is not only a secular archeological fact, it is what the bible states. Plus, these Hebrews fell later to the Neo-Assyrians in 900 BC or so.

2. Of course there is a cultural connection between the Palestinians and the Canaanites.  Here are a few excerpts from secular historical treatises on the subject.  Note: I have chosen a few in which the historian is Jewish.

_‘Palestinians are the descendants of all the indigenous peoples who lived in Palestine over the centuries; since the seventh century, they have been predominantly Muslim in religion and almost completely Arab in language and culture.’

Dowty, Alan (2008). Israel/Palestine. London, UK: Polity. p. 221.

‘Palestinians are an indigenous people who either live in, or originate from, historical Palestine. Although the Muslims guaranteed security and allowed religious freedom to all inhabitants of the region, the majority converted to Islam and adopte

d Arab culture.’ Bassam Abu-Libdeh, Peter D. Turnpenny, and Ahmed Teebi, ‘Genetic Disease in Palestine and Palestinians,’ in Dhavendra Kuma (ed.) Genomics and Health in the Developing World, OUP 2012 pp.700-711, p.700.

“[being of] Canaanite origin, Palestinians have priority; their descendants have continued to live there, which gives them continuity; and (except for the 800,000 dispossessed refugees of 1948 – as determined by Israeli officials at the time, not including the hundreds of thousands subsequently expelled), they are still living there, which gives them present possession. Thus we see that on purely statistical grounds they have a proven legal right to their land.”

Prof. Ilene Beatty, highly renowned historian/anthropologist and specialist on the “Holy Land” in Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan, 1957.

The Arab population of Palestin_e _was native in all the senses of the word, and their roots in Palestine can be traced back at least 40 centuries.

Professor Maxime Rodinson, Professor of law at the Sorbonne University in Paris, Israel and the Arabs, 1968.

As neither the Byzantines nor the Muslims carried out any large-scale population resettlement projects, the Christians were the offspring of the Jewish and Samaritan farmers who converted to Christianity in the Byzantine period; while the Muslim fellaheen in Palestine in modern times are descendants of those Christians who were the descendants of Jews*, and had turned to Islam before the Crusaders’ conquest.

Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, Cambridge University Press. pp 634-1099.  
_
3. The Palestinians have lived continuously in the area from before the arrival of the Jews.  That they practiced the Canaanite or other religions does not change the people's DNA.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Not the ones out of Europe.



But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.  

And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
Click to expand...


Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.
Click to expand...


DNA is NOT the basis for being indigenous.  Culture is.  Invading and colonizing cultures are specifically excluded from the definition of indigenous.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DNA is NOT the basis for being indigenous.  Culture is.  Invading and colonizing cultures are specifically excluded from the definition of indigenous.
Click to expand...


So, the Jews are not indigenous as by your definition invaders can't be indigenous.  Since today's Christian and Muslim Palestinians passively adopted what was required of the various invaders, including religion,  They are the indigenous people.  

But, besides indigenous, they are the "inhabitants" Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to. People living in Europe were not.


----------



## xotoxi

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
Click to expand...

 
That's what has happened everywhere throughtout the world throughout all of history.

And what should be done to rectify it?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:



I strongly disagree.



> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> _
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.



The Middle East, the Palestinian area in particular, is characterized by waves of invasions over milliniums - each succeeding wave brings with it changes in culture/religion/language even though the SAME people stay on.

Given the definition above - there would be no indiginous people.  For example, prior to the recreation of Israel - Hebrew was essentially a dead language, like latin, reserved for religion only.  The Jewish culture varied widely, including the languages spoken.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote,

How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?



I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote ,

Also, please keep in mind my purpose.  My purpose is not to deny anyone their rights.  But to illuminate the necessity for a consistent standard to be applied to all peoples.


----------



## xotoxi

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
Click to expand...


The indiginous people of Georgia are Cherokees.  They were conquered by the Europeans and displaced.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.



The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.  

But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
Click to expand...


Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

xotoxi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The indiginous people of Georgia are Cherokees.  They were conquered by the Europeans and displaced.
Click to expand...



And I would fully support their right to self-determination and sovereignty on their ancestral territory.


----------



## xotoxi

Shusha said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The indiginous people of Georgia are Cherokees.  They were conquered by the Europeans and displaced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I would fully support their right to self-determination and sovereignty on their ancestral territory.
Click to expand...


But how do you do that without displacing people and then causing a Redneck/Redskin war?


----------



## Shusha

xotoxi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The indiginous people of Georgia are Cherokees.  They were conquered by the Europeans and displaced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I would fully support their right to self-determination and sovereignty on their ancestral territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But how do you do that without displacing people and then causing a Redneck/Redskin war?
Click to expand...



We're managing to do it just fine in Canada.


----------



## xotoxi

Shusha said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> How would you differentiate between resident and indigenous?  And why do you think that differentiation might matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The indiginous people of Georgia are Cherokees.  They were conquered by the Europeans and displaced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I would fully support their right to self-determination and sovereignty on their ancestral territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But how do you do that without displacing people and then causing a Redneck/Redskin war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> We're managing to do it just fine in Canada.
Click to expand...


There are a lot of Americans, especially in the South, who won't stand for sharing.


----------



## Boston1

The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.

IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.

Quote


in·dig·e·nous
inˈdijənəs/
_adjective_
originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
"the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More

End Quote

Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.

The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied

With this in mind

Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?

Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.

As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.

Quote
eth·nic
ˈeTHnik/
_adjective_

of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.

End quote

So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.

Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?

While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"

So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.

Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.

In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.

Where we find the

drum roll please

Egyptians

Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.

From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.

Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.

I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.

Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"

This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.

We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE

The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"

Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey






So what happened to the Assyrians

They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.

So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.

PS
Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)


While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"

So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.



Najd, near Gaza?  What language do they speak?  What customs do they follow?  What religious faith do they practice?  What legal system do they use?  What clothing do they wear?  What myths and stories do they tell?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Najd, near Gaza?  What language do they speak?  What customs do they follow?  What religious faith do they practice?  What legal system do they use?  What clothing do they wear?  What myths and stories do they tell?
Click to expand...

What difference does it make? They were there for hundreds of years and there was nobody there before them.


----------



## Shusha

Residence, even for a long time, does not confer indigenousness.  If their culture is that of an invading culture, then, by definition, they are not indigenous.  The whole point of defining indigenous cultures is to preserve the culture of the pre-invasion peoples who developed on that land.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Residence, even for a long time, does not confer indigenousness.  If their culture is that of an invading culture, then, by definition, they are not indigenous.  The whole point of defining indigenous cultures is to preserve the culture of the pre-invasion peoples who developed on that land.



The European Jews are certainly not indigenous to the Middle East or Palestine, so what's your point?  

In any case the Palestinian Mandate refers to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and Article 22 refers to the inhabitants of the territory.  The Palestinians were overwhelmingly the inhabitants when the Mandate was signed.


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
Click to expand...


Never heard of it, but if its a village or a particular group of people they or it would have to precede the late bronze age collapse before it would even come close to dating back to the developing Judaic peoples.

Preceding Ottoman rule would but the development of Najd in about the 15th century CE or about 4500 years AFTER The protojudaic people inhabited the area.

In any case the 15th century CE is well within the era of the Arab Muslim colonization and long after anyone with a first nations claim developed in the area. Which archeology puts back in about the mid to early bronze age with the early Egyptians and the Mountain tribes of the Canaan valley area.

See
The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films

Although the book is the way to go
Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...

Monty, you are apparently emotionally incapable of facing the fact that only about 35% of todays inhabitants in Israel are returnees from Europe; although I did particularly like it when you presented immigration stats from ONLY European countries and then went on to claim it as proof that ALL the returnees came from Europe. I got a great laugh out of that one. 

Once again, your hatred is blinding you


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never heard of it, but if its a village or a particular group of people they or it would have to precede the late bronze age collapse before it would even come close to dating back to the developing Judaic peoples.
> 
> Preceding Ottoman rule would but the development of Najd in about the 15th century CE or about 4500 years AFTER The protojudaic people inhabited the area.
> 
> In any case the 15th century CE is well within the era of the Arab Muslim colonization and long after anyone with a first nations claim developed in the area. Which archeology puts back in about the mid to early bronze age with the early Egyptians and the Mountain tribes of the Canaan valley area.
> 
> See
> The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films
> 
> Although the book is the way to go
> Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...
> 
> Monty, you are apparently emotionally incapable of facing the fact that only about 35% of todays inhabitants in Israel are returnees from Europe; although I did particularly like it when you presented immigration stats from ONLY European countries and then went on to claim it as proof that ALL the returnees came from Europe. I got a great laugh out of that one.
> 
> Once again, your hatred is blinding you
Click to expand...


This hackneyed claim of hate is getting old.  What is blinding you is your ignorance. 

All the Jewish migrants to Israel were/are from somewhere else outside of Palestine.  So it really doesn't matter, they were not inhabitants as per Artilcle 22 of the Covenant.  

During the Mandate era, more than 90% of the Jewish migrants to Palestine were from Europe, that is just a fact.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never heard of it, but if its a village or a particular group of people they or it would have to precede the late bronze age collapse before it would even come close to dating back to the developing Judaic peoples.
> 
> Preceding Ottoman rule would but the development of Najd in about the 15th century CE or about 4500 years AFTER The protojudaic people inhabited the area.
> 
> In any case the 15th century CE is well within the era of the Arab Muslim colonization and long after anyone with a first nations claim developed in the area. Which archeology puts back in about the mid to early bronze age with the early Egyptians and the Mountain tribes of the Canaan valley area.
> 
> See
> The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films
> 
> Although the book is the way to go
> Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...
> 
> Monty, you are apparently emotionally incapable of facing the fact that only about 35% of todays inhabitants in Israel are returnees from Europe; although I did particularly like it when you presented immigration stats from ONLY European countries and then went on to claim it as proof that ALL the returnees came from Europe. I got a great laugh out of that one.
> 
> Once again, your hatred is blinding you
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?



Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never heard of it, but if its a village or a particular group of people they or it would have to precede the late bronze age collapse before it would even come close to dating back to the developing Judaic peoples.
> 
> Preceding Ottoman rule would but the development of Najd in about the 15th century CE or about 4500 years AFTER The protojudaic people inhabited the area.
> 
> In any case the 15th century CE is well within the era of the Arab Muslim colonization and long after anyone with a first nations claim developed in the area. Which archeology puts back in about the mid to early bronze age with the early Egyptians and the Mountain tribes of the Canaan valley area.
> 
> See
> The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films
> 
> Although the book is the way to go
> Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...
> 
> Monty, you are apparently emotionally incapable of facing the fact that only about 35% of todays inhabitants in Israel are returnees from Europe; although I did particularly like it when you presented immigration stats from ONLY European countries and then went on to claim it as proof that ALL the returnees came from Europe. I got a great laugh out of that one.
> 
> Once again, your hatred is blinding you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
Click to expand...


I think we can all see who's just babbling. Multiple proof have been offered in this and other threads and over and over again the supporters of Arab Muslim colonialism have ignored all facts and simply repeated the same old tired nonsense.

Is their proof LMAO

Need I really repeat myself so often ?

here's just one of the land mark works which embrace this issue 

See
The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films

Although the book is the way to go
Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
Click to expand...

Since it would be impossible to determine one way or the other, they just used the standard legal norm.

Anyone who normally lived in the area that became Palestine were Palestinian citizens.

Those who did not did not.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
Click to expand...

Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The genetic tests are somewhat misleading. It very much depends on what markers you are looking for. We also have 99% in common with a chimp, but no one would suggest a chimp is indigenous to say, the Cherokee homelands. or the Iroquois. Of the 1% left over, there's still millions and millions of groupings typical of racial mixing. There's also the vetting process for picking subjects to represent certain groups. Lots of variables with the genetic studies that can skew the results. Hell there's even a fair share of bacterial DNA that gets mixed in depending on what foods you eat. The DNA tests become much more questionable when you delve deeper than the basics.
> 
> IMHO the definition of indigenous is also questionable with many people thinking its somehow time dependent, The subject in the USA became sufficiently contentious that the more accurate term, first nations people was applied.
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> inˈdijənəs/
> _adjective_
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> "the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
> synonyms: native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;More
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Because so many people don't pay much attention to actual meanings its easy for some to think that indigenous is something you can become if you live there for a few hundred years, its not. Ones people must originate in that specific location.
> 
> The term first nations was invented to try and help clear that up, but even that got muddied
> 
> With this in mind
> 
> Who is the first nation people of the Canaan valley area ?
> 
> Hands down its the Judaic people. Its really not even a question.
> 
> As we can see indigenous isn't defined as a genetic grouping. its an ethnic, national ( in the ancient meaning ) grouping. Ethnicity is another interesting word.
> 
> Quote
> eth·nic
> ˈeTHnik/
> _adjective_
> 
> of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition.
> 
> End quote
> 
> So in order to be an indigenous people, one must have existed in a given location naturally or developed there.
> 
> Which brings us to the question, is war a natural condition. Is the meaning intended to address the basest of our traditions ? Does the term naturally imply that its normal for one persons tribe to slaughter the other ? Is naturally occurring ( as seen in the definition of indigenous ) intended to include those who slaughter the inhabitants of a given area and move in to inhabit that area ?
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.
> 
> Which brings us to the question of how far back one goes in history in order to find an indigenous people.
> 
> In the case of the Canaan valley its about the middle bronze age.
> 
> Where we find the
> 
> drum roll please
> 
> Egyptians
> 
> Who were farming the Canaan valley area for quite some time. Undetermined amount of time actually. People argue the age of the pyramids endlessly. But for however long it was, it ended.
> 
> From what I recall ( called the late bronze age collapse ) it was a drought combined with pressure from waring factions in the nile delta area that convinced the Egyptians to leave their Canaan valley farmlands and retreat to defensive positions outside Canaan.
> 
> Which led to the more primitive mountain tribes in the area, members of the Hyksos group, to gradually descend into the valleys of Canaan and pick up where the Egyptians left off. These people would eventually develop into the Judaic tribes.
> 
> I believe this would be called "naturally occurring" and meet the definition of Indigenous.
> 
> Interestingly enough the evidence in the development of the Judaic people in Canaan bears no resemblance to the old testament story ( originally an oral history of the Judaic tribes ) of a diaspora and a brave expulsion from Egyptian servitude or even a conquest of Canaan. See Silberman and Finkelstein "The Bible Unearthed"
> 
> This development appears to have occurred without any major disruptions by either the Egyptians, Hittites or Assyrian empires. Who were dealing with their own problems at the time.
> 
> We all know what happened to the Egyptians, they're still with us. The Hittites had a tendency to go at it with the Assyrians once they became a player and oddly enough one of their more well known treaties as I recall considered the center of the Canaan valley as the armistice line. Ignoring any Hyksos claim to the area as any form of military power, indicating at this time they were still a primitive insignificant tribe or group of tribes. Pretty sure that was about 1200 BCE
> 
> The Hittites were eventually pretty much rubbed out by the Assyrians in a series of wars that generally resulted in a slight mixing of bloodlines and a decline of Hittite culture and language. The Hittites also were on the run long enough that they ended up well outside of anywhere it could be said they either "developed in or occurred naturally"
> 
> Its pretty easy to see that the Assyrians had pushed the Hittites all the way back through the Canaan valley, from their original homeland in what it today Turkey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what happened to the Assyrians
> 
> They are still around wedged between Iraq and Turkey.
> 
> So in the end it was a primitive group known to archeologists as the Hyksos who in this particular area developed into the Judaic tribes inhabiting the mountain areas around the Canaan valley who stayed throughout the ebb and flow of waring early cultures. to this day. Even the Babylonians ( who spelled the end for the Assyrian dominance in the area ) couldn't manage to conquer the Judaic tribes at this point in history. Actually even the Romans didn't force every last Jew from the land. Even the worst of the pogroms failed. Israel is alive and well today, its people enjoy a distinct language, culture and nationality in both the ancient and modern sense.
> 
> PS
> Not sure what this stuff is below but it doesn't show up in the edit box so I can't seem to get rid of it ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> While war is a common incident, I don't see it as being intended in the meaning of "naturally occurring"
> 
> So by definition an indigenous people is one who must have either developed in a given area or be naturally occurring.​
> How would you define the people of Najd. The village of Najd precedes Ottoman rule. There is no history of those inhabitants displacing another people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never heard of it, but if its a village or a particular group of people they or it would have to precede the late bronze age collapse before it would even come close to dating back to the developing Judaic peoples.
> 
> Preceding Ottoman rule would but the development of Najd in about the 15th century CE or about 4500 years AFTER The protojudaic people inhabited the area.
> 
> In any case the 15th century CE is well within the era of the Arab Muslim colonization and long after anyone with a first nations claim developed in the area. Which archeology puts back in about the mid to early bronze age with the early Egyptians and the Mountain tribes of the Canaan valley area.
> 
> See
> The Bible Unearthed - Top Documentary Films
> 
> Although the book is the way to go
> Amazon.com: The Bible Unearthed: Israel Finkelstein, Neil ...
> 
> Monty, you are apparently emotionally incapable of facing the fact that only about 35% of todays inhabitants in Israel are returnees from Europe; although I did particularly like it when you presented immigration stats from ONLY European countries and then went on to claim it as proof that ALL the returnees came from Europe. I got a great laugh out of that one.
> 
> Once again, your hatred is blinding you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think we can all see who's just babbling. Multiple proof have been offered and over and over again the supporters of Arab Muslim colonialism have ignored all facts and simply repeated the same old tired nonsense.
> 
> Is their proof LMAO
> 
> Need I really repeat myself so often ?
> 
> One moment please
Click to expand...


No proof, just your usual propaganda Boston. You are great for laughs though.  The only colonists in Palestine are the Zionist Jews.


*"Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier, Weizmann Tells Actions Committ*
July 25, 1926​London (Jul. 23)
(Jewish Telegraphic Agency)
The various phases of the present situation in Palestine and in the Zionist movement throughout the world, and plans of Zionist leadership for the immediate future, were submitted for consideration at the Zionist Actions Committee which opened its session here yesterday.
“Due to the success of our colonization work in Palestine proper, it is possible that eventually our colonization work will be extended beyond the frontiers of Transjordania. It is true that the Palestine government has not taken a clear stand in regard to its economic policy, but well founded demands have every prospect of being agreed to. A great deal has been achieved during the last months,” Dr. Weizmann said."

http://www.jta.org/1926/07/25/archi...stine-frontier-weizmann-tells-actions-committ


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Since it would be impossible to determine one way or the other, they just used the standard legal norm.
> 
> Anyone who normally lived in the area that became Palestine were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Those who did not did not.



But residence is not equivalent to indigenousness.   So the people of the village of Najd were residents.  This does not give them the status of being indigenous.  And of course, having the culture of an invading peoples they can not be considered indigenous.


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
Click to expand...


Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.

As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)

Quote
*WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*

Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.” 
UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.

End Quote

So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.

Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--) 


Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character. 

All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since it would be impossible to determine one way or the other, they just used the standard legal norm.
> 
> Anyone who normally lived in the area that became Palestine were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But residence is not equivalent to indigenousness.   So the people of the village of Najd were residents.  This does not give them the status of being indigenous.  And of course, having the culture of an invading peoples they can not be considered indigenous.
Click to expand...


Look, the Jews were from somewhere outside of Palestine and invaded the area, so they are not indigenous. 

The Covenant of the League of Nations which legalized the Mandates referred to the "inhabitants" as having the right to being helped in their "well-being and development" by the Mandatory.  Full stop.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
Click to expand...

So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
Link?


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality
Click to expand...


The *Palestine Citizenship Order* was enacted by Britain on 24 July *1925.*


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
Click to expand...


This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming

Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.

For about the fifth time

The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...

Quote


At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation. 
End Quote 

See also 
Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming
> 
> Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.
> 
> For about the fifth time
> 
> The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation.
> End Quote
> 
> See also
> Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project
Click to expand...

OK, but Palestinian citizenship was already established by customary international law by the succession of states. This was reiterated by Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Palestinian citizenship order of 1925 was a colonial order designed to limit the rights provided by law and treaty. Whether that order expired or not does not change the existing rights of the Palestinians.


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have any proof that they were?  (And yes, invasion cultures, by definition, are the culture of the invading group and therefore not indigenous cultures.)
> 
> 
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming
> 
> Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.
> 
> For about the fifth time
> 
> The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation.
> End Quote
> 
> See also
> Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but Palestinian citizenship was already established by customary international law by the succession of states. This was reiterated by Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
> 
> The Palestinian citizenship order of 1925 was a colonial order designed to limit the rights provided by law and treaty. Whether that order expired or not does not change the existing rights of the Palestinians.
Click to expand...


Not true

Quote

SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
ARTICLE 30.
Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.

End Quote 

Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state, and a signatory of the treaty. Israel isn't party to this treaty and even if it was there is no provision for Jordan having stripped palestinians of citizenship in an effort to further destabilize Israel. Also the article fails to take into account the conditions of either war or martial law. Conditions in which neither combatants or their descendants fall under the protections afforded "protected persons" 

See
UN charter
also see 
IV Geneva convention 

Sorry but the entire argument against the Israeli's is based on hatred rather than fact. Prejudice and bigotry rather than history.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the Hebrews invading from Egypt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming
> 
> Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.
> 
> For about the fifth time
> 
> The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation.
> End Quote
> 
> See also
> Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but Palestinian citizenship was already established by customary international law by the succession of states. This was reiterated by Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
> 
> The Palestinian citizenship order of 1925 was a colonial order designed to limit the rights provided by law and treaty. Whether that order expired or not does not change the existing rights of the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not true
> 
> Quote
> 
> SECTION II .
> NATIONALITY.
> ARTICLE 30.
> Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state, and a signatory of the treaty. Israel isn't party to this treaty and even if it was there is no provision for Jordan having stripped palestinians of citizenship in an effort to further destabilize Israel. Also the article fails to take into account the conditions of either war or martial law. Conditions in which neither combatants or their descendants fall under the protections afforded "protected persons"
> 
> See
> UN charter
> also see
> IV Geneva convention
> 
> Sorry but the entire argument against the Israeli's is based on hatred rather than fact. Prejudice and bigotry rather than history.
Click to expand...

Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state...​
Not true. You are basing your opinion on false premise.


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of no proof, its a lie to suggest the Judaic people came from Egypt. Firstly even if you do take the bible story at face value then they still arrived in the Canaan valley about 3000 years BEFORE  the Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> As for that other little ditty about what defines a palestinian, your version as usual is a tad disingenuous since you left off the most important criteria. Oh and if you are going to quote the UN then lets keep it in context by including the ENTIRE definition ;--)
> 
> Quote
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> 
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, that expired with the end of the mandate period. Now its a definition provided by the UN that defines who a palestinian is, and as we all can see its not dependent on anything but location within a two year period.
> 
> Show us a similar definition used to define nationality or an indigenous designation ;--)
> 
> 
> Your argument falls flat at ever turn. The original inhabitants appear to be the Egyptians who later abandoned the area in the late bronze age collapse at which point the more primitive people living in the mountainous areas ( the proto Judaic people ) began to develop into the tribes eventually associated with Jewish character.
> 
> All this about 4500 years BEFORE the first Arab Muslim colonists ever arrived
> 
> 
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming
> 
> Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.
> 
> For about the fifth time
> 
> The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation.
> End Quote
> 
> See also
> Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but Palestinian citizenship was already established by customary international law by the succession of states. This was reiterated by Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
> 
> The Palestinian citizenship order of 1925 was a colonial order designed to limit the rights provided by law and treaty. Whether that order expired or not does not change the existing rights of the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not true
> 
> Quote
> 
> SECTION II .
> NATIONALITY.
> ARTICLE 30.
> Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state, and a signatory of the treaty. Israel isn't party to this treaty and even if it was there is no provision for Jordan having stripped palestinians of citizenship in an effort to further destabilize Israel. Also the article fails to take into account the conditions of either war or martial law. Conditions in which neither combatants or their descendants fall under the protections afforded "protected persons"
> 
> See
> UN charter
> also see
> IV Geneva convention
> 
> Sorry but the entire argument against the Israeli's is based on hatred rather than fact. Prejudice and bigotry rather than history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state...​
> Not true. You are basing your opinion on false premise.
Click to expand...


Unless Israel's signature is on that treaty it doesn't apply to them. ;--)

The treaty of Lausanne was also superseded by a whole slew of later treaties. Of particular note is IV Geneva convention, which Israel did sign but with reservations as I recall. But the IV G clearly states that combatants are not considered protected persons and since the UN has failed to segregate combatants and their descendants from the legitimate refugee population; it would not be possible at this time to make a reasonable determination of who any such right might even apply too.

On any number of points your reference falls flat in providing a basis for support in international law.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> So its not simply people who fell under the citizenship order, *that expired with the end of the mandate period.*​
> Link?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is pathetic. Do you really think questioning the same explicit facts over and over will convince anyone actually reading this that you have any knowledge or valid input on this subject ? Face it, the evidence is overwhelming
> 
> Palestinian citizenship or what the UN considers a palestinian to be has nothing to do with anything even remotely indigenous in nature. One only had to reside in the mandate area for a two year period of time to qualify. AND any orders given by the mandating authorities EXPIRED with the mandate.
> 
> For about the fifth time
> 
> The creation of Palestinian citizenship under an ...
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> At no other time, except between 1925 and 1948, did a Palestinian citizen exist, yet even today the citizenship laws of the successor states of Palestine (Israel, the West Bank under Jordanian administration, Gaza under Egyptian administration, and the current Palestinian Authority) have included some elements of Ottoman nationality legislation and Palestine Mandate citizenship legislation.
> End Quote
> 
> See also
> Citizenship After Orientalism: An Unfinished Project
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but Palestinian citizenship was already established by customary international law by the succession of states. This was reiterated by Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
> 
> The Palestinian citizenship order of 1925 was a colonial order designed to limit the rights provided by law and treaty. Whether that order expired or not does not change the existing rights of the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not true
> 
> Quote
> 
> SECTION II .
> NATIONALITY.
> ARTICLE 30.
> Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state, and a signatory of the treaty. Israel isn't party to this treaty and even if it was there is no provision for Jordan having stripped palestinians of citizenship in an effort to further destabilize Israel. Also the article fails to take into account the conditions of either war or martial law. Conditions in which neither combatants or their descendants fall under the protections afforded "protected persons"
> 
> See
> UN charter
> also see
> IV Geneva convention
> 
> Sorry but the entire argument against the Israeli's is based on hatred rather than fact. Prejudice and bigotry rather than history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Clearly the article is pertaining to Great Britain which became the governing state...​
> Not true. You are basing your opinion on false premise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Unless Israel's signature is on that treaty it doesn't apply to them. ;--)
> 
> The treaty of Lausanne was also superseded by a whole slew of later treaties. Of particular note is IV Geneva convention, which Israel did sign but with reservations as I recall. But the IV G clearly states that combatants are not considered protected persons and since the UN has failed to segregate combatants and their descendants from the legitimate refugee population; it would not be possible at this time to make a reasonable determination of who any such right might even apply too.
> 
> On any number of points your reference falls flat in providing a basis for support in international law.
Click to expand...

Where did the Geneva Convention change anything in the Treaty of Lausanne?


----------



## Shusha

Some thoughts on indigenous peoples by an indigenous Metis Canadian: 

On the uniqueness of Israel as a modern nation-State:

_Israel is the world’s first modern indigenous state: the creation and declaration of the sovereign nation of Israel marks the first time in history that an indigenous people has managed to regain control of its ancestral lands and build a nation state. As such, this is incredibly important for indigenous people both to recognize and to support as a great example for our peoples to emulate._



On the inadmissibility of the Palestinian claim:  

_Some Palestinians share common ancestry with indigenous peoples, but they neither follow indigenous traditions nor do they self-identify as those indigenous peoples. They share neither religion nor language with them. Blood quantum alone is insufficient to transmit indigenous status

The Arabs of the Middle East subsumed several indigenous populations, but no group can become indigenous through subsuming indigenous peoples. Rather, they conquered the entire region and spread their own language, customs, and religion. This is historical fact.


_
On the importance of recognizing the Jewish claim:

_Now you might ask, why is this important? It is important to indigenous people because* we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous.* If we, as other indigenous people, allow that argument to be made, then we are delegitimising our own rights._
_If conquerors can become indigenous, then the white Europeans who came to my indigenous lands in North America could now claim to be indigenous. The white Europeans who went to Australia and New Zealand could now claim to be indigenous. If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless._



And, while we are here, a big shout out to Canada for being on the forefront of acknowledging and respecting indigenous rights by establishing treaties and agreements which entrench the rights for self-determination and self-governance with our indigenous peoples.  We still have a long way to go.  But we are the world leaders in this area.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Some thoughts on indigenous peoples by an indigenous Metis Canadian:
> 
> On the uniqueness of Israel as a modern nation-State:
> 
> _Israel is the world’s first modern indigenous state: the creation and declaration of the sovereign nation of Israel marks the first time in history that an indigenous people has managed to regain control of its ancestral lands and build a nation state. As such, this is incredibly important for indigenous people both to recognize and to support as a great example for our peoples to emulate._
> 
> 
> 
> On the inadmissibility of the Palestinian claim:
> 
> _Some Palestinians share common ancestry with indigenous peoples, but they neither follow indigenous traditions nor do they self-identify as those indigenous peoples. They share neither religion nor language with them. Blood quantum alone is insufficient to transmit indigenous status
> 
> The Arabs of the Middle East subsumed several indigenous populations, but no group can become indigenous through subsuming indigenous peoples. Rather, they conquered the entire region and spread their own language, customs, and religion. This is historical fact.
> 
> 
> _
> On the importance of recognizing the Jewish claim:
> 
> _Now you might ask, why is this important? It is important to indigenous people because* we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous.* If we, as other indigenous people, allow that argument to be made, then we are delegitimising our own rights._
> _If conquerors can become indigenous, then the white Europeans who came to my indigenous lands in North America could now claim to be indigenous. The white Europeans who went to Australia and New Zealand could now claim to be indigenous. If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless._
> 
> 
> 
> And, while we are here, a big shout out to Canada for being on the forefront of acknowledging and respecting indigenous rights by establishing treaties and agreements which entrench the rights for self-determination and self-governance with our indigenous peoples.  We still have a long way to go.  But we are the world leaders in this area.



But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.



No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
Click to expand...


The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
Click to expand...


You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
Click to expand...


*Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*


Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
Click to expand...


Oh stop this bullshit, you are the racist, hater and bigot Hasbara fellowship graduate.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*
> 
> 
> Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center
Click to expand...


ONE building with SOME Minoan influences does not a history make. This time period was rich with Egyptian influences as this time frame was just prior to the late bronze age collapse, when the Egyptians fled back to Egypt.

Sorry but overwhelmingly the evidence proves JUDIAC origins in this area.

Unless that is you are now arguing the Monoan culture developed in the Canaan valley LMAO Best of luck with that one

Once again your racism and hatred is blinding you from even simple thought processes

Quote

The Tel Kabri fresoes and painting are, however, the only evidence of Minoan or Cycladic-style artwork in present-day Israel (or among the ancient Canaanites). And new excavations begun in 2005 under the direction of Eric Cline of George Washington University and Assaf Yasur-Landau of the University of Haifa have added to the discovery. During excavations in 2008 and 2009, they found more than 100 new fragments of wall and floor plaster, 

End Quote 

Once again you quote fails to support your assertion and your hatred is blinding you to even the basics


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*
> 
> 
> Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ONE building with SOME Minoan influences does not a history make. This time period was rich with Egyptian influences as this time frame was just prior to the late bronze age collapse, when the Egyptians fled back to Egypt.
> 
> Sorry but overwhelmingly the evidence proves JUDIAC origins in this area.
> 
> Unless that is you are now arguing the Monoan culture now developed in the Canaan valley LMAO
> 
> Once again your racism and hatred is blinding you from even simple thought processes
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Tel Kabri fresoes and painting are, however, the only evidence of Minoan or Cycladic-style artwork in present-day Israel (or among the ancient Canaanites). And new excavations begun in 2005 under the direction of Eric Cline of George Washington University and Assaf Yasur-Landau of the University of Haifa have added to the discovery. During excavations in 2008 and 2009, they found more than 100 new fragments of wall and floor plaster,
> 
> End Quote
Click to expand...


The Jews invaded Canaan, that's a fact.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*
> 
> 
> Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ONE building with SOME Minoan influences does not a history make. This time period was rich with Egyptian influences as this time frame was just prior to the late bronze age collapse, when the Egyptians fled back to Egypt.
> 
> Sorry but overwhelmingly the evidence proves JUDIAC origins in this area.
> 
> Unless that is you are now arguing the Monoan culture now developed in the Canaan valley LMAO
> 
> Once again your racism and hatred is blinding you from even simple thought processes
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Tel Kabri fresoes and painting are, however, the only evidence of Minoan or Cycladic-style artwork in present-day Israel (or among the ancient Canaanites). And new excavations begun in 2005 under the direction of Eric Cline of George Washington University and Assaf Yasur-Landau of the University of Haifa have added to the discovery. During excavations in 2008 and 2009, they found more than 100 new fragments of wall and floor plaster,
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Jews invaded Canaan, that's a fact.
Click to expand...


It never ceases to amaze me how your entire position is dependent on lies. 

Best archeological evidence clearly shows that the proto Judaic people developed in the Canaan valley undisturbed well into Babylonian times, and that the bible story is false. There was no conquest of Canaan. 

If you are going to base your hatred and bigotry on mythology then your dependance on lies and fake quotes to maintain your position suddenly makes a lot more sense.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
Click to expand...

Judaism developed in Mesopotamia/Babylon, it was a more radical fundamentalist version of some Judean monotheist cults that existed previously.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*
> 
> 
> Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ONE building with SOME Minoan influences does not a history make. This time period was rich with Egyptian influences as this time frame was just prior to the late bronze age collapse, when the Egyptians fled back to Egypt.
> 
> Sorry but overwhelmingly the evidence proves JUDIAC origins in this area.
> 
> Unless that is you are now arguing the Monoan culture now developed in the Canaan valley LMAO
> 
> Once again your racism and hatred is blinding you from even simple thought processes
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Tel Kabri fresoes and painting are, however, the only evidence of Minoan or Cycladic-style artwork in present-day Israel (or among the ancient Canaanites). And new excavations begun in 2005 under the direction of Eric Cline of George Washington University and Assaf Yasur-Landau of the University of Haifa have added to the discovery. During excavations in 2008 and 2009, they found more than 100 new fragments of wall and floor plaster,
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Jews invaded Canaan, that's a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It never ceases to amaze me how your entire position is dependent on lies.
> 
> Best archeological evidence clearly shows that the proto Judaic people developed in the Canaan valley undisturbed well into Babylonian times, and that the bible story is false. There was no conquest of Canaan.
> 
> If you are going to base your hatred and bigotry on mythology then your dependance on lies and fake quotes to maintain your position suddenly makes a lot more sense.
Click to expand...


There's no such thing as a "Judaic people"


----------



## Challenger

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. The Jewish people and the Jewish culture developed on the territory in question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.  Stop this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are blinded by racism, bigotry and hatred; there is no doubt that the Judaic people developed their language and culture within the mandated area. A claim that out distances any other claim by about 4500 years, based on the archeological evidence already presented
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center*
> 
> 
> Archaeologists Uncover Rare Finds at an Ancient Canaanite Center
Click to expand...


It's worse than that, recently a "bog body" found in Ireland has been DNA tested and supports a new theory that the original Irish came from the Middle East, move over Zionists, the Irish are coming to claim back their patrimony!


----------



## montelatici

Look out.  The Tuscans are about to claim their homeland back. 

On the other hand, there has been a lot of intermarriage between Italians and Irish in the U.S., so they may get along when they recover their homeland as the indigenous people of Canaan and Phoenicia.

A study  of grape vine species DNA and other wine related artifacts of the Canaanites and Phoenicians were found among Etruscan grape vine DNA and wine related artifacts indicating that Etruscans may be descendants of the people living in Canaan and Phoenicia that fled the Hebrew invasion of their land.





http://www.penn.museum/sites/biomoleculararchaeology/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Etruscanwine.pdf


----------



## rhodescholar

The only facts one needs to look at is the census data taken of the arab muslims showing their massive growth from 1910 to the late 1930s, which cannot be explained by birthrate, but massive immigration.  That the fakestinians do not have a distinct language, culture or mode of dress other than what they brought over from their home countries of syria, egypt (where arafat was born), jordan and lebanon, is further proof.

Why these two facts are ignored by the pro-arab muslim terror apologist scumbags is obvious.


----------



## montelatici

rhodescholar said:


> The only facts one needs to look at is the census data taken of the arab muslims showing their massive growth from 1910 to the late 1930s, which cannot be explained by birthrate, but massive immigration.  That the fakestinians do not have a distinct language, culture or mode of dress other than what they brought over from their home countries of syria, egypt (where arafat was born), jordan and lebanon, is further proof.
> 
> Why these two facts are ignored by the pro-arab muslim terror apologist scumbags is obvious.



Because it is Zionist propaganda belied by the facts.  You see, there are academic and Government archives that preserve the facts and prove that all you lying scumbags have is propaganda.

Chapter II, paras. 15 and 16, debunk your lies.



[TBODY][TR][TD="width: 75%"]*UNITED*
*NATIONS*[/TD]
[TD="width: 25%"]*A*​[/TD][/TR][/TBODY]​

[TBODY][TR][TD="width: 15%"]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/TD]
[TD="width: 49%"]

*General Assembly*
[/TD]
[TD="width: 36%"]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD="width: 15%"]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/TD][TD="width: 49%"]
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




[/TD][TD="width: 36%"]A/364
3 September 1947[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD="width: 100%, colspan: 3"]​[/TD][/TR][/TBODY]*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *
*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*


*SUPPLEMENT No. 11*



*UNITED NATIONS*
*SPECIAL COMMITTEE*
*ON PALESTINE*​


(b) IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration.* From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. *


----------



## P F Tinmore

montelatici said:


> Look out.  The Tuscans are about to claim their homeland back.
> 
> On the other hand, there has been a lot of intermarriage between Italians and Irish in the U.S., so they may get along when they recover their homeland as the indigenous people of Canaan and Phoenicia.
> 
> A study  of grape vine species DNA and other wine related artifacts of the Canaanites and Phoenicians were found among Etruscan grape vine DNA and wine related artifacts indicating that Etruscans may be descendants of the people living in Canaan and Phoenicia that fled the Hebrew invasion of their land.
> 
> View attachment 59754
> 
> http://www.penn.museum/sites/biomoleculararchaeology/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Etruscanwine.pdf


I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.

Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?


----------



## montelatici

P F Tinmore said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look out.  The Tuscans are about to claim their homeland back.
> 
> On the other hand, there has been a lot of intermarriage between Italians and Irish in the U.S., so they may get along when they recover their homeland as the indigenous people of Canaan and Phoenicia.
> 
> A study  of grape vine species DNA and other wine related artifacts of the Canaanites and Phoenicians were found among Etruscan grape vine DNA and wine related artifacts indicating that Etruscans may be descendants of the people living in Canaan and Phoenicia that fled the Hebrew invasion of their land.
> 
> View attachment 59754
> 
> http://www.penn.museum/sites/biomoleculararchaeology/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Etruscanwine.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
Click to expand...


Right of return for the ingenious, oops I mean indigenous.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?



Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.
Click to expand...

I am serious.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am serious.
Click to expand...


Defend your case then.  Define how, exactly, you can "tell" you are Israelite.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am serious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defend your case then.  Define how, exactly, you can "tell" you are Israelite.
Click to expand...


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am serious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defend your case then.  Define how, exactly, you can "tell" you are Israelite.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


My hearing impairment does not permit me to understand this video and the gentleman's accent.  The CC is atrocious (fish collusion?) 

Remember my request though, it is not to prove that the Jewish people's diaspora is wide and partly unknown (which I sort of gather is the gist of the video), the request is to demonstrate why you, personally, believe yourself to be an Israelite.

And while you are at it, maybe you can suggest why you used the term "Israelite" and not "Jew".


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I far as I can tell, I am an Israelite.
> 
> Does that mean that I can go to Palestine and kick someone out of his house?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Don't make a mockery of this conflict by comments such as these.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am serious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defend your case then.  Define how, exactly, you can "tell" you are Israelite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My hearing impairment does not permit me to understand this video and the gentleman's accent.  The CC is atrocious (fish collusion?)
> 
> Remember my request though, it is not to prove that the Jewish people's diaspora is wide and partly unknown (which I sort of gather is the gist of the video), the request is to demonstrate why you, personally, believe yourself to be an Israelite.
> 
> And while you are at it, maybe you can suggest why you used the term "Israelite" and not "Jew".
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I forgot. Perhaps this will be more intelligible.


BTW, I too have a hearing problem. I have a pair of cheap earbuds. These favor the voice frequencies and cut off those that muddy up the sound. Often times I can hear people talking but I can't understand what they are saying. Just a thought.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> And while you are at it, maybe you can suggest why you used the term "Israelite" and not "Jew".



Wouldn't want to put words in someone else's mouth, but I'd hazard a guess that the former may have been a member of an ancient tribe/ethnic group, while the latter denotes membership of a religious cult, perhaps that of Judean Monotheism. More accurately in antiquity, "Judean" would have been a more ethnically orientated descriptive term.


----------



## Boston1

No matter how you slice it Arab Muslim colonists were not indigenous to the mandated area.

See
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0ahUKEwjQ0Zzs6r3KAhWkzoMKHT6mBzoQFggwMAM&url=http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/plunder.html&usg=AFQjCNGdD2oA8C3WEomSuXoxT-TPQdmkcA&sig2=nx9eWKoyCrIu7rWFOul3vQ

Also see 
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=0ahUKEwjQ0Zzs6r3KAhWkzoMKHT6mBzoQFghgMA4&url=http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/01/09/palestinians-invented-people/&usg=AFQjCNEOsVfX9e8Oc9UtIyxI6AMF-w2pZw&sig2=1mMKh5UxDxRS0Hp9p6_kOg


----------



## Challenger

"No matter how you slice it Arab Muslim colonists were indigenous to the mandated area." There, fixed it for ya, no need to thank me, happy to help. 

Try reading a decent history book, not just Hasbara sites on the internet; to think people moan about Wikipedia 

Here's a starter book for you The Great Arab Conquests: How The Spread Of Islam Changed The World We Live In: Amazon.co.uk: Hugh Kennedy: 9780753823897: Books


----------



## Boston1

LOL, the author was far from neutral in his views. Offered few first sources in support of his diatribe and all in all it was a boring read. Also as I recall he repeatedly repudiates his own stories by admitting he has very little source material. I can't remember for what class but I was tortured into ready what can at best be call a mundane and unsubstantiated view of the Arab Muslim colonial period.

Or in short
Yeah I read it ;--)

Whats your point ? Or are you simply avoiding the fact that the Arab Muslims are colonists in a foreign land


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> LOL, the author was far from neutral in his views. Offered few first sources in support of his diatribe and all in all it was a boring read. Also as I recall he repeatedly repudiates his own stories by admitting he has very little source material. I can't remember for what class but I was tortured into ready what can at best be call a mundane and unsubstantiated view of the Arab Muslim colonial period.
> 
> Or in short
> Yeah I read it ;--)
> 
> Whats your point ? Or are you simply avoiding the fact that the Arab Muslims are colonists in a foreign land



The colonists are the Jews.  They came from elsewhere, the Muslims and Christians of Palestine are, by definition, the native people.


----------



## Boston1

Repeating the same old tired lie won't make it any less a lie Monty


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Repeating the same old tired lie won't make it any less a lie Monty



How can fact be a lie?  The Jews that colonized Palestine came from outside of Palestine.  The non-Jews had been living in Palestine had been living in Palestine for many generations.  That's just a fact.


----------



## Boston1

What you call facts are what the rest of us call fantasies. Jews didn't colonize Judea, they developed both their language and culture right there, dating back to the dawn of written history.

How can anyone colonize their ancestral lands.

The Arab Muslims on the other hand did colonize Judea from the Arabian Peninsula right around the 9th century CE in what is known to history as the Arab conquest.

You don't read much history do you ?

And you have no proof or evidence to support your generalization that non jews had been living in the area of the mandate for generations.

What is known is that at the time of the Arab conquest many if not most of the reagions inhabitants were slaughtered in typical Arab Muslim fashion, convert or die.

We also know that a sufficient number of Arab Muslim colonists remained to enforce their influence on whatever of the population remained.

What we don't know is what percentage of teh population remained or what percentage of population was Arab Muslim colonists.

So you really have no supporting evidence for your claims.

Any way you slice it basic science shows that the proto Judaic people inhabited the Canaan valley area long before the Arab Muslim ever even existed.

But I am kinda curious, tell me Clifford ;--)


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, the author was far from neutral in his views. Offered few first sources in support of his diatribe and all in all it was a boring read. Also as I recall he repeatedly repudiates his own stories by admitting he has very little source material. I can't remember for what class but I was tortured into ready what can at best be call a mundane and unsubstantiated view of the Arab Muslim colonial period.
> 
> Or in short
> Yeah I read it ;--)
> 
> Whats your point ? Or are you simply avoiding the fact that the Arab Muslims are colonists in a foreign land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The colonists are the Jews.  They came from elsewhere, the Muslims and Christians of Palestine are, by definition, the native people.
Click to expand...

You mindlessly rattle on with cliche's and slogans not taking the time to learn. 

The Ottomon colonists were not, by definition, native people. The Syrian, Lebaneses and Egyptian squatters were not, by definition, native people. 

Take some time to learn, your definitions.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, the author was far from neutral in his views. Offered few first sources in support of his diatribe and all in all it was a boring read. Also as I recall he repeatedly repudiates his own stories by admitting he has very little source material. I can't remember for what class but I was tortured into ready what can at best be call a mundane and unsubstantiated view of the Arab Muslim colonial period.
> 
> Or in short
> Yeah I read it ;--)
> 
> Whats your point ? Or are you simply avoiding the fact that the Arab Muslims are colonists in a foreign land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The colonists are the Jews.  They came from elsewhere, the Muslims and Christians of Palestine are, by definition, the native people.
Click to expand...



Being part of a group which is indigenous to an ancestral area is what confers their indigenousness, not the current place of residence. Indigenousness applies to the entire group and to each person belonging to the group.


----------



## Boston1

The final nail in this coffin is that the UN had to get creative when deciding who a palestinian was. According to them, its anyone residing in the mandated area within a two year period. Nationality, heritage, indiginous had nothing to do with it. 

Now I ask you

Why was that ?


----------



## Shusha

Boston1 said:


> The final nail in this coffin is that the UN had to get creative when deciding who a palestinian was. According to them, its anyone residing in the mandated area within a two year period. Nationality, heritage, indiginous had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Now I ask you
> 
> Why was that ?



Because they wanted to give Palestinians special privileges that no one else has ever had?


----------



## Boston1

Well first they had to invent palestinians


----------



## montelatici

*PALESTINE.*

*CORRESPONDENCE *
*WITH THE*
*PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION*
*AND THE *
*ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*

*Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.*
*JUNE, 1922.*
*LONDON:

*
If to-day the *People of Palestine* assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration.

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> LOL, the author was far from neutral in his views. Offered few first sources in support of his diatribe and all in all it was a boring read. Also as I recall he repeatedly repudiates his own stories by admitting he has very little source material. I can't remember for what class but I was tortured into ready what can at best be call a mundane and unsubstantiated view of the Arab Muslim colonial period.
> 
> Or in short
> Yeah I read it ;--)
> 
> Whats your point ? Or are you simply avoiding the fact that the Arab Muslims are colonists in a foreign land



My point is simple, you have no idea about this subject, or history in general outside of your Hasbara bubble. So you've read it, not just the 1 star review on Amazon? Good to know. Ok, what's chapter six called and on what page does it start (I'll give you 10 pages either way because in different editions it may start on different pages)?  

If you have read it you will have noted the lack of colonisation of the conquered lands.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> What you call facts are what the rest of us call fantasies. Jews didn't colonize Judea, they developed both their language and culture right there, dating back to the dawn of written history.
> 
> How can anyone colonize their ancestral lands.
> 
> The Arab Muslims on the other hand did colonize Judea from the Arabian Peninsula right around the 9th century CE in what is known to history as the Arab conquest.
> 
> You don't read much history do you ?
> 
> And you have no proof or evidence to support your generalization that non jews had been living in the area of the mandate for generations.
> 
> What is known is that at the time of the Arab conquest many if not most of the reagions inhabitants were slaughtered in typical Arab Muslim fashion, convert or die.
> 
> We also know that a sufficient number of Arab Muslim colonists remained to enforce their influence on whatever of the population remained.
> 
> What we don't know is what percentage of teh population remained or what percentage of population was Arab Muslim colonists.
> 
> So you really have no supporting evidence for your claims.
> 
> Any way you slice it basic science shows that the proto Judaic people inhabited the Canaan valley area long before the Arab Muslim ever even existed.
> 
> But I am kinda curious, tell me Clifford ;--)








Judeans lived there before, during and after, they just converted over time. Jewish European Zionists colonised Palestine in the 20th century.


----------



## Boston1

You really are dreaming if you think I still have any but the better of my books from my college days. From what I recall the book sucked and was mostly conjecture. I also recall the class it came up in giving it really bad review and pretty much berating the professor for making us read it. Later I think it was dropped from the curriculum.

While one of my more favorite authors ( Finkelstein ) pointed out some errors in another book you would do well to read "From Time Immemorial" which I do have sitting around here somewhere.  Now that one went through several stages of reviews. Initially acclaimed as the definitive work, errors were found which in the academic world means someone is going to be jumping down your throat. But regardless its a great read and offers so much information that it was almost inevitable that over time some percentage of that information would be refuted.

So yeah, best of luck suggesting crappy books that don't offer any substance as some of us are actually read on this subject.






Speaking of which, here's something else you might read 

Quote 

*WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.” 
UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.

End Quote 

Notice there is no qualification of ethnicity, nationality, indiginous status or any other consideration but a 2 year stint in the mandated area. 

The fun part comes when you ( assuming you've ever actually discussed these issues before ) consider just how many of that original 750,000 refugees were actually combatants and didn't actually qualify for refugee status. Consider that the UNWRA is almost entirely staffed by Arab Muslims who apparently don't read either and failed to follow the UNs own policy of segregating combatants from refugees. 

So once we establish an estimate for how many of the refugees were either combatants, assisted combatants or could be suspected of assisting or engaging in acts against the state then we get to the even stickier issue of the descendants of people who don't qualify as refugees living in refugee camps only because the UNWRA Arab Muslim employees refuse to segregate combatants from protected persons 

Anyway chew on that for a while and get back to us because who exactly qualifies as a refugee is sorta important ;--)


----------



## Challenger

Ah, thought so. 



Boston1 said:


> So yeah, best of luck suggesting crappy books that don't offer any substance as some of us are actually read on this subject.



At least you didn't say "well read"; that would have proved beyond doubt you have absolutely no idea. Another triumph for the American educational system.


----------



## Challenger

"I was born in Israel and it was many years before I realized that Israel was Palestine." *--Gilad Atzmon*

Someone else whose thoughts are worth the read, if you agree with him or not.


----------



## Boston1

Boston1 said:


> You really are dreaming if you think I still have any but the better of my books from my college days. From what I recall the book sucked and was mostly conjecture. I also recall the class it came up in giving it really bad review and pretty much berating the professor for making us read it. Later I think it was dropped from the curriculum.
> 
> While one of my more favorite authors ( Finkelstein ) pointed out some errors in another book you would do well to read "From Time Immemorial" which I do have sitting around here somewhere.  Now that one went through several stages of reviews. Initially acclaimed as the definitive work, errors were found which in the academic world means someone is going to be jumping down your throat. But regardless its a great read and offers so much information that it was almost inevitable that over time some percentage of that information would be refuted.
> 
> So yeah, best of luck suggesting crappy books that don't offer any substance as some of us are actually read on this subject.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of which, here's something else you might read
> 
> Quote
> 
> *WHO ARE PALESTINE REFUGEES?*
> Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”
> UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration. When the Agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 750,000 Palestine refugees. Today, some 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Notice there is no qualification of ethnicity, nationality, indiginous status or any other consideration but a 2 year stint in the mandated area.
> 
> The fun part comes when you ( assuming you've ever actually discussed these issues before ) consider just how many of that original 750,000 refugees were actually combatants and didn't actually qualify for refugee status. Consider that the UNWRA is almost entirely staffed by Arab Muslims who apparently don't read either and failed to follow the UNs own policy of segregating combatants from refugees.
> 
> So once we establish an estimate for how many of the refugees were either combatants, assisted combatants or could be suspected of assisting or engaging in acts against the state then we get to the even stickier issue of the descendants of people who don't qualify as refugees living in refugee camps only because the UNWRA Arab Muslim employees refuse to segregate combatants from protected persons
> 
> Anyway chew on that for a while and get back to us because who exactly qualifies as a refugee is sorta important ;--)



Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing. 

If you'd rather discuss authors your welcome to do so IN ANOTHER THREAD. Our moderators have asked us to stay on topic. 

If you have any rebuttal to the issues presented feel free. Had you actually read the thread we were up to the qualifications of a refugee and if it included any requirement of an indigenous character, which it doesn't 

Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ? 

Something tells me you aren't all that well read on that either ;--) 

So please lets just stick on topic and you can discuss all the revisionist holocaust denying authors you want elsewhere. 

Although if you are seriously suggesting Atzman you really are barking up the wrong tree. 

So how about that UN definition of a palestinian refugee ;--) Kinda blows your indigenous argument right out of the water as indigenous clearly has nothing to do with it.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing.



Happy to address a point once you make one worth addressing. 

UNWRA is irrelevant to resolving who is indigenous to Palestine, but that said, the refugees UNWRA deals with nevertheless have a much greater claim to being indigenous than the Russians, Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans who came over on the boat in the 20th century.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to address a point once you make one worth addressing.
> 
> UNWRA is irrelevant to resolving who is indigenous to Palestine, but that said, the refugees UNWRA deals with nevertheless have a much greater claim to being indigenous than the Russians, Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans who came over on the boat in the 20th century.
Click to expand...

The UNWRA does not define refugees. They only define who qualifies for aid.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?



Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to address a point once you make one worth addressing.
> 
> UNWRA is irrelevant to resolving who is indigenous to Palestine, but that said, the refugees UNWRA deals with nevertheless have a much greater claim to being indigenous than the Russians, Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans who came over on the boat in the 20th century.
Click to expand...


I didn't think so ;--)

You're making baseless claims again. The UN definition is all it takes to understand that first nations status had exactly zero to do with who is or isn't a palestinian.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...WW_CUqLgHR9t9XQZMb9wcA&bvm=bv.112454388,d.amc

Also your assumption ( again offered with no basis in fact ) that the returnees were all from Europe is demonstrably wrong

Although Wiki isn't our best source its easy so I'll use it cause I doubt you read the links anyway LOL ;--)

Only about 35% of the Judaic population in Israel are from Europe ;--)

Demographics of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So again the baseless claims and assumptions are pretty easily proven false. Its actually a pretty easy game of find the flaw as the palestinian narrative seems entirely based on false information and revisionist history.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.
Click to expand...


Your funny. 

Your argument is nonexistent, you don't provide a single corroborating source and so far everything you've claimed had been demonstrably false. ( through the use of even just basic source material ) so yeah, not feeling any tremendous inclination to simply take your word for it. LOL


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your funny.
> 
> Your argument is nonexistent, you don't provide a single corroborating source and so far everything you've claimed had been demonstrably false. ( through the use of even just basic source material ) so yeah, not feeling any tremendous inclination to simply take your word for it. LOL
Click to expand...


Everything you have claimed is demonstrably false.  All source documentation disproves your every assertion.


----------



## Boston1

More baseless claims from the racist mob. 

No citations 
No references 
No thing

You've got nothing

The indigenous people of Judea are Judaic ;--) Its pretty basic. And they can be traced back to the early middle bronze age and even beyond. 

The Arab Muslim colonists can at best only be traced back to the 7th to 9th centuries CE


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Also your assumption ( again offered with no basis in fact ) that the returnees were all from Europe is demonstrably wrong
> 
> Although Wiki isn't our best source its easy so I'll use it cause I doubt you read the links anyway LOL ;--)
> 
> Only about 35% of the Judaic population in Israel are from Europe ;--)
> 
> Demographics of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> So again the baseless claims and assumptions are pretty easily proven false. Its actually a pretty easy game of find the flaw as the palestinian narrative seems entirely based on false information and revisionist history.



Really. 

Check the Palestine Census of 1931 and when you discount that as "false information" and "revisionist history" Have a look at the Israeli Ministry of Aliya and Immigrant Absorbtion website which describes the various waves of European colonists who came over on the boat up until 1939, when you do the maths you find the figures are fairly close between the two sites up until the 5th Aliya. The Israeli government site points out that on average no more than 10% of Jewish colonists/immigrants came from outside Europe up until 1939, mainly from Yemen and Iraq. This means that 90% of Zionist colonists from 1882 to 1939 were indigenous Europeans. Oh, in case you are wondering, the 5th Aliya which boosted the colonialist population dramatically all came from Europe according to the Israeli site;
"The year 1929 began with signs of economical revival, which stimulated a new influx of immigrants known as the Fifth Aliyah. During the period of the Fifth Aliyah, which continued until the outbreak of the Second World War, *more than a quarter of a million* immigrants arrived from all parts of _*Europe,* *including Western and Central Europe.*"_

https://ia800304.us.archive.org/18/...ndAdministrativeAreas/PalestineCensus1931.pdf

Know Israel

When you've done that, you can crawl back into your Hasbara bubble and get back to making things up for your masters.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your funny.
> 
> Your argument is nonexistent, you don't provide a single corroborating source and so far everything you've claimed had been demonstrably false. ( through the use of even just basic source material ) so yeah, not feeling any tremendous inclination to simply take your word for it. LOL
Click to expand...


That just translates as, "Oh sh*t, I can't demonstrate otherwise, I'd better just try to use the old tactic of making childish accusations and hope this goes away..." another Hasbara fail by Busted1


----------



## Boston1

You are too funny

OK so now you want to consider only one year out of this little imaginary world of yours LOL

Sorry but thats not how it works. If you want to make a baseless claim and pretend that everyone in Israel are immigrants from Europe then you are going to have to back it up with a little more than data from just one year that just happened to be a big year for European returnees.

How about if we consider ALL years to date






The information is readily available

Israel Central Bureau of Statistics 

Statistical Abstract of Israel 2009 - No. 60 Subject 2 - Table No. 24

Only about 35% of todays Israeli's can trace their return from Europe.

37% never left and the other 28% returned from all other countries.

So once again your racism depends on lies and misrepresentations


----------



## Fishlore

Although the Sioux people may find the idea of returning to an ancestral homeland appealing, modern government doesn't work that way. The Ashkenazi Zionists who created modern Israel based their activity on Bible stories Lord Balfour learned in Sunday School.

Even if historically accurate, the Torah is no basis for displacement of millions of non-Jewish residents. Add to that the fact that the "history" of Old Testament has been shown to be myth, not fact and the injustice done by European Jews to Palestinians is even more cruel and absurd.

History is filled with injustice, just ask the Sioux people. The big difference between the West Bank and the Great Sious Reservation is that the West Bank is surrounded by 400,000,000 Muslims rich with oil money and armed to the teeth with American weapons.

Nebuchadnezzar booted out the Jews 2,500 years ago. Titus did it again 500 years later. This third attempt to set up a Jewish state in Palestine isn't going to work any better than the last two. God gave the Jews a land of milk and honey in exchange for keeping the Covenant. When the Jews abandoned the Covenant, God cancelled their deed to Palestine. No human power can reverse the Will of God.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> You are too funny
> 
> OK so now you want to consider only one year out of this little imaginary world of yours LOL
> 
> Sorry but thats not how it works. If you want to make a baseless claim and pretend that everyone in Israel are immigrants from Europe then you are going to have to back it up with a little more than data from just one year that just happened to be a big year for European returnees.
> 
> How about if we consider ALL years to date
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The information is readily available
> 
> Israel Central Bureau of Statistics
> 
> Statistical Abstract of Israel 2009 - No. 60 Subject 2 - Table No. 24
> 
> Only about 35% of todays Israeli's can trace their return from Europe.
> 
> 37% never left and the other 28% returned from all other countries.
> 
> So once again your racism depends on lies and misrepresentations








Do us both a favour and read my posts before answering.


----------



## Boston1

Your posts are full of nonsense. The simple fact remains that only about 35% of returnees to Israel come from Europe.

Your continued efforts to forward revisionist views is disingenuous at best.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Your posts are full of nonsense. The simple fact remains that only about 35% of returnees to Israel come from Europe.
> 
> Your continued efforts to forward revisionist views is disingenuous at best.



Fine. I'll leave it to anyone reading this thread to decide for themselves who is being disingenuous, I'm done here. 

One interesting snippet of information your link provided though, in 2008 at most there were only 47,500 Jewish "Israelis" who had a father that was born in Israel/Palestine in 1948, the rest were all immigrant colonists.


----------



## Boston1

If you were going to cherry pick you might as well have actually read the graph and gone with the 50-54 age group who only had 19,900 fathers born in Israel. But of course we all know thats not a fair representation of much either particularly when you forgot to mention that in the same time period 94,500 of 174,000 fathers were from the Arab Muslim countries in the immediate vicinity of Israel. 

In the end its pretty obvious that your hatred is blinding you to even the basics. Things like reading a graph or being able to look at all of history and not just the fragments that don't challenge your narrative.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Your posts are full of nonsense. The simple fact remains that only about 35% of returnees to Israel come from Europe.
> 
> Your continued efforts to forward revisionist views is disingenuous at best.



At partition nearly 100% of the Zionist colonizers had come from Europe or their parents had.  The rest came from Oceania or the Americas.


----------



## Boston1

And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Fishlore said:


> Although the Sioux people may find the idea of returning to an ancestral homeland appealing, modern government doesn't work that way. The Ashkenazi Zionists who created modern Israel based their activity on Bible stories Lord Balfour learned in Sunday School.
> 
> Even if historically accurate, the Torah is no basis for displacement of millions of non-Jewish residents. Add to that the fact that the "history" of Old Testament has been shown to be myth, not fact and the injustice done by European Jews to Palestinians is even more cruel and absurd.
> 
> History is filled with injustice, just ask the Sioux people. The big difference between the West Bank and the Great Sious Reservation is that the West Bank is surrounded by 400,000,000 Muslims rich with oil money and armed to the teeth with American weapons.
> 
> Nebuchadnezzar booted out the Jews 2,500 years ago. Titus did it again 500 years later. This third attempt to set up a Jewish state in Palestine isn't going to work any better than the last two. God gave the Jews a land of milk and honey in exchange for keeping the Covenant. When the Jews abandoned the Covenant, God cancelled their deed to Palestine. No human power can reverse the Will of God.



On the one hand, you say the Old Testament is myth, and on the other hand you say that Gd cancelled the Jews' deed to "Palestine" because they abandoned the Covenant.  So which is it?  If it's myth, that really doesn't matter because the Jews have suffered persecution for 2000 years, and they want a land of their own, regardless of the Torah.  If you ARE going by the Bible, then it says that Gd will one day gather the Jews from the four corners of the world, and restore them to their homeland.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?



I have posted the links to the source immigration data from the UN archives several times. It is just fact that close to 100% of the Jews in Palestine were from Europe. Reposting the links would be contrary to the rules.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have posted the links to the source immigration data from the UN archives several times. It is just fact that close to 100% of the Jews in Palestine were from Europe. Reposting the links would be contrary to the rules.
Click to expand...


You mean the ones from just one year ? I saw those, classic cherrypicking. Any chance you can show all years ? Because as we all know by now only about 35% of todays Israeli's are returnees from Europe


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have posted the links to the source immigration data from the UN archives several times. It is just fact that close to 100% of the Jews in Palestine were from Europe. Reposting the links would be contrary to the rules.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the ones from just one year ? I saw those, classic cherrypicking. Any chance you can show all years ? Because as we all know by now only about 35% of todays Israeli's are returnees from Europe
Click to expand...


We know that nearly 100% of the colonizing Jews were from Europe at the time of partition.


----------



## Boston1

We also know that nearly 100% of the native people of Judea are Jewish. ;--) 

What we don't know is why a colonist from the 9th century would be considered by you to be indigenous since you've never been able to intelligently support your claim. 

Judaic people can be traced back to the stone age in Canaan. 

Arabic Muslims only go back to the Arab invasion of roughly the 9th century CE


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> At partition nearly 100% of the Zionist colonizers had come from Europe or their parents had.  The rest came from Oceania or the Americas.



So you are completely ignoring the million (nearly) that were ethnically cleansed from the surrounding Muslim states?  Because it suits you?


----------



## Boston1

he's also ignoring the fact that these people are returning to their native land vs colonizing like the Arab Muslims


----------



## Fishlore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Although the Sioux people may find the idea of returning to an ancestral homeland appealing, modern government doesn't work that way. The Ashkenazi Zionists who created modern Israel based their activity on Bible stories Lord Balfour learned in Sunday School.
> 
> Even if historically accurate, the Torah is no basis for displacement of millions of non-Jewish residents. Add to that the fact that the "history" of Old Testament has been shown to be myth, not fact and the injustice done by European Jews to Palestinians is even more cruel and absurd.
> 
> History is filled with injustice, just ask the Sioux people. The big difference between the West Bank and the Great Sious Reservation is that the West Bank is surrounded by 400,000,000 Muslims rich with oil money and armed to the teeth with American weapons.
> 
> Nebuchadnezzar booted out the Jews 2,500 years ago. Titus did it again 500 years later. This third attempt to set up a Jewish state in Palestine isn't going to work any better than the last two. God gave the Jews a land of milk and honey in exchange for keeping the Covenant. When the Jews abandoned the Covenant, God cancelled their deed to Palestine. No human power can reverse the Will of God.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the one hand, you say the Old Testament is myth, and on the other hand you say that Gd cancelled the Jews' deed to "Palestine" because they abandoned the Covenant.  So which is it?  If it's myth, that really doesn't matter because the Jews have suffered persecution for 2000 years, and they want a land of their own, regardless of the Torah.  If you ARE going by the Bible, then it says that Gd will one day gather the Jews from the four corners of the world, and restore them to their homeland.
Click to expand...

You are right that the two arguments I made are inconsistent, but they are not incompatible. To start with, today's belief, expressed in the UN Charter and elsewhere, is that the government of a people must rest on the will of the people. This is the essential claim of our Declaration of Independence for example, and it is a principle flouted by the establishment of Israel and in breach of that principle in Palestine to this day.

How people reach their conclusion as to what government they want for themsleves varies enormously. Myth (and all religions rest on myth) remains popular in many parts of the globe, social and economic theories have their advocates as well. The universal principle isn't about how people decide, it is that the people, We, the People, get to decide for themselves.

Now, it is an historical fact that in 1948, the majority of people living in Palestine were Arab Muslims. The people who created Israel were British and American Christians. The population which flooded into the new state were Ashkenazi Jews from Germany, Poland and Russia. The motives and beliefs of the creators of the new state were quite disparate; more important the wishes of the millions of Arab Muslims already living in Palestine were simply ignored and overriden by armed force. This was the last gasp of the European colonialism which had been tearing up Arabia since the days of Napoleon.

Both the Christians who raised the possibility of a Zionist homeland with the Balfour Declaration and the Jews who used that document to create the state of Israel envisioned a secular government with religious freedom and equality for all religious groups. The move toward a theocratic state was a subsequent development which, since the rise to power of the Orthodox right Likud has pushed Israel outside its founding territory and beliefs with a series of brutal military operations which have been condemned as illegal by the USA, the UN and most of the world's nations. America's Jews think they can make this situation stick by constiant infusion of lawyers, guns and money. I think they are making a tragic mistake.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> he's also ignoring the fact that these people are returning to their native land vs colonizing like the Arab Muslims



No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.



That the Jewish people were forced into a diaspora and did not convert, but remained Jewish, doesn't change our DNA as the native people either.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> he's also ignoring the fact that these people are returning to their native land vs colonizing like the Arab Muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.
Click to expand...



He's lying and he knows it. The statistics are extremely clear, only about 35% of the returnees came from Europe. Something like 37% returned form the local area. 

A classic example of cognitive dissonance. 

Obviously the Judaic people are indigenous to Judea and obviously the Arabic people came from the Arabian peninsula. Its a no brainer only argued by revisionists.


----------



## Challenger

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> he's also ignoring the fact that these people are returning to their native land vs colonizing like the Arab Muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.
Click to expand...


You're wasting your time, Boston1 has got no idea.  He doesn't seem to understand the use of census data and seems to have a whacky belief that all Judeans in antiquity followed the same religion, spoke the same language and shared the same culture. Given his posting style, he's probably a teenager.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That the Jewish people were forced into a diaspora and did not convert, but remained Jewish, doesn't change our DNA as the native people either.
Click to expand...


What forced diaspora? The cult known as Judaism was widespread throughout the Roman Empire until the "triumph" of Christianity in the 4th-5th centuries. People from the Levant were known to live as far away as Hadrian's wall and there was no such thing as a "Jewish people" as an ethnic group/race until the 19th century. The only place that was barred to adherants of Judaism was the city of Jerusalem, the cult centre.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> ...there was no such thing as a "Jewish people" as an ethnic group/race until the 19th century.



Okay, I'll bite:  what happened in the 19th century which suddenly created a Jewish people?  Are you going to say that the Jewish people didn't exist until the emergence of Zionism?  And that the emergence of Zionism didn't happen until the 19th century?


----------



## Boston1

Challenged is just angry because she hasn't the debating skills or the position to engage in an informed discussion. There's really no debate when it comes to who the indigenous people of Judea are; the evidence goes literally back to the stone age. The Judaic people and even the protojudaic people left more than sufficient evidence in the Canaan valley area. The Arab Muslims, none; no evidence for Arab Muslim culture exists anywhere in the middle east prior to sometime around 650 CE. None exists outside the Arabian peninsula prior to about 720 CE and almost none appears in Judea until about 900 CE well into the Arab Muslim colonial period.

The facts are obvious, clear, and definitive. The Arab Muslims developed their culture OUTSIDE of the Canaan area, specifically on the Arabian Peninsula. Ergo, the Arab Muslims cannot be the indigenous people of Judea.

Her ludicrous claim that there was no

Quote
"Jewish people" as an ethnic group/race
End Quote

prior to the 19th century is just another blatant lie in a long list of lies which she must accept in order to maintain her delusions.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> Challenged is just angry because she hasn't the debating skills or the position to engage in an informed discussion. There's really no debate when it comes to who the indigenous people of Judea are; the evidence goes literally back to the stone age. The Judaic people and even the protojudaic people left more than sufficient evidence in the Canaan valley area. The Arab Muslims, none; no evidence for Arab Muslim culture exists anywhere in the middle east prior to sometime around 650 CE. None exists outside the Arabian peninsula prior to about 720 CE and almost none appears in Judea until about 900 CE well into the Arab Muslim colonial period.
> 
> The facts are obvious, clear, and definitive. The Arab Muslims developed their culture OUTSIDE of the Canaan area, specifically on the Arabian Peninsula. Ergo, the Arab Muslims cannot be the indigenous people of Judea.
> 
> Her ludicrous claim that there was no culture or people known as Judaic prior to the early 20th century is just another blatant lie in a long list of lies which she must accept in order to maintain her condition known as cognitive dissonance.


The Jews were not the first people in the holy land nor were they ever the only people there.

There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Jews were not the first people in the holy land nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.



The Jewish people are the oldest, surviving, historical culture associated with that land. 

 And the Jewish state is INCLUSIVE not exclusive.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people in the holy land nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are the oldest, surviving, historical culture associated with that land.
> 
> And the Jewish state is INCLUSIVE not exclusive.
Click to expand...

Tell that crap to the refugees.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Tell that crap to the refugees.




The Jewish people ARE the refugees, returning home after a very, very long absence.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> And the Jewish state is INCLUSIVE not exclusive.



Tell that to any non-Jewish person who has ever applied for citizenship.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Okay, I'll bite: what happened in the 19th century which suddenly created a Jewish people?



The emergance and rise of Nationalism in Europe; read a good history book, not your standard Zionist Hasbara re-write rubbish.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Jewish state is INCLUSIVE not exclusive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell that to any non-Jewish person who has ever applied for citizenship.
Click to expand...


Not many Christians have applied for citizenship, but I've read of a few.  My best friend teaches at an Armenian school in Jerusalem.  There are many diverse non-Jewish citizens in Israel--Armenians, Druze, Bahais, Bedouins, Samaritans, etc.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Fishlore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Although the Sioux people may find the idea of returning to an ancestral homeland appealing, modern government doesn't work that way. The Ashkenazi Zionists who created modern Israel based their activity on Bible stories Lord Balfour learned in Sunday School.
> 
> Even if historically accurate, the Torah is no basis for displacement of millions of non-Jewish residents. Add to that the fact that the "history" of Old Testament has been shown to be myth, not fact and the injustice done by European Jews to Palestinians is even more cruel and absurd.
> 
> History is filled with injustice, just ask the Sioux people. The big difference between the West Bank and the Great Sious Reservation is that the West Bank is surrounded by 400,000,000 Muslims rich with oil money and armed to the teeth with American weapons.
> 
> Nebuchadnezzar booted out the Jews 2,500 years ago. Titus did it again 500 years later. This third attempt to set up a Jewish state in Palestine isn't going to work any better than the last two. God gave the Jews a land of milk and honey in exchange for keeping the Covenant. When the Jews abandoned the Covenant, God cancelled their deed to Palestine. No human power can reverse the Will of God.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the one hand, you say the Old Testament is myth, and on the other hand you say that Gd cancelled the Jews' deed to "Palestine" because they abandoned the Covenant.  So which is it?  If it's myth, that really doesn't matter because the Jews have suffered persecution for 2000 years, and they want a land of their own, regardless of the Torah.  If you ARE going by the Bible, then it says that Gd will one day gather the Jews from the four corners of the world, and restore them to their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right that the two arguments I made are inconsistent, but they are not incompatible. To start with, today's belief, expressed in the UN Charter and elsewhere, is that the government of a people must rest on the will of the people. This is the essential claim of our Declaration of Independence for example, and it is a principle flouted by the establishment of Israel and in breach of that principle in Palestine to this day.
> 
> How people reach their conclusion as to what government they want for themsleves varies enormously. Myth (and all religions rest on myth) remains popular in many parts of the globe, social and economic theories have their advocates as well. The universal principle isn't about how people decide, it is that the people, We, the People, get to decide for themselves.
> 
> Now, it is an historical fact that in 1948, the majority of people living in Palestine were Arab Muslims. The people who created Israel were British and American Christians. The population which flooded into the new state were Ashkenazi Jews from Germany, Poland and Russia. The motives and beliefs of the creators of the new state were quite disparate; more important the wishes of the millions of Arab Muslims already living in Palestine were simply ignored and overriden by armed force. This was the last gasp of the European colonialism which had been tearing up Arabia since the days of Napoleon.
> 
> Both the Christians who raised the possibility of a Zionist homeland with the Balfour Declaration and the Jews who used that document to create the state of Israel envisioned a secular government with religious freedom and equality for all religious groups. The move toward a theocratic state was a subsequent development which, since the rise to power of the Orthodox right Likud has pushed Israel outside its founding territory and beliefs with a series of brutal military operations which have been condemned as illegal by the USA, the UN and most of the world's nations. America's Jews think they can make this situation stick by constiant infusion of lawyers, guns and money. I think they are making a tragic mistake.
Click to expand...

I thought it would be best to respond to this post here:

The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## abu afak

*The Smoking Gun: Arab Immigration into Palestine, 1922-1931*
*by Fred M. Gottheil*
*Middle East Quarterly[/indent]*
*Winter 2003, pp. 53-64*

*['........]*
*Evidence for Arab Migration*
There are several problems associated with estimating Arab immigration into Palestine during the 1920s, the principal one being that *Arab migration flows were, in the main, illegal, and therefore unreported and unrecorded.[17] But they were not entirely unnoticed.*

Demographer U.O. Schmelz's analysis of the Ottoman registration data for 1905 populations of Jerusalem and Hebron _kaza_s (Ottoman districts), by place of birth, showed that of those* Arab Palestinians born outside their localities of residence, approximately HALF represented intra-Palestine movement—from areas of low-level economic activity to areas of higher-level activity—while the other half represented Arab immigration into Palestine itself, 43% originating in Asia, 39% in Africa, and 20% in Turkey.*[18] Schmelz conjectured:

The above-average population growth of the Arab villages around the city of Jerusalem, with its Jewish majority, continued until the end of the mandatory period. This must have been due—as elsewhere in Palestine under similar conditions—to in-migrants attracted by economic opportunities, and to the beneficial effects of improved health services in reducing mortality—_just as happened in other parts of Palestine around cities with a large Jewish population sector_.[19]​
While Schmelz restricted his research of the 1905 Palestinian census to the official Ottoman registrations and used these registrations with only minor critical comment, he did acknowledge that "stable population models assume the absence of external migrations, _a condition which was obviously not met by all the subpopulations_" that Schmelz enumerated.[20]

Like U.O. Schmelz, Roberto Bachi expressed some reservation about the virtual non-existence of data and discussion concerning migration into and within Palestine. He writes:

Between 1800 and 1914, the Muslim population had a yearly average increase in the order of magnitude of roughly 6-7 per thousand. This can be compared to the very crude estimate of about 4 per thousand for the "less developed countries" of the world (in Asia, Africa, and Latin America) between 1800 and 1910. _It is possible that part of the growth of the Muslim population was due to Immigration_.[21]​
Although Bachi did not pursue the linkage between undocumented immigration into Palestine and the 6 (or 7) to 4 per thousand differential in growth rates between Palestine and the other less developed countries (LDCs), the idea that at least one-third of Palestine's population growth may be attributed to immigration is—using Bachi's own growth rate differentials—not an entirely unreasonable one.

Lacking verifiable evidence did not prevent Bachi from stating the obvious concerning internal migration within Palestine:

*The great economic development of the coastal plains—largely due to Jewish immigration—was accompanied both in 1922-1931 and in 1931-1944 by a much stronger increase of the Muslim and Christian populations in this region than that registered in other regions. This was probably due to two reasons: stronger decrease in mortality of the non-Jewish population in the neighborhood of Jewish areas and Internal migration toward the more developed zones.[22]*[/B]​*

In the footnote accompanying this quote, Bachi writes: "As no statistics are available for internal migration, this conclusion has been obtained from indirect evidence."[23] Bachi's footnote is instructive. The "indirect evidence" he referred to no doubt included his understanding of the important role economics plays in explaining demographic movements. While appreciating the value of Ottoman registrations and British mandatory government censuses in providing estimates of Palestinian demography, they were, in his judgment, still crude and incomplete.

Reference to Arab immigration into Palestine during the 1920s is made as well in the British mandatory government's annual compilation of statistical data on population. The Palestine Blue Book, 1937, for example, provides time series demographic statistics whose annual estimates are based on extrapolations from its 1922 census.[24] The footnote accompanying the table on population of Palestine reads:
*
*There has been unrecorded illegal immigration of both Jews and Arabs in the period since the census of 1931, but it is clear that, since it cannot be recorded, no estimate of its volume is possible.[25]*​*The 1935 British report to the League of Nations noted that:
*
*One thousand five hundred and fifty-seven persons (including 565 Jews) who, having made their way into the country surreptitiously, were later detected, were sentenced to imprisonment for their offence and recommended for deportation.[26]*​*The number who "made their way into the country surreptitiously" and undetected was neither estimated nor mentioned.

Historian Gad Gilbar's observation on Ruth Kark's contribution to his edited volume Ottoman Palestine, 1800-1914, touches on the issue of Arab immigration into and within Palestine. He relates her ideas in "The Rise and Decline of Coastal Towns in Palestine" to Charles Issawi's thesis concerning the role of minority groups and foreigners in the development of Middle Eastern towns. Explaining why NO other Palestinian cities grew as rapidly as Jaffa and Haifa did during the final three decades of the Ottoman rule, Gilbar writes: "Both attracted population from the rural and urban surroundings and immigrants from outside Palestine."[27]

Each piece of the demographic puzzle by itself may reveal no identifiable picture. But given a multiplicity of such pieces, an image does begin to appear. The Royal Institute for International Affairs adds another piece. Commenting on the growth of the Palestinian population during the decades of the 1920s and 1930s it reports: "The number of Arabs who have entered Palestine illegally from Syria and Transjordan is unknown. But probably considerable."[28] And C.S. Jarvis, governor of the Sinai from 1923-36, adds yet another:
*
*This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Trans-Jordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.[29]*​*Estimating Real Numbers
The derivation of Palestine migration estimates in this section is based on an uncomplicated imputation theory. Migration becomes a residual claimant for numbers not explained by a population-estimating model based on known initial population stocks and known sets of birth and death rates for that population. In this way, expected population stocks can be derived for any set of subsequent years.

The value of the model depends, of course, on the reliability of the estimates given for initial population stocks and for the rates associated with natural increase. Therein lies the problem with estimating Arab immigration into Palestine. The model itself may be simple and applicable, but its usefulness—as with all estimating models—is contingent upon the quality of the data inputs. That quality in the case of Palestinian migration is compromised by the explicit neglect of illegal entrants. If illegal migrants and subsequently illegal residents escaped the census taker, how could the census account for them? It couldn't and didn't.

It is not surprising then that the British census data produce an Arab Palestinian population growth for 1922-31 that turns out to be generated by natural increase and legal migrations alone. Applying a 2.5 per annum growth rate[30] to a population stock of 589,177 for 1922 generates a 1931 population estimate of 735,799 or 97.6% of the 753,822 recorded in the 1931 census. Does the imputation model then "prove" that illegal immigration into Palestine was inconsequential during 1922-31? Not at all. A footnote accompanying the census's population time series acknowledges the presence in Palestine of illegal Arab immigration. But because it could not be recorded, no estimate of its numbers was included in the census count.[31] Ignoring illegal migrants does not mean they don't exist.

Setting illegal immigration into Palestine aside, the imputation model does generate substantial migrations of Arab Palestinians within Palestine itself and confirms what many demographers, historians, government administrators, and economists have alluded to: the migration of Arab Palestinians from villages, towns, and cities of low economic opportunity to villages, towns, and cities of higher economic opportunity.

Which towns, villages, and cities offered the higher economic opportunity? Analyzing the 1922 and 1931 demographic data by sub-district and separating those sub-districts of Palestine that eventually became 1948 Israel—that is, sub-districts that had relatively large Jewish populations (with accompanying Jewish capital and modern technology)—from those that were not designated as part of 1948 Israel, identified not only the direction of Arab Palestinian migration within Palestine but its magnitude as well.[32]

The Arab Palestinian populations within those sub-districts that eventually became Israel increased from 321,866 in 1922 to 463,288 in 1931 or by 141,422. Applying the 2.5 per annum natural rate of population growth to the 1922 Arab Palestinian population generates an expected population size for 1931 of 398,498 or 64,790 less than the actual population recorded in the British census. By imputation, this unaccounted population increase must have been either illegal immigration not accounted for in the British census and/or registered Arab Palestinians moving from outside the Jewish-identified sub-districts to those sub-districts so identified. This 1922-31 Arab migration into the Jewish sub-districts represented 11.8% of the total 1931 Arab population residing in those sub-districts and as much as 36.8% of its 1922-31 growth.

That over 10% of the 1931 Arab Palestinian population in those sub-districts that eventually became Israel had immigrated to those sub-districts within the 1922-31 years is a datum of considerable significance. It is consistent with the fragmentary evidence of illegal migration to and within Palestine; it supports the idea of linkage between economic disparities and migratory impulses—a linkage universally accepted; it undercuts the thesis of "spatial stickiness" attributed by some scholars to the Arab Palestinian population of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; and it provides strong circumstantial evidence that the illegal Arab immigration into Palestine, like that within Palestine, was of consequence as well.

Denying the Evidence
As compelling as the arguments and evidence supporting consequential illegal immigration may be to some scholars, they are clearly unconvincing to others. The single most cited contemporary publication on Palestinian demography is Justin McCarthy's 1990 The Population of Palestine. Of McCarthy's 43 pages of descriptive analysis—supplemented by 188 pages of demographic tables copied directly from Ottoman, European, and Jewish source materials—slightly more than one and a half pages are devoted to Arab immigration into and within Palestine during the Ottoman period, and a similar one and a half pages are devoted to Arab immigration during the succeeding mandate period.[33] According to McCarthy, these few pages offer enough critical analysis to close the lid on the "infamous" immigration thesis.

Consider first McCarthy's analysis of Arab immigration during the Ottoman period. That he finds no illegal immigration of consequence is not surprising because McCarthy uses official Ottoman registration lists that, by the nature of its classifications, take no account of the unreported, illegal immigration. That is to say, if you look in a haystack for a needle that wasn't put there, the probability is high you won't find it. It is strange that that idea had not occurred to McCarthy. Choosing to focus on the official registration lists allows him to write:
*
*From the analysis of rates of increase of the Muslim population of the three Palestiniansanjaks [Ottoman sub-provinces], one can say with certainty that Muslim immigration after 1870 was small.[34]*​*Reflecting elsewhere on the possibility that the immigration may have occurred over an extended period of time, McCarthy writes: "To postulate such an immigration … stretches the limits of credulity."[35]

McCarthy's treatment of the linkage between economic disparities and migration impulses appears to be even more disingenuous. He writes: "The question of the relative economic development of Palestine in Ottoman times is not a matter to be discussed here."[36] Nor is it considered anywhere else in his book. That is to say, McCarthy does not contest the linkage so much as ignore its relevance to the Palestinian situation.[37]

His dismissal of Arab immigration into Palestine during the mandate period is based on a set of assumptions concerning illegal immigration that is both restrictive and unsubstantiated. He contends that even if the illegal immigrants were unreported on entry, their deaths in Palestine would have been registered. So too, he argues, would their children born in Palestine. Deriving estimates based on such registrations, he arrives at this conclusion: immigration was minimal.[38] But he provides no evidence to show that these supposed registrations of births and deaths were actually made. Had McCarthy considered the fact that detection of illegal immigration during the mandate period resulted in imprisonment and deportation and that immigrants, aware of this, may have avoided any formal registration of deaths and births, he would have had to revise his assessment of illegal immigration.

Perhaps the more serious charge against McCarthy's analysis of Arab immigration is his use of Roberto Bachi's estimates. McCarthy's numbers are based, in part, on Bachi's reporting of 900 illegal Arab immigrants per year over the period 1931-45.[39] But McCarthy misrepresents what Bachi's estimate is meant to show. Bachi is careful to identify his 900-per-year illegal Arab immigration estimate as only those discovered by the mandatory authorities. Illegal Arab immigration that went undetected and unreported is not included. He writes:
*
*A detailed analysis presented in Appendix 6.5B on the basis of the registration of part of the illegal migratory traffic, discovered by the Palestine police, shows that legal movements (as reflected in Tables 9.4-9.7) constituted only a small fraction of total Muslim immigration.[40]*​*To emphasize this point, Bachi writes: "It is hardly credible that illegal movements which were actually discovered included all the illegal entrances which actually occurred, or even the majority of them."[41] As a result, Bachi can only conclude that "in the present state of knowledge, we have beenunable to even guess the size of total immigration."[42]

Such a cautionary comment finds no place in McCarthy's analysis or conclusions. Using Bachi's estimates inappropriately, deriving estimates based solely on registration lists, and ignoring completely the linkages between regional economic disparities and migratory impulses, McCarthy confidently concludes,
*
*the vast majority of the Palestinians resident in 1947 were the sons and daughters who were living in Palestine before modern Jewish immigration began. There is no reason to believe that they were not the sons and daughters of Arabs who had been in Palestine for many centuries.[43]*​*Every Reason to Believe
Therein lies the ideological warfare concerning claims to territorial inheritance and national sovereignty. Contrary to McCarthy's findings or wishes, there is every reason to believe that consequential immigration of Arabs into and within Palestine occurred during the Ottoman and British mandatory periods. Among the most compelling arguments in support of such immigration is the universally acknowledged and practiced linkage between regional economic disparities and migratory impulses.

The precise magnitude of Arab immigration into and within Palestine is, as Bachi noted, unknown. Lack of completeness in Ottoman registration lists and British Mandatory censuses, and the immeasurable illegal, unreported, and undetected immigration during both periods make any estimate a bold venture into creative analysis. In most cases, those venturing into the realm of Palestinian demography—or other demographic analyses based on very crude data—acknowledge its limitations and the tentativeness of the conclusions that may be drawn.

Fred M. Gottheil is a professor in the department of economics, University of Illinois.*


----------



## Dogmaphobe

abu afak said:


> *The Smoking Gun: Arab Immigration into Palestine, 1922-1931*
> *by Fred M. Gottheil*
> *Middle East Quarterly[/indent]*
> *Winter 2003, pp. 53-64*
> 
> *['........]*
> *Evidence for Arab Migration*
> There are several problems associated with estimating Arab immigration into Palestine during the 1920s, the principal one being that *Arab migration flows were, in the main, illegal, and therefore unreported and unrecorded.[17] But they were not entirely unnoticed.*
> 
> Demographer U.O. Schmelz's analysis of the Ottoman registration data for 1905 populations of Jerusalem and Hebron _kaza_s (Ottoman districts), by place of birth, showed that of those* Arab Palestinians born outside their localities of residence, approximately HALF represented intra-Palestine movement—from areas of low-level economic activity to areas of higher-level activity—while the other half represented Arab immigration into Palestine itself, 43% originating in Asia, 39% in Africa, and 20% in Turkey.*[18] Schmelz conjectured:
> 
> The above-average population growth of the Arab villages around the city of Jerusalem, with its Jewish majority, continued until the end of the mandatory period. This must have been due—as elsewhere in Palestine under similar conditions—to in-migrants attracted by economic opportunities, and to the beneficial effects of improved health services in reducing mortality—_just as happened in other parts of Palestine around cities with a large Jewish population sector_.[19]​
> While Schmelz restricted his research of the 1905 Palestinian census to the official Ottoman registrations and used these registrations with only minor critical comment, he did acknowledge that "stable population models assume the absence of external migrations, _a condition which was obviously not met by all the subpopulations_" that Schmelz enumerated.[20]
> 
> Like U.O. Schmelz, Roberto Bachi expressed some reservation about the virtual non-existence of data and discussion concerning migration into and within Palestine. He writes:
> 
> Between 1800 and 1914, the Muslim population had a yearly average increase in the order of magnitude of roughly 6-7 per thousand. This can be compared to the very crude estimate of about 4 per thousand for the "less developed countries" of the world (in Asia, Africa, and Latin America) between 1800 and 1910. _It is possible that part of the growth of the Muslim population was due to Immigration_.[21]​
> Although Bachi did not pursue the linkage between undocumented immigration into Palestine and the 6 (or 7) to 4 per thousand differential in growth rates between Palestine and the other less developed countries (LDCs), the idea that at least one-third of Palestine's population growth may be attributed to immigration is—using Bachi's own growth rate differentials—not an entirely unreasonable one.
> 
> Lacking verifiable evidence did not prevent Bachi from stating the obvious concerning internal migration within Palestine:
> 
> *The great economic development of the coastal plains—largely due to Jewish immigration—was accompanied both in 1922-1931 and in 1931-1944 by a much stronger increase of the Muslim and Christian populations in this region than that registered in other regions. This was probably due to two reasons: stronger decrease in mortality of the non-Jewish population in the neighborhood of Jewish areas and Internal migration toward the more developed zones.[22]*[/B]​*
> 
> In the footnote accompanying this quote, Bachi writes: "As no statistics are available for internal migration, this conclusion has been obtained from indirect evidence."[23] Bachi's footnote is instructive. The "indirect evidence" he referred to no doubt included his understanding of the important role economics plays in explaining demographic movements. While appreciating the value of Ottoman registrations and British mandatory government censuses in providing estimates of Palestinian demography, they were, in his judgment, still crude and incomplete.
> 
> Reference to Arab immigration into Palestine during the 1920s is made as well in the British mandatory government's annual compilation of statistical data on population. The Palestine Blue Book, 1937, for example, provides time series demographic statistics whose annual estimates are based on extrapolations from its 1922 census.[24] The footnote accompanying the table on population of Palestine reads:
> *
> *There has been unrecorded illegal immigration of both Jews and Arabs in the period since the census of 1931, but it is clear that, since it cannot be recorded, no estimate of its volume is possible.[25]*​*The 1935 British report to the League of Nations noted that:
> *
> *One thousand five hundred and fifty-seven persons (including 565 Jews) who, having made their way into the country surreptitiously, were later detected, were sentenced to imprisonment for their offence and recommended for deportation.[26]*​*The number who "made their way into the country surreptitiously" and undetected was neither estimated nor mentioned.
> 
> Historian Gad Gilbar's observation on Ruth Kark's contribution to his edited volume Ottoman Palestine, 1800-1914, touches on the issue of Arab immigration into and within Palestine. He relates her ideas in "The Rise and Decline of Coastal Towns in Palestine" to Charles Issawi's thesis concerning the role of minority groups and foreigners in the development of Middle Eastern towns. Explaining why NO other Palestinian cities grew as rapidly as Jaffa and Haifa did during the final three decades of the Ottoman rule, Gilbar writes: "Both attracted population from the rural and urban surroundings and immigrants from outside Palestine."[27]
> 
> Each piece of the demographic puzzle by itself may reveal no identifiable picture. But given a multiplicity of such pieces, an image does begin to appear. The Royal Institute for International Affairs adds another piece. Commenting on the growth of the Palestinian population during the decades of the 1920s and 1930s it reports: "The number of Arabs who have entered Palestine illegally from Syria and Transjordan is unknown. But probably considerable."[28] And C.S. Jarvis, governor of the Sinai from 1923-36, adds yet another:
> *
> *This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Trans-Jordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.[29]*​*Estimating Real Numbers
> The derivation of Palestine migration estimates in this section is based on an uncomplicated imputation theory. Migration becomes a residual claimant for numbers not explained by a population-estimating model based on known initial population stocks and known sets of birth and death rates for that population. In this way, expected population stocks can be derived for any set of subsequent years.
> 
> The value of the model depends, of course, on the reliability of the estimates given for initial population stocks and for the rates associated with natural increase. Therein lies the problem with estimating Arab immigration into Palestine. The model itself may be simple and applicable, but its usefulness—as with all estimating models—is contingent upon the quality of the data inputs. That quality in the case of Palestinian migration is compromised by the explicit neglect of illegal entrants. If illegal migrants and subsequently illegal residents escaped the census taker, how could the census account for them? It couldn't and didn't.
> 
> It is not surprising then that the British census data produce an Arab Palestinian population growth for 1922-31 that turns out to be generated by natural increase and legal migrations alone. Applying a 2.5 per annum growth rate[30] to a population stock of 589,177 for 1922 generates a 1931 population estimate of 735,799 or 97.6% of the 753,822 recorded in the 1931 census. Does the imputation model then "prove" that illegal immigration into Palestine was inconsequential during 1922-31? Not at all. A footnote accompanying the census's population time series acknowledges the presence in Palestine of illegal Arab immigration. But because it could not be recorded, no estimate of its numbers was included in the census count.[31] Ignoring illegal migrants does not mean they don't exist.
> 
> Setting illegal immigration into Palestine aside, the imputation model does generate substantial migrations of Arab Palestinians within Palestine itself and confirms what many demographers, historians, government administrators, and economists have alluded to: the migration of Arab Palestinians from villages, towns, and cities of low economic opportunity to villages, towns, and cities of higher economic opportunity.
> 
> Which towns, villages, and cities offered the higher economic opportunity? Analyzing the 1922 and 1931 demographic data by sub-district and separating those sub-districts of Palestine that eventually became 1948 Israel—that is, sub-districts that had relatively large Jewish populations (with accompanying Jewish capital and modern technology)—from those that were not designated as part of 1948 Israel, identified not only the direction of Arab Palestinian migration within Palestine but its magnitude as well.[32]
> 
> The Arab Palestinian populations within those sub-districts that eventually became Israel increased from 321,866 in 1922 to 463,288 in 1931 or by 141,422. Applying the 2.5 per annum natural rate of population growth to the 1922 Arab Palestinian population generates an expected population size for 1931 of 398,498 or 64,790 less than the actual population recorded in the British census. By imputation, this unaccounted population increase must have been either illegal immigration not accounted for in the British census and/or registered Arab Palestinians moving from outside the Jewish-identified sub-districts to those sub-districts so identified. This 1922-31 Arab migration into the Jewish sub-districts represented 11.8% of the total 1931 Arab population residing in those sub-districts and as much as 36.8% of its 1922-31 growth.
> 
> That over 10% of the 1931 Arab Palestinian population in those sub-districts that eventually became Israel had immigrated to those sub-districts within the 1922-31 years is a datum of considerable significance. It is consistent with the fragmentary evidence of illegal migration to and within Palestine; it supports the idea of linkage between economic disparities and migratory impulses—a linkage universally accepted; it undercuts the thesis of "spatial stickiness" attributed by some scholars to the Arab Palestinian population of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; and it provides strong circumstantial evidence that the illegal Arab immigration into Palestine, like that within Palestine, was of consequence as well.
> 
> Denying the Evidence
> As compelling as the arguments and evidence supporting consequential illegal immigration may be to some scholars, they are clearly unconvincing to others. The single most cited contemporary publication on Palestinian demography is Justin McCarthy's 1990 The Population of Palestine. Of McCarthy's 43 pages of descriptive analysis—supplemented by 188 pages of demographic tables copied directly from Ottoman, European, and Jewish source materials—slightly more than one and a half pages are devoted to Arab immigration into and within Palestine during the Ottoman period, and a similar one and a half pages are devoted to Arab immigration during the succeeding mandate period.[33] According to McCarthy, these few pages offer enough critical analysis to close the lid on the "infamous" immigration thesis.
> 
> Consider first McCarthy's analysis of Arab immigration during the Ottoman period. That he finds no illegal immigration of consequence is not surprising because McCarthy uses official Ottoman registration lists that, by the nature of its classifications, take no account of the unreported, illegal immigration. That is to say, if you look in a haystack for a needle that wasn't put there, the probability is high you won't find it. It is strange that that idea had not occurred to McCarthy. Choosing to focus on the official registration lists allows him to write:
> *
> *From the analysis of rates of increase of the Muslim population of the three Palestiniansanjaks [Ottoman sub-provinces], one can say with certainty that Muslim immigration after 1870 was small.[34]*​*Reflecting elsewhere on the possibility that the immigration may have occurred over an extended period of time, McCarthy writes: "To postulate such an immigration … stretches the limits of credulity."[35]
> 
> McCarthy's treatment of the linkage between economic disparities and migration impulses appears to be even more disingenuous. He writes: "The question of the relative economic development of Palestine in Ottoman times is not a matter to be discussed here."[36] Nor is it considered anywhere else in his book. That is to say, McCarthy does not contest the linkage so much as ignore its relevance to the Palestinian situation.[37]
> 
> His dismissal of Arab immigration into Palestine during the mandate period is based on a set of assumptions concerning illegal immigration that is both restrictive and unsubstantiated. He contends that even if the illegal immigrants were unreported on entry, their deaths in Palestine would have been registered. So too, he argues, would their children born in Palestine. Deriving estimates based on such registrations, he arrives at this conclusion: immigration was minimal.[38] But he provides no evidence to show that these supposed registrations of births and deaths were actually made. Had McCarthy considered the fact that detection of illegal immigration during the mandate period resulted in imprisonment and deportation and that immigrants, aware of this, may have avoided any formal registration of deaths and births, he would have had to revise his assessment of illegal immigration.
> 
> Perhaps the more serious charge against McCarthy's analysis of Arab immigration is his use of Roberto Bachi's estimates. McCarthy's numbers are based, in part, on Bachi's reporting of 900 illegal Arab immigrants per year over the period 1931-45.[39] But McCarthy misrepresents what Bachi's estimate is meant to show. Bachi is careful to identify his 900-per-year illegal Arab immigration estimate as only those discovered by the mandatory authorities. Illegal Arab immigration that went undetected and unreported is not included. He writes:
> *
> *A detailed analysis presented in Appendix 6.5B on the basis of the registration of part of the illegal migratory traffic, discovered by the Palestine police, shows that legal movements (as reflected in Tables 9.4-9.7) constituted only a small fraction of total Muslim immigration.[40]*​*To emphasize this point, Bachi writes: "It is hardly credible that illegal movements which were actually discovered included all the illegal entrances which actually occurred, or even the majority of them."[41] As a result, Bachi can only conclude that "in the present state of knowledge, we have beenunable to even guess the size of total immigration."[42]
> 
> Such a cautionary comment finds no place in McCarthy's analysis or conclusions. Using Bachi's estimates inappropriately, deriving estimates based solely on registration lists, and ignoring completely the linkages between regional economic disparities and migratory impulses, McCarthy confidently concludes,
> *
> *the vast majority of the Palestinians resident in 1947 were the sons and daughters who were living in Palestine before modern Jewish immigration began. There is no reason to believe that they were not the sons and daughters of Arabs who had been in Palestine for many centuries.[43]*​*Every Reason to Believe
> Therein lies the ideological warfare concerning claims to territorial inheritance and national sovereignty. Contrary to McCarthy's findings or wishes, there is every reason to believe that consequential immigration of Arabs into and within Palestine occurred during the Ottoman and British mandatory periods. Among the most compelling arguments in support of such immigration is the universally acknowledged and practiced linkage between regional economic disparities and migratory impulses.
> 
> The precise magnitude of Arab immigration into and within Palestine is, as Bachi noted, unknown. Lack of completeness in Ottoman registration lists and British Mandatory censuses, and the immeasurable illegal, unreported, and undetected immigration during both periods make any estimate a bold venture into creative analysis. In most cases, those venturing into the realm of Palestinian demography—or other demographic analyses based on very crude data—acknowledge its limitations and the tentativeness of the conclusions that may be drawn.
> 
> Fred M. Gottheil is a professor in the department of economics, University of Illinois.*




It is really just common sense -- a trait so lacking in Judeophobes -- but it doesn't take a rocket science to realize populations follow economic opportunity.   The very same factors that drive the current immigration of Mexicans into the United states now drove a similar migration into the Mandate of Palestine as a result of the economic growth fueled by Zionist businesses.


----------



## abu afak

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is really just common sense -- a trait so lacking in Judeophobes -- but it doesn't take a rocket science to realize populations follow economic opportunity.   The very same factors that drive the current immigration of Mexicans into the United states now drove a similar migration into the Mandate of Palestine as a result of the economic growth fueled by Zionist businesses.


Forgot Link:
It's easy to look up but highly useful for 'us' and for first part of article.
The Smoking Gun: Arab Immigration into Palestine, 1922-1931
All most cite are the Turkish-paid and Bogus Justin McCarthy assumptions.

and sorry about the bolding of the whole post.
Unfortunately once bolded, it cannot be edited back to standard fonts. A quirk on this board.
`


----------



## montelatici

Oh, the usual Zionist false propaganda. Now the facts from source documents:

*UNITED*​*NATIONS​**A*





*General Assembly*












 A/364
3 September 1947

*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *​*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY​*​*SUPPLEMENT No. 11​*
​*UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE​*​
*REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

*VOLUME 1*





*Lake Success*
*New York*
*1947*



4. It will have been noticed that not only has there been a remarkably rapid increase in the total population of Palestine but also the proportion of Jews in the total has greatly increased, from 12.91 -per cent in 1922 to 32.96 per cent in 1946. Conversely, of course, the Arab proportion has fallen since 1922. The Moslem proportion of the population (almost entirely Arab) has fallen from about 75 per cent of the total to 60 per cent, and the Christian proportion (very largely Arab) from 11 per cent to 8 per cent. Thus, at the present time about one-third of the total settled population is Jewish.

(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration.* From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. *


----------



## Indeependent

montelatici said:


> Oh, the usual Zionist false propaganda. Now the facts from source documents:
> 
> *UNITED
> NATIONS
> A*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> 
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> 
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> ​
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947*
> 
> 
> 
> 4. It will have been noticed that not only has there been a remarkably rapid increase in the total population of Palestine but also the proportion of Jews in the total has greatly increased, from 12.91 -per cent in 1922 to 32.96 per cent in 1946. Conversely, of course, the Arab proportion has fallen since 1922. The Moslem proportion of the population (almost entirely Arab) has fallen from about 75 per cent of the total to 60 per cent, and the Christian proportion (very largely Arab) from 11 per cent to 8 per cent. Thus, at the present time about one-third of the total settled population is Jewish.
> 
> (b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration.* From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. *



I say montelatici for Prime Minister of Israel!


----------



## Boston1

I might vote for him except that he just can't get it through his head that the UN general assembly has no authority.

he can't even seem to figure out what an indigenous person is.  Having developed in the area, obviously the indigenous people are the Judaic people. Having developed far far away on the Arabian peninsula the Arabs are clearly NOT the indigenous people


----------



## Indeependent

Boston1 said:


> I might vote for him except that he just can't get it through his head that the UN general assembly has no authority.


He will find out the hard way; you know...by living the reality instead of the anti-Israel web-sites.


----------



## montelatici

So, the UN archives are an anti-Israel website. LOL


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> I might vote for him except that he just can't get it through his head that the UN general assembly has no authority.
> 
> he can't even seem to figure out what an indigenous person is.  Having developed in the area, obviously the indigenous people are the Judaic people. Having developed far far away on the Arabian peninsula the Arabs are clearly NOT the indigenous people



The indigenous people of Palestine are certainly not the European Jews. The Palestinians are the people that have always lived in Palestine. Their choice of religion to follow doesn't change the people.


----------



## Boston1

The UN and its palestinian sympathizers the UNWRA has been so involved in anti Israeli activities for so long that the ICC has from what I can see been petitioned at least a half dozen times to investigate them for war crimes and crimes against the principals of neutrality. 

I don't want to get to far off topic but you are dreaming if you think the UN is an unbiased organization. 

As far as your claim of the indiginous nature of the Arab Muslims in Judea. You'd have to show they are first somehow distinct from the Arab Muslims of Jordan, and as I recall they were registered Jordanians as of just a few years ago. Or any different than Syrians or any number of Arab Muslim communities living outside the Arabian Peninsula from whence they came in about the 9th century CE. 

Then you'd have to show that the Judaic people didn't precede them in Judea. 

On any number of scores, the invented people in roughly 1967 are not indigenous.


----------



## montelatici

1. It is UN document from 1947, when the UN essentially approved the Zionist colonization of Palestine. The UN was biased, alright, against the native people of Palestine and biased for the Europeans Jews.

2.  The native people of the Trans-Jordan were Bedouins, not Muslim or Christian Palestinians, the native people of Palestine.  Completely distinct.

3.  The people of Palestine are the native people of Palestine.  They once followed the Canaanite, Roman, Jewish and Christian and other religions.  At different times. 

4.  The Palestinians were Palestinians long before 1967.  They were Palestinians when it was the Roman province of Palaestina. The fact that they followed the Canaanite Samaritan, Jewish, Roman or Christian religions at one time does not change them as a people just because they adopted the Muslim religion.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> Oh, the usual Zionist false propaganda. Now the facts from source documents:
> 
> *UNITED
> NATIONS*​
> *General Assembly*
> A/364 3 September 1947​
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
> SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> ​


Except for one thing Akhmed.​I posted 1922-1931.
You posted 1922-1946, which includes the large War refugee years of 1940-1946.
Perhaps they don't know Apples from Oranges in Yemen.
See my Sig.
-


----------



## montelatici

abu afak said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, the usual Zionist false propaganda. Now the facts from source documents:
> 
> *UNITED
> NATIONS
> A*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> 
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> 
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> ​
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947*
> 
> 
> 
> 4. It will have been noticed that not only has there been a remarkably rapid increase in the total population of Palestine but also the proportion of Jews in the total has greatly increased, from 12.91 -per cent in 1922 to 32.96 per cent in 1946. Conversely, of course, the Arab proportion has fallen since 1922. The Moslem proportion of the population (almost entirely Arab) has fallen from about 75 per cent of the total to 60 per cent, and the Christian proportion (very largely Arab) from 11 per cent to 8 per cent. Thus, at the present time about one-third of the total settled population is Jewish.
> 
> (b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration.* From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. *
> 
> 
> 
> Except for one thing Akhmed.
> I posted 1922-1931.
> You posted 1922-1946, which includes the large War refugee years of 1945/1946.
> Perhaps they don't know Apples from Oranges in Yemen.
> -
Click to expand...



It is from 1947.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:
			
		

> It is from 1947.


You obviously are logic challenged as well as language challenged.
It wouldn't matter what Year the REPORT was from,.
I posted the statistics/scenario for 1922-1931, YOU posted 1922-1946.
DIFFERENT time periods.
You Moron.
It wouldn't matter if the report was from 1947, 1967, or 2007.
Unbelievable
You are just too obtuse to debate.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The indigenous people of Palestine are certainly not the European Jews. The Palestinians are the people that have always lived in Palestine. Their choice of religion to follow doesn't change the people.



You are wrong.  Indigenous cultures are those which pre-exist colonization and conquest.  That's the UN's working definition. Thus the Jewish people are indigenous to Palestine and the colonizing, conquesting cultures of the Arab Muslims are not. Long term residence  is not the same thing as being indigenous.


----------



## Boston1

I had him on ignore for a long time and if he's not careful he might just be on ignore again. His consistently ignoring all logical argument to the contrary and repetitive diatribe reminds me of climate deniers. No amount of science of logic can shake their ideological nonsense. 

Its one thing to discuss the subject but its another to just be offering someone a platform to repeat the same old lies and nonsense over and over. 

There's really no doubt who the indigenous people of this region are. The Judaic people.


----------



## Shusha

Now this is not to say that being indigenous is a requirement for national sovereignty or self-determination, but its just a silly argument.


----------



## Shusha

Boston1 said:


> His consistently ignoring all logical argument to the contrary and repetitive diatribe reminds me of climate deniers. No amount of science of logic can shake their ideological nonsense.



Or anti-vaxxers.  

The reason he does it is because he needs to justify his reasoning for why the Jewish people should not have national sovereignty and self-determination on part of the land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> I had him on ignore for a long time and if he's not careful he might just be on ignore again. His consistently ignoring all logical argument to the contrary and repetitive diatribe reminds me of climate deniers. No amount of science of logic can shake their ideological nonsense.
> 
> Its one thing to discuss the subject but its another to just be offering someone a platform to repeat the same old lies and nonsense over and over.
> 
> There's really no doubt who the indigenous people of this region are. The Judaic people.


Some were. Who is arguing that point?


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> Now this is not to say that being indigenous is a requirement for national sovereignty or self-determination, but its just a silly argument.



Exactly. The Syrians, the Jordanians and countless others are not an indigenous people however have cultures, languages, styles of dress, customs that all developed in the Arabian peninsula. We also know that there was a massive upheaval of people in the violence of the Arab conquest. So its very difficult to say that any large percentage of these people are in any way indigenous. 

However, many do have a nation state in the old Ottoman Empire. 

The deal is that attempting to invent a people out of the the defunct Jordanians, an invented people themselves and impose them on Israel just isn't fooling anyone. Or of course anyone actually paying attention


----------



## Indeependent

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I had him on ignore for a long time and if he's not careful he might just be on ignore again. His consistently ignoring all logical argument to the contrary and repetitive diatribe reminds me of climate deniers. No amount of science of logic can shake their ideological nonsense.
> 
> Its one thing to discuss the subject but its another to just be offering someone a platform to repeat the same old lies and nonsense over and over.
> 
> There's really no doubt who the indigenous people of this region are. The Judaic people.
> 
> 
> 
> Some were. Who is arguing that point?
Click to expand...

There must be a photoshopped document on your wall that argues that point.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> You are wrong.  Indigenous cultures are those which pre-exist colonization and conquest.  That's the UN's working definition. Thus the Jewish people are indigenous to Palestine and the colonizing, conquesting cultures of the Arab Muslims are not. Long term residence  is not the same thing as being indigenous.


You've only been indigenous for 414 years, out of the entire 5000 years that area has been inhabited. Ergo, you've only been indigenous 8% of the time.

Now, many of you fuckers say Arabs didn't show up until the 7th century and that's what, 1300 years ago?  That's about 20% indigenous for them. 

Therefore, Arabs are 12% more indigenous than Jews.


----------



## Billo_Really

Check out the voting bitches!

Have Zionists ever been right about anything?


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are wrong.  Indigenous cultures are those which pre-exist colonization and conquest.  That's the UN's working definition. Thus the Jewish people are indigenous to Palestine and the colonizing, conquesting cultures of the Arab Muslims are not. Long term residence  is not the same thing as being indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> You've only been indigenous for 414 years, out of the entire 5000 years that area has been inhabited. Ergo, you've only been indigenous 8% of the time.
> 
> Now, many of you fuckers say Arabs didn't show up until the 7th century and that's what, 1300 years ago?  That's about 20% indigenous for them.
> 
> Therefore, Arabs are 12% more indigenous than Jews.
Click to expand...


Ah, so the only way you can make things work out is for you to change the actual definition of "indigenous".  Once again, indigenous does not have the same meaning as length of residency.


Edited to add:  My husband says you can be fast and loose with (sexual partner of choice) or liquor but not with word definitions.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Ah, so the only way you can make things work out is for you to change the actual definition of "indigenous".  Once again, indigenous does not have the same meaning as length of residency.
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  My husband says you can be fast and loose with (sexual partner of choice) or liquor but not with word definitions.


And you're nuts, if you think arguing BS semantics will give people moving into an area, more rights than the people already living there.


----------



## Billo_Really

Here's another example of how ridiculous the Zionist narrative is...

*How is it possible for Israel to be completely surrounded by Arab nations and the Palestinian's, who are Arab, not be indigenous to that area?*​


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, so the only way you can make things work out is for you to change the actual definition of "indigenous".  Once again, indigenous does not have the same meaning as length of residency.
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  My husband says you can be fast and loose with (sexual partner of choice) or liquor but not with word definitions.
> 
> 
> 
> And you're nuts, if you think arguing BS semantics will give people moving into an area, more rights than the people already living there.
Click to expand...


Not asking for more rights.  Asking for equal rights.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Here's another example of how ridiculous the Zionist narrative is...
> 
> *How is it possible for Israel to be completely surrounded by Arab nations and the Palestinian's, who are Arab, not be indigenous to that area?*​



Um.  The same way the Lakota nation (as an example) can be surrounded by European colonized nations?


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  The same way the Lakota nation (as an example) can be surrounded by European colonized nations?
> 
> 
> 
> I used to date a girl from the Pueblo nation; man, she had a temper.  I also dated a little Jewess, who was a total psycho in bed.  Didn't see that coming?
> 
> You're right, Zionists from Europe, are now indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> Let's hook up!  A man should only be married 4 days a week.
Click to expand...



The Jewish people, no matter where they are currently living, are indigenous to Israel.  Just like a Lakota can move to Quebec and still be Lakota.  And her descendants will also still be Lakota. 

Also I live in Canada, and I'm Irish and Scots:


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people, no matter where they are currently living, are indigenous to Israel.  Just like a Lakota can move to Quebec and still be Lakota.  And her descendants will also still be Lakota.
> 
> Also I live in Canada, and I'm Irish and Scots:


My my, what a small world, I'm Irish to.

As far as being indigenous to Israel...

Zionists are indigenous to Israel, because Israel didn't exist until
May 15, 1948.​
As far as being indigenous to that area...

If the Jews that are indigenous to that area, then the Palestinian's are also indigenous to that area, as well, for they are both the same people.

*According to amateur historian Tsvi Misinai, many Jews and Palestinians share not only DNA, but also customs and even names.*

_*"We are of the same race and blood, and cooperation will bring great prosperity to the land,"* wrote Emir Faisal to Felix Frankfurter in 1917._

_ "Faisal's paternal line was Hashemite...meaning *he was directly descended from Muhammad.* But the mother of his maternal grandfather, King On, *was descended from a family of forced Jewish converts *to Islam that immigrated to the east bank of the Jordan, later returning to one of the villages west of the Jordan."

*90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews.*_​
My my, it is a small world after all.
​


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people, no matter where they are currently living, are indigenous to Israel.  Just like a Lakota can move to Quebec and still be Lakota.  And her descendants will also still be Lakota.
> 
> Also I live in Canada, and I'm Irish and Scots:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My my, what a small world, I'm Irish to.
> 
> As far as being indigenous to Israel...
> 
> Zionists are indigenous to Israel, because Israel didn't exist until
> May 15, 1948.​
> As far as being indigenous to that area...
> 
> If the Jews that are indigenous to that area, then the Palestinian's are also indigenous to that area, as well, for they are both the same people.
> 
> *According to amateur historian Tsvi Misinai, many Jews and Palestinians share not only DNA, but also customs and even names.*
> 
> _*"We are of the same race and blood, and cooperation will bring great prosperity to the land,"* wrote Emir Faisal to Felix Frankfurter in 1917._
> 
> _ "Faisal's paternal line was Hashemite...meaning *he was directly descended from Muhammad.* But the mother of his maternal grandfather, King On, *was descended from a family of forced Jewish converts *to Islam that immigrated to the east bank of the Jordan, later returning to one of the villages west of the Jordan."
> 
> *90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews.*_​
> My my, it is a small world after all.
> ​
Click to expand...


LOL

I don't think you'd know a haplogroup from a psychgroup, although you might be a lot more familiar with that last. I'm damn sure you don't have any idea what a SNP is or that the human genome shares about 99% of its gene structure with that of a chimp.

Or are you suggesting we create a national homeland for chimps right smack in the middle of Mecca because their indigenous to Medina ;--)






Some thing else about those genetic studies that I'm sure you are not aware of is the opportunity for bias in the sampling group. Which would allow a dishonest researcher to show just about whatever they wanted.

Sorry but your argument simply doesn't wash. The defining characteristics of a indigenous people is often more cultural than genetic. Think Papua New Guinea if thats not to much trouble.

Looks like that world just got a little bigger didn't it ;--)






The part you don't seem to be able to wrap your ( can't believe I'm about to say it ;--) brain around is that two separate peoples and cultures can develop in relative proximity to one another and share some common DNA, little things like hair color and skin tone, yet still be a distinct people. DNA does not denote tribal or cultural uniqueness nor does it define an indigenous people.


----------



## abu afak

Boston1 said:


> Sorry but your argument simply doesn't wash. *The defining characteristics of a indigenous people is often more cultural than genetic. *Think Papua New Guinea if thats not to much trouble.


Tinhead couldn't respond to this either. He said Jews were just a religion.

Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Jews (/dʒuːz/;[11] Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 Yehudim, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]),
also known as the *Jewish people, are an ethnoreligious group*[12] originating from the Israelites, or Hebrews, of the Ancient Near East.[13][14] *Jewish ethnicity, Nationhood and Religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish Nation*,[15][16][17] while its observance varies from strict observance to complete nonobservance.
[........]​


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> _*90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews.*_



You do realize you have just conclusively disproved your own argument, don't you?  Don't feel bad.  Monte did the same thing.  

If the _reason _that the Palestinians are connected to that particular territory is because they are descended from the Jews, then conclusively, the Jews are the indigenous ones -- the original, pre-existing, pre-colonial, pre-conquest culture.  And, since, the Arab Muslim Palestinians have lost their Jewish culture (are no longer Jewish), and adopted the culture of the colonist conquest, they can no longer be considered part of the indigenous group.


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize you have just conclusively disproved your own argument, don't you?  Don't feel bad.  Monte did the same thing.
> 
> If the _reason _that the Palestinians are connected to that particular territory is because they are descended from the Jews, then conclusively, the Jews are the indigenous ones -- the original, pre-existing, pre-colonial, pre-conquest culture.  And, since, the Arab Muslim Palestinians have lost their Jewish culture (are no longer Jewish), and adopted the culture of the colonist conquest, they can no longer be considered part of the indigenous group.
Click to expand...







LMAO nice catch there Shusha. Once again shot yourself in your own foot now didn't you Billo 

Tell us again how the Arab Muslims who arrived in about the 9th century are the indigenous people ;--)


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize you have just conclusively disproved your own argument, don't you?  Don't feel bad.  Monte did the same thing.
> 
> If the _reason _that the Palestinians are connected to that particular territory is because they are descended from the Jews, then conclusively, the Jews are the indigenous ones -- the original, pre-existing, pre-colonial, pre-conquest culture.  And, since, the Arab Muslim Palestinians have lost their Jewish culture (are no longer Jewish), and adopted the culture of the colonist conquest, they can no longer be considered part of the indigenous group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO nice catch there Shusha. Once again shot yourself in your own foot now didn't you Billo
> 
> Tell us again how the Arab Muslims who arrived in about the 9th century are the indigenous people ;--)
Click to expand...


A people don't lose their indigenous status because they adopt a different religion, culture and language.  That would make Latin American Indios that are Catholic, speak Spanish and have adopted the Hispanic culture non-indigenous.  You guys are a hoot.


----------



## Boston1

Obviously you don't comprehend the term indigenous 

A definition which has been posted about a hundred times so far. Which is why I liken the entire revisionist Arab diatribe right up there with climate denial. 

Quote 

in·dig·e·nous

inˈdijənəs/

_adjective_

adjective: *indigenous*


originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.

End Quote 

Quote 

adjective

1.

originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native 

End Quote 

Quote 

*in·dig·e·nous*  (ĭn-dĭj′ə-nəs)

_adj._

*1. *Originating, growing, or produced in a certain place or region. See Synonyms at *native*.

*2.*

*a. *Being a member of the original inhabitants of a particular place.

*b. *Of, belonging to, or characteristic of such inhabitants.

End Quote 

Lets look at a few more 

Quote 


*Indigenous people* are *people defined* in international or national legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their historical ties to a particular territory, and their cultural or historical distinctiveness from other populations that are often politically dominant.
n
mWelcome to Indigenous Peoples Literature
www.*indigenouspeople*.net/

End Quote 

Quote 

The ILO Convention no. 169states that a people are considered indigenous either:


because they are descendants of those who lived in the area before colonization; or
because they have maintained their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions since colonization and the establishment of new states.

End Quote 

And for the last nail in that coffin 

Quote 

The identification outlined by the Chairperson of the United Nations' Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Mme. Erica-Irene Daes designates certain peoples as indigenous,


because they are descendants of groups which were in the territory of the country at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived there;
because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have preserved almost intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterised as indigenous; and
because they are, even if only formally, placed under a State structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to theirs.
End Quote 

Let the kicking and screaming begin 

Clearly the colonists are the Arab Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula who arrived in about 900 CE and the native peoples are clearly the Judaic people who originated in the area roughly 6500 years ago in the mid bronze age. and were subject to countless invaders and imposed regimes until they won independence again on that great day, May 15 1948


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Um.  The same way the Lakota nation (as an example) can be surrounded by European colonized nations?


Or Palestinian's surrounded by European Zionists?


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Obviously you don't comprehend the term indigenous
> 
> A definition which has been posted about a hundred times so far. Which is why I liken the entire revisionist Arab diatribe right up there with climate denial.
> 
> Quote
> 
> in·dig·e·nous
> 
> inˈdijənəs/
> 
> _adjective_
> 
> adjective: *indigenous*
> 
> 
> originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Quote
> 
> adjective
> 
> 1.
> 
> originating in and characteristic of a particular region or country; native
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Quote
> 
> *in·dig·e·nous*  (ĭn-dĭj′ə-nəs)
> 
> _adj._
> 
> *1. *Originating, growing, or produced in a certain place or region. See Synonyms at *native*.
> 
> *2.*
> 
> *a. *Being a member of the original inhabitants of a particular place.
> 
> *b. *Of, belonging to, or characteristic of such inhabitants.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Lets look at a few more
> 
> Quote
> 
> 
> *Indigenous people* are *people defined* in international or national legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their historical ties to a particular territory, and their cultural or historical distinctiveness from other populations that are often politically dominant.
> n
> mWelcome to Indigenous Peoples Literature
> www.*indigenouspeople*.net/
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Quote
> 
> The ILO Convention no. 169states that a people are considered indigenous either:
> 
> 
> because they are descendants of those who lived in the area before colonization; or
> because they have maintained their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions since colonization and the establishment of new states.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> And for the last nail in that coffin
> 
> Quote
> 
> The identification outlined by the Chairperson of the United Nations' Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Mme. Erica-Irene Daes designates certain peoples as indigenous,
> 
> 
> because they are descendants of groups which were in the territory of the country at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived there;
> because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have preserved almost intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterised as indigenous; and
> because they are, even if only formally, placed under a State structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to theirs.
> End Quote
> 
> Let the kicking and screaming begin
> 
> Clearly the colonists are the Arab Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula who arrived in about 900 CE and the native peoples are clearly the Judaic people who originated in the area roughly 6500 years ago in the mid bronze age. and were subject to countless invaders and imposed regimes until they won independence again on that great day, May 15 1948



The colonists are the people that come from elsewhere to colonize a foreign territory.  The people of Palestine have always lived in Palestine.  The Zionists came from Europe, another continent. That's just a fact.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> A people don't lose their indigenous status because they adopt a different religion, culture and language.



Um.  YEAH, they do.  The definition of indigenous is the people belonging to the original, pre-existing, pre-colonial, pre-conquest CULTURE.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The colonists are the people that come from elsewhere to colonize a foreign territory.  The people of Palestine have always lived in Palestine.  The Zionists came from Europe, another continent. That's just a fact.



The Jewish people are not colonizing foreign territory.  They are returning to the territory to which they are indigenous.  Returning home.  Right of return.  You are familiar with this concept, no? 

The only people who have a right to decide who is included in their group is the group in question. The concepts are self-identification and acceptance by the group.  Therefore, ALL Jews who self-identify and who are accepted into the group belong to the Jewish people and are therefore indigenous to the place where the Jewish people originated.  

Removing people from a territory does not remove their belonging to a group.


----------



## Boston1

Neither of those two are playing with reality. I've seen them handed the simple facts right down to multiple definitions like I just posted and still they blither on with the denial and the revisionist nonsense. 

There's no doubt who is the native people of Judea. The Judaic people. Its a no brainer, unless that is you are blinded by racism and hatred. Then all of a sudden a colonizing culture becomes the native culture. Or at least for the more deluded among us. 

Its typical of cognitive dissonance that those who suffer haven't the mental fortitude to face reality, lest it challenge long standing beliefs they know damn well are complete BS


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> LOL
> 
> I don't think you'd know a haplogroup from a psychgroup, although you might be a lot more familiar with that last. I'm damn sure you don't have any idea what a SNP is or that the human genome shares about 99% of its gene structure with that of a chimp.
> 
> Or are you suggesting we create a national homeland for chimps right smack in the middle of Mecca because their indigenous to Medina ;--)


Isn't it about time you report someone, you fuckin' pussy?



Boston1 said:


> Some thing else about those genetic studies that I'm sure you are not aware of is the opportunity for bias in the sampling group. Which would allow a dishonest researcher to show just about whatever they wanted.


Well, you do know something about dishonesty.



Boston1 said:


> Sorry but your argument simply doesn't wash. The defining characteristics of a indigenous people is often more cultural than genetic.
> 
> The part you don't seem to be able to wrap your ( can't believe I'm about to say it ;--) brain around is that two separate peoples and cultures can develop in relative proximity to one another and share some common DNA, little things like hair color and skin tone, yet still be a distinct people. DNA does not denote tribal or cultural uniqueness nor does it define an indigenous people.


Did you say something about cultural?

_" ...the evidence for the Jewish ancestry of the Palestinians is persuasive - very persuasive, when all the information is taken into account. First, there are the names - not just place names, but family names. *"Many villages here have names that are not Arabic, and very rarely appear in other Arab lands. Among such names are Kafr Yasif, Kafr Kana, Kafr Yatta, Kafr Manda, Kafr Samia, and many others"*

"west of the Jordan River, 277 villages and sites - nearly two-thirds! - *had names that were similar to or the same as the Jewish settlements *on the same sites during Second Temple times" -  Ben-Zvi in his 1932 book The Peoples of Our Land

"Colonel Condor of the Institute for Israel Research found biblical names among Palestinian fellahin [peasants]. *Many of these names have no root in the Arabic lexicon.* Large, distinguished families from various parts of the country carry Hebrew names or Jewish family names."
_​It's not just names that are similar, but dialect as well...

_*The Palestinian dialect of Arabic contains many terms and words not found in "standard" Arabic* - the result of the integration of Hebrew and Aramaic into the Arabic they were forced to learn after the various Arab and Turkish conquests.
_​And not just dialect, but customs as well...

_*Many Jewish customs have survived among the Palestinians*,  
"In Islam, parents are required to have their sons circumcised by the age of 13. While in many Islamic countries the custom is to wait several years, *among Palestinians many perform the ritual a week after their son is born - meaning on the eighth day*,"

Other customs include sitting seven days for deceased loved ones instead of just three

lighting memorial candles for the dead (*a custom found nowhere in the Muslim world*)

much of the legal code of the Beduin is remarkably similar to many laws in the Torah and the Mishna

several Palestinian families own ancient hanukkiot, which they used in mid-winter - around Hanukka

One of the most curious of the *Jewish customs that were once widespread among the Palestinians was the putting on of tefillin* - usually done by someone who was ill, especially by those suffering from headaches.

Many Beduin refrain from eating camel and other nonkosher animals, and around Pessah time, *many Palestinians find themselves with a yen for matza.*
_​Now go report someone, troll boy.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people are not colonizing foreign territory.  They are returning to the territory to which they are indigenous.  Returning home.  Right of return.  You are familiar with this concept, no?


Jews can return after 2000 years, but Palestinian's cannot return after 70?

Interesting?


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> 
> I don't think you'd know a haplogroup from a psychgroup, although you might be a lot more familiar with that last. I'm damn sure you don't have any idea what a SNP is or that the human genome shares about 99% of its gene structure with that of a chimp.
> 
> Or are you suggesting we create a national homeland for chimps right smack in the middle of Mecca because their indigenous to Medina ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't it about time you report someone, you fuckin' pussy?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some thing else about those genetic studies that I'm sure you are not aware of is the opportunity for bias in the sampling group. Which would allow a dishonest researcher to show just about whatever they wanted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, you do know something about dishonesty.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but your argument simply doesn't wash. The defining characteristics of a indigenous people is often more cultural than genetic.
> 
> The part you don't seem to be able to wrap your ( can't believe I'm about to say it ;--) brain around is that two separate peoples and cultures can develop in relative proximity to one another and share some common DNA, little things like hair color and skin tone, yet still be a distinct people. DNA does not denote tribal or cultural uniqueness nor does it define an indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you say something about cultural?
> 
> _" ...the evidence for the Jewish ancestry of the Palestinians is persuasive - very persuasive, when all the information is taken into account. First, there are the names - not just place names, but family names. *"Many villages here have names that are not Arabic, and very rarely appear in other Arab lands. Among such names are Kafr Yasif, Kafr Kana, Kafr Yatta, Kafr Manda, Kafr Samia, and many others"*
> 
> "west of the Jordan River, 277 villages and sites - nearly two-thirds! - *had names that were similar to or the same as the Jewish settlements *on the same sites during Second Temple times" -  Ben-Zvi in his 1932 book The Peoples of Our Land
> 
> "Colonel Condor of the Institute for Israel Research found biblical names among Palestinian fellahin [peasants]. *Many of these names have no root in the Arabic lexicon.* Large, distinguished families from various parts of the country carry Hebrew names or Jewish family names."
> _​It's not just names that are similar, but dialect as well...
> 
> _*The Palestinian dialect of Arabic contains many terms and words not found in "standard" Arabic* - the result of the integration of Hebrew and Aramaic into the Arabic they were forced to learn after the various Arab and Turkish conquests.
> _​And not just dialect, but customs as well...
> 
> _*Many Jewish customs have survived among the Palestinians*,
> "In Islam, parents are required to have their sons circumcised by the age of 13. While in many Islamic countries the custom is to wait several years, *among Palestinians many perform the ritual a week after their son is born - meaning on the eighth day*,"
> 
> Other customs include sitting seven days for deceased loved ones instead of just three
> 
> lighting memorial candles for the dead (*a custom found nowhere in the Muslim world*)
> 
> much of the legal code of the Beduin is remarkably similar to many laws in the Torah and the Mishna
> 
> several Palestinian families own ancient hanukkiot, which they used in mid-winter - around Hanukka
> 
> One of the most curious of the *Jewish customs that were once widespread among the Palestinians was the putting on of tefillin* - usually done by someone who was ill, especially by those suffering from headaches.
> 
> Many Beduin refrain from eating camel and other nonkosher animals, and around Pessah time, *many Palestinians find themselves with a yen for matza.*
> _​Now go report someone, troll boy.
Click to expand...


The appropriate response to uncivilized messages on the forum is report the offender. Not to descend into similar uncivilized diatribe. 

Your prison logic simply doesn't wash in polite society. 

Also the body of your post is hardly credible 

Quote 

*According to amateur historian Tsvi Misinai*

End Quote  

Wiki, amateurs and racists are your typical sources. Why am I not surprised


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are not colonizing foreign territory.  They are returning to the territory to which they are indigenous.  Returning home.  Right of return.  You are familiar with this concept, no?
> 
> 
> 
> Jews can return after 2000 years, but Palestinian's cannot return after 70?
> 
> Interesting?
Click to expand...


You're catching on 

Now if you can only figure out why. Of course its amazingly simple and we've explained it to you a thousand times but you just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept. 

Read back a little and see if you can figure out just who the indigenous people are in Judea ;--)


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> The appropriate response to uncivilized messages on the forum is report the offender. Not to descend into similar uncivilized diatribe.
> 
> Your prison logic simply doesn't wash in polite society.
> 
> Also the body of your post is hardly credible
> 
> Quote
> 
> *According to amateur historian Tsvi Misinai*
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Wiki, amateurs and racists are your typical sources. Why am I not surprised


You use the report button as a weapon, which makes you a fucking hypocrite as well.  You sit there and say the most fucked up shit to other people, then turnaround and try to silence your critics.

You're one of the most uncivilized posters at this website and you can also take that arrogant, condescending prose of yours and shove it up your ass!  You're a phony and a fake.

All you got is ad hominems; you certainly can't debate worth a shit.  Because if you could, you would specifically address the points in my post.  Instead, you make these bullshit ad hominems and then act like you've just made a point.

You claimed there was more than DNA to show a link, that there were cultural differences.  Well, I gave you a whole list of cultural similarities between Palestinian's and Jews that you were too pussy to address.


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> You're catching on
> 
> Now if you can only figure out why. Of course its amazingly simple and we've explained it to you a thousand times but you just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept.
> 
> Read back a little and see if you can figure out just who the indigenous people are in Judea ;--)


Fuck you!

I know why the Pals can't return, it's because Israel doesn't respect international law.  And since you defend Israel's position, that means you don't respect international law, either.

So stop talking about this respect BS, because you obviously demonstrate you have none.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your funny.
> 
> Your argument is nonexistent, you don't provide a single corroborating source and so far everything you've claimed had been demonstrably false. ( through the use of even just basic source material ) so yeah, not feeling any tremendous inclination to simply take your word for it. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have claimed is demonstrably false.  All source documentation disproves your every assertion.
Click to expand...






Source documentation is not put together by a committee and sold as a novel, which is what you try and pass off as evidence. You would not know a source document if it jumped up and bit your nose


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to address a point once you make one worth addressing.
> 
> UNWRA is irrelevant to resolving who is indigenous to Palestine, but that said, the refugees UNWRA deals with nevertheless have a much greater claim to being indigenous than the Russians, Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans who came over on the boat in the 20th century.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The UNWRA does not define refugees. They only define who qualifies for aid.
Click to expand...





 The UNWRA does define who are Palestinians refugees and they pass the data on to the UN. This results in the UN allocating so much money to the UNWRA. The UN sets the criteria for refugee status, and one of those is 2 years residency in the country, because 90% of the alleged refugees were arrivals in the 1947 to 1949 time slot they did not meet the UN crir=teria and so UNWRA was formed. No other group has access to UNWRA funds and help but Palestinian muslims.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also your assumption ( again offered with no basis in fact ) that the returnees were all from Europe is demonstrably wrong
> 
> Although Wiki isn't our best source its easy so I'll use it cause I doubt you read the links anyway LOL ;--)
> 
> Only about 35% of the Judaic population in Israel are from Europe ;--)
> 
> Demographics of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> So again the baseless claims and assumptions are pretty easily proven false. Its actually a pretty easy game of find the flaw as the palestinian narrative seems entirely based on false information and revisionist history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really.
> 
> Check the Palestine Census of 1931 and when you discount that as "false information" and "revisionist history" Have a look at the Israeli Ministry of Aliya and Immigrant Absorbtion website which describes the various waves of European colonists who came over on the boat up until 1939, when you do the maths you find the figures are fairly close between the two sites up until the 5th Aliya. The Israeli government site points out that on average no more than 10% of Jewish colonists/immigrants came from outside Europe up until 1939, mainly from Yemen and Iraq. This means that 90% of Zionist colonists from 1882 to 1939 were indigenous Europeans. Oh, in case you are wondering, the 5th Aliya which boosted the colonialist population dramatically all came from Europe according to the Israeli site;
> "The year 1929 began with signs of economical revival, which stimulated a new influx of immigrants known as the Fifth Aliyah. During the period of the Fifth Aliyah, which continued until the outbreak of the Second World War, *more than a quarter of a million* immigrants arrived from all parts of _*Europe,* *including Western and Central Europe.*"_
> 
> https://ia800304.us.archive.org/18/...ndAdministrativeAreas/PalestineCensus1931.pdf
> 
> Know Israel
> 
> When you've done that, you can crawl back into your Hasbara bubble and get back to making things up for your masters.
Click to expand...







And what about the 3 Ottoman head counts that show that the arab muslims were in the minority prior to WW1



CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem After 1291 
"...Present condition of the City: (1907 edition)

Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. *The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures:
Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000;* Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the Nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly Half the present population...""

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Growth of Jerusalem 1838-Present

....... Jews Muslims Christians Total
1838 6,000 5,000 3,000 14,000
*1844 7,120 5,760 3,390 16,270 ..... ..The First Official Ottoman Census *
1876 12,000 7,560 5,470 25,030 .... .....Second """"""""""
1905 40,000 8,000 10,900 58,900 ....... Third/last, detailed in CathEncyc above
1948 99,320 36,680 31,300 167,300
1990 353,200 124,200 14,000 491,400
1992 385,000 150,000 15,000 550,000

http://www.testimony-magazine.org/jerusalem/bring.htm





 You must be wrong as you are deflecting again and resorting to your hasbara claims


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're catching on
> 
> Now if you can only figure out why. Of course its amazingly simple and we've explained it to you a thousand times but you just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept.
> 
> Read back a little and see if you can figure out just who the indigenous people are in Judea ;--)
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you!
> 
> I know why the Pals can't return, it's because Israel doesn't respect international law.  And since you defend Israel's position, that means you don't respect international law, either.
> 
> So stop talking about this respect BS, because you obviously demonstrate you have none.
Click to expand...







 So which international law says that the Palestinians have the right to claim property they never owned. What year was it enacted and when was this made international law.  The fact that you ignore and deny the International law enacted in 1923 that sets out the granting of part of Palestine to the Jews as their NATIONal home and delineates the boundaries of thatpart of Palestine means that you are the one with no respect for international law and will go to any lengths to show your hatred of the Jews that hence forth will be know as Judeaophobia, or the mentally debilitating abject fear of anything related to the Jews


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda throws a wrench into all this diatribe about Arab Muslims being indigenous to the Canaan valley area. Whoops, there's that term again ;--) did you ever look up just where they valley is and its relation to the mandated area ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comprehension not your strongpoint is it? I'll write it once again, slowly for you. There is no evidence that the indigenous people of the area called Palestine were ever displaced in any significant numbers by the Arab conquerors. Arab nobles/chieftains took over vacant estates left by the Roman nobles who chose to leave rather than pay taxes or convert, the peasantry remained in place. Over the next century or so these people took up Arabic language and customs and voluntarily converted to Islam (mainly to avoid taxes). If you can demonstrate otherwise, please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your funny.
> 
> Your argument is nonexistent, you don't provide a single corroborating source and so far everything you've claimed had been demonstrably false. ( through the use of even just basic source material ) so yeah, not feeling any tremendous inclination to simply take your word for it. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That just translates as, "Oh sh*t, I can't demonstrate otherwise, I'd better just try to use the old tactic of making childish accusations and hope this goes away..." another Hasbara fail by Busted1
Click to expand...






 Yep in the wrong again so I had better claim hasbara hoping that it will silence the opposition


----------



## Phoenall

Fishlore said:


> Although the Sioux people may find the idea of returning to an ancestral homeland appealing, modern government doesn't work that way. The Ashkenazi Zionists who created modern Israel based their activity on Bible stories Lord Balfour learned in Sunday School.
> 
> Even if historically accurate, the Torah is no basis for displacement of millions of non-Jewish residents. Add to that the fact that the "history" of Old Testament has been shown to be myth, not fact and the injustice done by European Jews to Palestinians is even more cruel and absurd.
> 
> History is filled with injustice, just ask the Sioux people. The big difference between the West Bank and the Great Sious Reservation is that the West Bank is surrounded by 400,000,000 Muslims rich with oil money and armed to the teeth with American weapons.
> 
> Nebuchadnezzar booted out the Jews 2,500 years ago. Titus did it again 500 years later. This third attempt to set up a Jewish state in Palestine isn't going to work any better than the last two. God gave the Jews a land of milk and honey in exchange for keeping the Covenant. When the Jews abandoned the Covenant, God cancelled their deed to Palestine. No human power can reverse the Will of God.








 How about recent events like the setting up of UNWRA in 1949 because the vast majority of Palestinians did not meet the criteria for being classed as refugees. They had less than 2 years residency on the land so could not be refugees and the UN had to invent a refugee agency for the arab muslims not allowed to return to their homes in arab league nations.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have posted the links to the source immigration data from the UN archives several times. It is just fact that close to 100% of the Jews in Palestine were from Europe. Reposting the links would be contrary to the rules.
Click to expand...







 No you have posted the novel produced by a committee that is stored in the UN archives, this does not mean that it is factual


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you have some supporting evidence for that rather amazing claim Monty ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have posted the links to the source immigration data from the UN archives several times. It is just fact that close to 100% of the Jews in Palestine were from Europe. Reposting the links would be contrary to the rules.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean the ones from just one year ? I saw those, classic cherrypicking. Any chance you can show all years ? Because as we all know by now only about 35% of todays Israeli's are returnees from Europe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We know that nearly 100% of the colonizing Jews were from Europe at the time of partition.
Click to expand...







 Do we, and how do you arrive at that conclusion from just one document sold as a novel by a committee


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> he's also ignoring the fact that these people are returning to their native land vs colonizing like the Arab Muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, the Jews that colonized Palestine were from Europe.  It was not the European's native land.  The Muslims and Christian Palestinians are the native people of Palestine. That they converted to Islam or Christianity and adopted Arabic as their language does not change the DNA of the native people.
Click to expand...






 Then explain why they were evicted from Palestine in 1099 and only re-migrated in the later part of the 19C after the Jews had been invited to colonise and make the desert bloom. Then why the UN had to invent a refugee agency just for arab muslims in 1949 because they did not meet the criteria they had set. This shows that the numbers of Palestinians that arrived between 1947 and 1949 amounted to the numbers of refugees on the UNWRA books at the end of the war of independence.

 So moving to Palestine as part of an arab league invasion force does not make them indigenous to the area and able to claim land that they have never seen before in their lives.


----------



## abu afak

Phoenall said:


> ... And what about the 3 Ottoman head counts that show that the arab muslims were in the minority prior to WW1
> CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem After 1291
> "...Present condition of the City: (1907 edition)
> 
> Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. *The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures:
> Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000;* Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the Nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly Half the present population...""
> 
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 
> Growth of Jerusalem 1838-Present
> 
> ....... Jews Muslims Christians Total
> 1838 6,000 5,000 3,000 14,000
> *1844 7,120 5,760 3,390 16,270 ..... ..The First Official Ottoman Census *
> 1876 12,000 7,560 5,470 25,030 .... .....Second """"""""""
> 1905 40,000 8,000 10,900 58,900 ....... Third/last, detailed in CathEncyc above
> 1948 99,320 36,680 31,300 167,300
> 1990 353,200 124,200 14,000 491,400
> 1992 385,000 150,000 15,000 550,000
> 
> http://www.testimony-magazine.org/jerusalem/bring.htm
> 
> You must be wrong as you are deflecting again and resorting to your hasbara claims


*Actually, that's a Direct PLAGIARIZATION of one of my many repeated posts.*
ie HERE in July 2011
What was the impact of the Zionists on Palestine?
or 5 Times as "mbig" on DebatePolitics.com since 2009.
Google
and in 2008 on Christian Forums
"Right to Exist"?
*As Abu Afak on Irish Indymedia 2004*
Jerusalem Growth: 1838- - Indymedia Ireland

Complete with those unique Two links, (Incl the second now 10-yr-dead one from when I first posted it one Israel Forum 11 years ago), the portions Bolded, and commentary pointing out that the Testimony magazine data are the 3 Ottoman Censuses ("abu"), the amount of * - - - -* these between links, and these *.....* in every spot, and words/sub-headings that do Not exist on Catholic Encyclopedia for many years (_and MY words that Never existed there like "1907 edition"_)

The only thing you Nefariously and Dishonestly Omitted was the "abu" or "mbig" after the parenthesis in the census numbers on the second link.
At least the Second time too: Palestinians Hold The Key To Their Own Future
Geez, and I never even got "thanks" from you for anything.

Please cite /CREDIT me in the future.
abu afak/mbig


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The appropriate response to uncivilized messages on the forum is report the offender. Not to descend into similar uncivilized diatribe.
> 
> Your prison logic simply doesn't wash in polite society.
> 
> Also the body of your post is hardly credible
> 
> Quote
> 
> *According to amateur historian Tsvi Misinai*
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Wiki, amateurs and racists are your typical sources. Why am I not surprised
> 
> 
> 
> You use the report button as a weapon, which makes you a fucking hypocrite as well.  You sit there and say the most fucked up shit to other people, then turnaround and try to silence your critics.
> 
> You're one of the most uncivilized posters at this website and you can also take that arrogant, condescending prose of yours and shove it up your ass!  You're a phony and a fake.
> 
> All you got is ad hominems; you certainly can't debate worth a shit.  Because if you could, you would specifically address the points in my post.  Instead, you make these bullshit ad hominems and then act like you've just made a point.
> 
> You claimed there was more than DNA to show a link, that there were cultural differences.  Well, I gave you a whole list of cultural similarities between Palestinian's and Jews that you were too pussy to address.
Click to expand...


I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.

Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.

As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.

Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.

If you insist on discussing DNA evidence I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like

Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal

or

The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses

You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.

Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes

However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.

The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?

From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism. In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.

If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.

Best of luck with that ;--)

Cheers


----------



## Boston1

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Challenger but your consistent inability to address any of the points presented isn't very convincing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to address a point once you make one worth addressing.
> 
> UNWRA is irrelevant to resolving who is indigenous to Palestine, but that said, the refugees UNWRA deals with nevertheless have a much greater claim to being indigenous than the Russians, Poles, Hungarians and other Eastern Europeans who came over on the boat in the 20th century.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The UNWRA does not define refugees. They only define who qualifies for aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UNWRA does define who are Palestinians refugees and they pass the data on to the UN. This results in the UN allocating so much money to the UNWRA. The UN sets the criteria for refugee status, and one of those is 2 years residency in the country, because 90% of the alleged refugees were arrivals in the 1947 to 1949 time slot they did not meet the UN crir=teria and so UNWRA was formed. No other group has access to UNWRA funds and help but Palestinian muslims.
Click to expand...


Bingo

They knew that the immigration issue was going to jump up and bite them in the ass so they side stepped it and reinvented the term refugee. The move created such an uproar that a few years later the UN was forced to define what a real refugee was or have to admit literally millions of people to the roles of refugee status, and they simply couldn't afford it. 

The UNWRA then went on to say that descendants of refugees were also refugees and eligible for aid, why ? Because this whole UN aid thing turns out to be a pretty nice gig and nearly 100% of all UNWRA employees were these so called palestinian refugees. No reason to screw up a good thing, free food, shelter, cloths, that damn refugee card was worth a fortune. 

And so began the trade in refugee cards 

But again no matter how you slice it the Arab Muslims that colonized Judea in the late dark ages hardly constitute an indigenous people in Judea. On the Arabian Peninsula they might be considered indigenous, but not in Judea.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The colonists are the people that come from elsewhere to colonize a foreign territory.  The people of Palestine have always lived in Palestine.  The Zionists came from Europe, another continent. That's just a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are not colonizing foreign territory.  They are returning to the territory to which they are indigenous.  Returning home.  Right of return.  You are familiar with this concept, no?
> 
> *The only people who have a right to decide who is included in their group is the group in question. The concepts are self-identification and acceptance by the group. * Therefore, ALL Jews who self-identify and who are accepted into the group belong to the Jewish people and are therefore indigenous to the place where the Jewish people originated.
> 
> *Removing people from a territory does not remove their belonging to a group*.
Click to expand...


People need to keep that in mind when it comes to the Palestinians instead of working so hard to make them non-existant.


----------



## Coyote

*I want to clarify a little confusion about moderation - IP is Zone 2, flaming IS allowed as long as there is content related to the topic.  The site wide rules say foul language is loosely tolerated.   Those who tend to use strong language need to realize that there is a limit but the bar is low (that's the loosely tolerate part) and that there must be material related to the topic, that is more than lip service to allow the flames (which folks are doing a good job at).  When foul is offensive - you can always put the person on ignore. *


----------



## Boston1

This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.

Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.


----------



## Coyote

Boston1 said:


> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.



I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.



Palestinian culture (and history) is specific to the Palestinians.  Trying to claim that Palestinian culture is indistinguishable from the general Arab Muslim culture, firstly this ignores the fact that denies that within the Palestinian population world-wide, diaspora included 35% are Christian, not just Muslim.  And, like Muslim Palestinians  would like to have an ancestral homeland and possibly return to their ancestral homeland.  Palestine is not the ancestral homeland of European Zionists.


Secondly, your contention is so idiotic that if applied to any other people, e.g. the Hispanic people, you would deny that there is any difference culturally between a Colombian and an Argentine.


----------



## Boston1

Coyote said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
Click to expand...


They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Boston1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
Click to expand...


There are about 22 Arab countries and 57 Muslim countries.


----------



## montelatici

The Palestinian people have no state, they are underrepresented.   Palestinians follow different religions, not just Islam.   Can't you get that through your thick skull.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.



Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.

Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.  

However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel.
Click to expand...


It was very foolish of Israel to have prevented the PLO from toppling King Hussein of Jordan in 1970-71.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Secondly, your contention is so idiotic that if applied to any other people, e.g. the Hispanic people, you would deny that there is any difference culturally between a Colombian and an Argentine.



The indigenous cultures of Columbia and Argentina have both been heavily colored over by the same colonial and conquesting forces.  Neither has much remaining indigenous culture.  Indigenous groups comprise about 2-3% of the population.  

That doesn't mean that Columbia and Argentina haven't developed unique and distinct cultural attributes on their own since their independence.  

What, exactly, are you trying to argue here, Monte?


----------



## montelatici

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was very foolish of Israel to have prevented the PLO from toppling King Hussein of Jordan in 1970-71.
Click to expand...


Jordan is not a Palestinian state, it is a Hashemite Kingdom where the indigenous Bedouin have most of the power, are the military officers  and have most government jobs. 


"The differentiation between Jordanians, Bedouins, and Palestinians is clear in this society. Jordanians are defined as residents who have lived east of the Jordan River since before 1948. Palestinians are defined as residents whose birthright extends back to areas west of the Jordan River. People of Bedouin descent are considered to be of the purest Arab stock."

Read more: http://www.everyculture.com/Ja-Ma/Jordan.html#ixzz3ywoBHYpw


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Secondly, your contention is so idiotic that if applied to any other people, e.g. the Hispanic people, you would deny that there is any difference culturally between a Colombian and an Argentine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The indigenous cultures of Columbia and Argentina have both been heavily colored over by the same colonial and conquesting forces.  Neither has much remaining indigenous culture.  Indigenous groups comprise about 2-3% of the population.
> 
> That doesn't mean that Columbia and Argentina haven't developed unique and distinct cultural attributes on their own since their independence.
> 
> What, exactly, are you trying to argue here, Monte?
Click to expand...


If I can speak for monte, I think he's trying to say that a Palestinian is very different from a Jordanian.  After all, there is that star that differentiates the Jordanian and Palestinian flags.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
Click to expand...


See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.



> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.



If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.

However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.


----------



## Coyote

Boston1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
Click to expand...


States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?

Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Indeependent

Ever since WWI, most countries are whatever Europe wants them to be.
They have, for the most part, been divided up by Religion.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Ever since WWI, most countries are whatever Europe wants them to be.
> They have, for the most part, been divided up by Religion.



I know they tried that with India, but African countries?  Middle East?  It seems it's more based on a division of spoils (or spheres of influence) with little regard to the populations - such as Iraq.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since WWI, most countries are whatever Europe wants them to be.
> They have, for the most part, been divided up by Religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know they tried that with India, but African countries?  Middle East?  It seems it's more based on a division of spoils (or spheres of influence) with little regard to the populations - such as Iraq.
Click to expand...

Very few people in the Middle East were unaffected by religious power shifts post WWI.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.



But both Boston and I have said more than once that being indigenous is not a requirement for self-determination and self-rule.  So while we argue that Palestinians are not indigenous -- we are not arguing that Palestinians don't have the right to self-determination and self-rule.  While the other side is arguing vehemently that the Jewish people have no right to self-determination and self-rule.  Its a HUGE distinction.  

And Boston's main point is that Palestinians ALREADY have self-determination and self-rule in the majority of the Mandate for Palestine.  He's not arguing that Palestinians have no culture.  He's arguing that their culture is already represented in a sovereign nation.  And that giving them land that was assigned to Israel is part of the larger goal of dismantling Israel.  



> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.



But again, the Mandate for Palestine was ALREADY divided between the Jewish National Homeland (west side of the river) and the Arab Muslim homeland (east side of the river).  We agree that people live there and they may not have ended up on the "right" side of the border of homelands.  But residency and sovereignty are two different concepts.  

The Arab "solution" to that problem was to get rid of all the Jewish people who ended up on the "wrong" side.  And it worked.  There is no discussion today of creating Jewish nations in Jordan, Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Morocco, Tunisia, Yemen, etc.  -- EVEN THOUGH those nations had large long-standing Jewish communities in those places and why shouldn't they have self-determination and self-rule in the places they have lived for thousands of years as the Jewish people -- a separate and distinct culture?  Israel, frankly, made a tactical mistake in NOT ethnically cleansing herself (for which she should be commended rather than criticized -- she had a dream that was way ahead of the capabilities of those she was in conflict with.  Still is.)

Why was it a tactical mistake?  Because 100 years ago that was an ACCEPTED way of dealing with a bunch of people living together who had different cultures and wanted a different, and self-determative way of life.  Now, largely due to the narrative developed and used by the Palestinians for the purpose of destroying the Jewish National Homeland, moving people from where they live to where they will join their cultural brethren is seen as heinous.


----------



## Boston1

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
Click to expand...


I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype. 

Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state. 

They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant. 

The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war. 

To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH

The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
Click to expand...


The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.


*PALESTINE.*​*CORRESPONDENCE 
WITH THE
PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
AND THE 
ZIONIST ORGANISATION.​*​*Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
JUNE, 1922.
LONDON:
​*

"............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
Click to expand...


Pure nonsense. Nothing but empty rhetoric. Even if the palestinians can be shown to be a distinct people somehow unique from the other Arab Muslims not more than 100' away in Jordan then they still already have a homeland and a state set up Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

If they really want a separate state, why didn't they complain about being Jordanian citizens ? Why not set up Gaza as a state ? Why not recognize Jordan as a palestinian state at the UN ;--) ?

LOL comunists and Jooooos you are too funny


----------



## Indeependent

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> 
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
Click to expand...


Pure horse dung, Rabbinical writings from The Mishnah, The Talmud, The Gaonim, The Rishonim, The Acahronim until today leave a clear trail of Jews being expelled from Judea to Europe and returning to Israel after the Holocaust.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.



The Jewish 'Palestinians' want their ancestral homeland back.  How about if the Arab Muslims get 78% of it and the Jewish people get the remaining 22%? That seems exceedingly reasonable.  Oh wait, that's what happened and the Arabs want the rest of it and for the Jewish people to have nothing.


----------



## Boston1

Sorry Coyote, while I do appreciate the input, particularly in that its civil input, I just don't see any factual basis for your insistence that the Arab Muslims of Judea are deserving of indigenous status. I can see an emotional investment but not a factual one.

On that note I think we agree that there is a certain number of people who just assume shake hands and move forward. Unfortunately there's also a large number who'd rather strap a bomb vest on a 14 year old and see what happens.

The innocents in this are the real losers, perfectly decent people on either side who are stuck with all the radicals. Unfortunately my solution might be seen as being radical itself but baring any decisive action militarily I can't see any end; or a return to peaceful coexistence. If a negotiated peace cannot be achieved, then unconditional surrender is the next option, and its been a long long time coming. The palestinians are playing with fire, and will inevitably get burned. 

In any case I'm not trying to disenfranchise anyone, but instead I'm just not accepting any revisionist views and insisting that if we are to find an equitable solution we're going to all have to be dealing from a place of historical reality in order to do so.

peace


----------



## P F Tinmore

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> 
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
Click to expand...

The Palestinians are Palestinians by treaty, by international law, and domestic law.

This whole thread is for Zionists to blow smoke on the issue.


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.


You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.

And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.

I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.



Boston1 said:


> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.


Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.

People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.



Boston1 said:


> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...


Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.



Boston1 said:


> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.


You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?



Boston1 said:


> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?


You just like hearing yourself talk.



Boston1 said:


> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.


Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?

Do you have dyslexia?



Boston1 said:


> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.


And where did I say that?



Boston1 said:


> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.


You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.




Boston1 said:


> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers


I don't need luck.


----------



## Boston1

P F Tinmore said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are Palestinians by treaty, by international law, and domestic law.
> 
> This whole thread is for Zionists to blow smoke on the issue.
Click to expand...


And of course you have a treaty that actually says that ? 

Something like "we the Israeli's recognize the palestinians as an indigenous people of Judea" ? 

I think we can all see who's blowing smoke and from where ;--) 

The simple reality is this is just another baseless claim.


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.
> 
> And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.
> 
> I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.
> 
> People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just like hearing yourself talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?
> 
> Do you have dyslexia?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't need luck.
Click to expand...


Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.

If you need a reminder

The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.

Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--) 

If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.
> 
> And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.
> 
> I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.
> 
> People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just like hearing yourself talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?
> 
> Do you have dyslexia?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't need luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.
Click to expand...


The only colonists in Palestine are the European Zionists.


----------



## theliq

Boston1 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.
> 
> And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.
> 
> I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.
> 
> People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just like hearing yourself talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?
> 
> Do you have dyslexia?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't need luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.
Click to expand...

You do realize that the Palestinians have been in Palestine longer than the Robber Jews in all their guises over the years.......


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.
> 
> And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.
> 
> I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.
> 
> People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just like hearing yourself talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?
> 
> Do you have dyslexia?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't need luck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only colonists in Palestine are the European Zionists.
Click to expand...


Clearly you have not been reading along. On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves. One in the 7th to 9th century CE and the other from about 1850 to the end of the late Zionist era.

Only about 35% of returnees came back to Judea from Europe and those precious genetic studies all you revisionists keep touting only show that the Judiac people actually are a race and have remained genetically isolated from the Europeans.

We should start keeping track, you've been told this how many times ?

In the end there is no doubt that the Judaic people originated in Judea and the Arab people originated on the Arabian Peninsula.

Its a no brainer unless you are experiencing some form of cognitive dissonance in which case you're going to tend to deny the facts in favor of whatever emotionally invested fallacies


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> You do realize that the Palestinians have been in Palestine longer than the Robber Jews in all their guises over the years.......



Um.  You do realize that the Jewish people have lived continuously in ISRAEL for 3000+years, yes?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

theliq Indeependent  The topic of this thread is the Palestinians, not the two of you


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that the Palestinians have been in Palestine longer than the Robber Jews in all their guises over the years.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  You do realize that the Jewish people have lived continuously in ISRAEL for 3000+years, yes?
Click to expand...

And nobody else?


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
Click to expand...







 And if the muslims had won in 1948/1949, or at any point after that the Jews would now be extinct in that part of the world. So who would have represented them then ? ? ?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinian culture (and history) is specific to the Palestinians.  Trying to claim that Palestinian culture is indistinguishable from the general Arab Muslim culture, firstly this ignores the fact that denies that within the Palestinian population world-wide, diaspora included 35% are Christian, not just Muslim.  And, like Muslim Palestinians  would like to have an ancestral homeland and possibly return to their ancestral homeland.  Palestine is not the ancestral homeland of European Zionists.
> 
> 
> Secondly, your contention is so idiotic that if applied to any other people, e.g. the Hispanic people, you would deny that there is any difference culturally between a Colombian and an Argentine.
Click to expand...








 Using pre 2000 data again as the population of Palestinians Christians is now just 1% down from 10% in 2007.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The Palestinian people have no state, they are underrepresented.   Palestinians follow different religions, not just Islam.   Can't you get that through your thick skull.









 So who does the UN and most UN nations recognise then, the Palestinian child sex groups, or is it the Palestinian nation invented in 1988.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that the Palestinians have been in Palestine longer than the Robber Jews in all their guises over the years.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  You do realize that the Jewish people have lived continuously in ISRAEL for 3000+years, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And nobody else?
Click to expand...







 Well Christians haven't for starters as they did not exist until 70 C.E. or thereabouts. The muslims didn't until 635 C.E. when they were invented. So who does that leave the Inuit, the Polynesians, First Nations, Inca or is that just showing how silly your reply is.


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
Click to expand...








 But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?
> 
> Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...







 Which European states have religious, cultural and racial ties to the Jewish people, when you find one then please let the world know. Then let the world know what ties muslims have to Jerusalem other that dar al islam and conquest


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> 
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
Click to expand...








 And then the same arabs decided because they would not get one inch of Jewish land to deny the Mandadte and refuse to have anything to do with the outcome. So they only have themselves to blame for the problems they face today.
 They want full control of the world and you are supporting those demands making you a traitor to your adopted country.


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.


One way you can spot a troll, is they don't specifically address the points of an opposing post.  That fits you like a glove.

I gave you an entire list of cultural similarities proving the Pals are indigenous to the area and to date, you haven't addressed a single one.

Personal attacks, bullshit innuendo's and strawman arguments, are all you got.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are Palestinians by treaty, by international law, and domestic law.
> 
> This whole thread is for Zionists to blow smoke on the issue.
Click to expand...








 Then produce the treaties, international laws and domestic laws that say so. They must clearly state the formation of a Palestinian state for the arab muslims. They must not say the Mandate of Palestine as that is not a state.


 How do you like that smoke that destroys your reply before you even make it.


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> Clearly you have not been reading along. On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves. One in the 7th to 9th century CE and the other from about 1850 to the end of the late Zionist era.
> 
> Only about 35% of returnees came back to Judea from Europe and those precious genetic studies all you revisionists keep touting only show that the Judiac people actually are a race and have remained genetically isolated from the Europeans.
> 
> We should start keeping track, you've been told this how many times ?
> 
> In the end there is no doubt that the Judaic people originated in Judea and the Arab people originated on the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Its a no brainer unless you are experiencing some form of cognitive dissonance in which case you're going to tend to deny the facts in favor of whatever emotionally invested fallacies


And virtually all of the Zionist population migrated into the area at the turn of the last century.


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use the system as it was intended to be used, rather than as a soap box for some personal grudge and although a healthy discussion is the essence of our time here I don't believe this area of the site was intended for over emotional profane laced outbursts directed against other members.
> 
> Basically the children have their space, separated from the adults, and you keep jumping the fence and throwing a tantrum.
> 
> 
> 
> You advocate destroying the lives of over a million and a half people; that's far more profane than the f-word.
> 
> And no, you do not use the system as it was intended; you use the "report button" as a weapon to get even with people that disagree with you and to silence their voice.
> 
> I've been blogging for 10 years over a dozen message boards with about 50,000 posts and I've never reported anyone, or put anyone on "Ignore".  People are free to say whatever they want to say to me.  I don't put up filters or try to control conversations to make them more palatable.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for DNA I didn't say "there was more than DNA" what I said was that its very easy for a bias researcher to show all kinds of things with DNA including that our genome also has 99% in common with a chimp but I wouldn't drop a nation of chimps in the middle of Mecca simply because some fool insists their indigenous. Might want to brush up on your own debating skills there Koko.
> 
> Oh and that amateur historian, if I can be so cavalier with the term historian, you referenced. Really ? Is that the best you can do is now add "amateur" historians to your list of racists and wiki quotes. Again, its not I, that needs to brush up on debating skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.
> 
> People who try to discredit the source, do so because they have no valid argument with which to rebut.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you insist on discussing DNA evidence...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since my last 2 posts focused on cultural similarities, I find your statement a little odd.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you first go check out "The Genetic Literacy Project" And then begin actually reading some studies, like
> 
> Jews Are a 'Race,' Genes Reveal
> 
> or
> 
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> You might ( and thats a huge maybe ) then have the background to comprehend this one which I'm sure you'd ( instead of actually understanding it ) jump up and down and cry I win along with some litany of profane invectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You remember where I told you to stick that condescending arrogance?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
> 
> However the essence of the argument about DNA isn't that there no similarities within a geological location, its that genetic similarities are somewhat irrelevant when it comes to tribal and cultural identities. No matter how you slice it, we know the Judaic culture developed in Judea and we know the Arabic culture developed on the Arabian Peninsula. So when it comes time to design a system of states that most fairly represents the native peoples of the area then it only stands to reason that we allow for a Judaic state within its ancestral boundaries. Just like we've allowed for Arabic states within their ancestral boundaries.
> 
> The Arabs have Syria and Jordan, Egypt as well as a host of others from the colonial period, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the list is endless. So why not the Judaic people ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just like hearing yourself talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From there, the only argument you present is one of bigotry and racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pointing out how similar the two groups are, is bigotry and racism?
> 
> Do you have dyslexia?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which case you foam and spit and cry foul that the Judaic people exist at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to continue to insist that the pali's are so similar to the Israeli's according to the DNA then we must also agree that they are quite nearly identical to chimpanzees and we should be throwing Muslims out of Mecca to make way for a Chimpanzee state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You must have ADD as well.  Because my last 2 posts, did not include DNA evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Best of luck with that ;--)
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't need luck.
Click to expand...






 Where has that been stated then, other by you to deflect away from the reality.

 What evidence do you have to substantiate this claim then, apart from your own paranoia ?

 BULLSHIT

 Showing that you are using non expert testimony because it supports your POV is a valid rebuttal.  If the source is proven to be wrong or malicious then that is also a valid rebuttal. This is frowned on in law if the person using such evidence does so knowing the evidence to be flawed. You know this evidence is flawed so you used the only get out you have and fail to get anywhere with it.

Ever thought that the cultures could have been stolen by the arab muslims to begin with, as they had no culture of their own to begin with. Just as they stole everything else from architecture, dress, religion and society.

So because you have no answer to the most telling point that destroys your whole POV you resort to immature name calling.

It is when it is based on flawed evidence, like nearly all of your input to this board is.

 When you have said that the Jews should be wiped out as they have no legal right to exist

What you mean is they did not contain any evidence at all

You do the way you are going as skill is a failure on your part.


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.
> 
> 
> 
> One way you can spot a troll, is they don't specifically address the points of an opposing post.  That fits you like a glove.
> 
> I gave you an entire list of cultural similarities proving the Pals are indigenous to the area and to date, you haven't addressed a single one.
> 
> Personal attacks, bullshit innuendo's and strawman arguments, are all you got.
Click to expand...







 Hello troll is it nice being hung by your own petard

 And how does those cultural traits prove anything as they can be stolen for use by anyone

 And what do you have other than flawed evidence, doctored videos and outright lies


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly you have not been reading along. On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves. One in the 7th to 9th century CE and the other from about 1850 to the end of the late Zionist era.
> 
> Only about 35% of returnees came back to Judea from Europe and those precious genetic studies all you revisionists keep touting only show that the Judiac people actually are a race and have remained genetically isolated from the Europeans.
> 
> We should start keeping track, you've been told this how many times ?
> 
> In the end there is no doubt that the Judaic people originated in Judea and the Arab people originated on the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Its a no brainer unless you are experiencing some form of cognitive dissonance in which case you're going to tend to deny the facts in favor of whatever emotionally invested fallacies
> 
> 
> 
> And virtually all of the Zionist population migrated into the area at the turn of the last century.
Click to expand...







 Another LIE, or is it another faked source as the Zionists were still living in America, Europe and the M.E. to the present day. Only about 10% of the migrants were Zionists, and all Jews were invited by the LoN under the terms of the Mandate


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves.



Care to show me?


----------



## montelatici

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Secondly, your contention is so idiotic that if applied to any other people, e.g. the Hispanic people, you would deny that there is any difference culturally between a Colombian and an Argentine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The indigenous cultures of Columbia and Argentina have both been heavily colored over by the same colonial and conquesting forces.  Neither has much remaining indigenous culture.  Indigenous groups comprise about 2-3% of the population.
> 
> That doesn't mean that Columbia and Argentina haven't developed unique and distinct cultural attributes on their own since their independence.
> 
> What, exactly, are you trying to argue here, Monte?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I can speak for monte, I think he's trying to say that a Palestinian is very different from a Jordanian.  After all, there is that star that differentiates the Jordanian and Palestinian flags.[/QUOTE
> 
> You are demonstrating a tremendous amount of ignorance.  Bedouins (the indigenous Jordanians) are have a completely different culture and history than the Palestinians.  The Bedouins of Jordan are Arabians, like the Saudis.  The Palestinians are the descendants of the people of the Levant.  Canaanites, Phoenicians, Samaritans, Jews, Romans, Greeks, Armenians etc.  Completely different people.
Click to expand...


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry Billy but there was really noting of substance to respond to, although I did find it entertaining.
> 
> If you need a reminder
> 
> The subject is indigenous people and what qualifications are required to be considered one.
> 
> Nothing you've said so far in any way supports the idea that there is either a distinct cultural group of Arab Muslims in Judea, or that even if there is one, they somehow didn't already get a few states to call their own in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. All of which encompass the exact same area that is the most likely source of immigration of Arabs into Judea in the second Arab colonial wave which seems to have begun sometime after 1850 and contunued into the late Zionist period. See DNA evidence provided ;--)
> 
> If you recall we already went over why the UN had to redefine what a refugee was in order to assist these nationals as refugees even thought Jordan had at this time given them Jordanian citizenship.
> 
> 
> 
> One way you can spot a troll, is they don't specifically address the points of an opposing post.  That fits you like a glove.
> 
> I gave you an entire list of cultural similarities proving the Pals are indigenous to the area and to date, you haven't addressed a single one.
> 
> Personal attacks, bullshit innuendo's and strawman arguments, are all you got.
Click to expand...








Just about fell out of my chair laughing when I read that. I love it. 

So pointing out that your list has zero credibility isn't an answer ? The Nazi's can make all the lists they want they are still Nazi's. 

How about something actually published, peer reviewed and found in a respected journal ? Rather than an op ed from an AMATEUR archeologist. 

Oh I addressed your list all right, its just you can't handle the critique. 

The simple facts are that the Judaic people developed in Judea and the Arabic people developed on the Arabian Peninsula. There's really no question ergo there's really no doubt. Unless its critical to ignore those realities in order to maintain what amounts to fantasies. 

The Judaic people are hands down the indigenous people of what is today Israel. 

Cheers


----------



## montelatici

The indigenous people of Palestine are the people that have always lived there, the Palestinians who are descendants of the original people of the area that underwent foreign influences including Jewish, Assyrian and other influences early on and Roman, Greek and Arabian influence later on.  

The Zionists are self-described colonists from Europe.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to show me?
Click to expand...


No problem, and to save time I'll quote Wiki a bit but if you have trouble with it I'm sure I can find many other sources for the information. 

Quote 

The *Islamization of Palestine* occurred as a result of the Islamic conquest in 640. It was a long process that included immigration of Muslim Arabs, as well as other Muslims, from other regions, as well as conversion to Islam by some of the indigenous Christian, Samaritan and Jewish population of the area. Islam did not become the majority religion of Palestine until at least the 9th century and possibly even as late as the Mamluk era (1250–1516)

End Quote 

Thus we have the first wave of Arab Muslim immigrants. 

Lets look at another source just to make sure we can agree 

Feel free to vet Mr Parks 

Quote 

According to the historian James William Parkes, during the 1st century after the Arab conquest (640–740), the caliph and governors of Syria and the Holy Land ruled entirely over Christian and Jewish subjects. He further states that apart from the Bedouin in the earliest days, the only Arabs west of the Jordan were the garrisons.[5]

James William Parkes, _Whose Land? A History of the Peoples of Palestine_ (Penguin books, 1970), p. 66

End Quote 

OK so now lets look at how many Muslims were actually in Jerusalem in the 1800s 

Not sure this graph will paste but I'll give it a shot. 

Nope 

Ugh, OK I'll write out a few years showing just how few Muslims were in jerusalem 

Year   Jew  Muslim Christian

*1853*, 8000, 4000, 3500, 
Source   
"Histoire de la rivalité et du protectorat des églises chrétiennes en Orient". Archive.org. Retrieved 2015-10-23.

*1866* 8000, 4000, 4000 
Source 
Kark, Ruth; Oren-Nordheim, Michal (2001). _Jerusalem and its environs: quarters, neighborhoods, villages, 1800-1948_. Wayne State University Press. p. 28. ISBN 0-8143-2909-8. Retrieved 14 July 2011.

Lets look at 1885 which is one of the last years before we get to the Zionist period 

*1885* 15000, 6000, 14000
Source
Kark, Ruth; Oren-Nordheim, Michal (2001). _Jerusalem and its environs: quarters, neighborhoods, villages, 1800-1948_. Wayne State University Press. p. 28. ISBN 0-8143-2909-8. Retrieved 14 July 2011.

So now lets look at the what the rest of palestine looked like. Thing to remember is that we don't really know what the area of palestine was durring the Ottoman times because there was no area specifically called palestine on Ottoman maps. Instead we have a number of provinces. Gaza, Acre and Lebanon, all in southern Syria. So unless we know what area the various sources are counting its a little difficult to compare numbers. But lets give it a shot anyway 

In the graph offered on WIKI we have some specifics but they clearly will blur the issue given that these numbers include Jordan, and doesn't include internal movements. 

Quote 

*Demographic history of Palestine* refers to the study of the historical population of the region of Palestine, defined as the modern State of Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian territories, or the territory defined by the borders of the 1923-48 Mandatory Palestine.

End Quote 

Although this link does describe large numbers of Arabs immigrating into the above defined area. 

Demographic history of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following graph is of undefined palestine 






Source
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...8wp5XYyQyaXa88LxLVf8rg&bvm=bv.113034660,d.amc

In the above graph you can see two waves of Arab immigration. One pre 1915 and one in the Zionist period matching nearly exactly the growth in the Judaic population. 

Lets take a look at the "Harvard Israel Review" 

Source
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...UWbsc4iSEhESWKyxWr38uQ&bvm=bv.113034660,d.amc

Quote 

From the period of the Crusades to the beginning of modern times, the population of Palestine remained at a near constant level.2This apparent stability is significant, as populations naturally tend to increase over time. It is estimated that there were 205,000 people living in Palestine in the mid 1500s.3By 1800, the population had only grown to 275,000, reflecting about a thousandth of a percent of average growth a year.4By 1890, still before any significant Jewish immigration, the population had made a slightly larger jump, to 532,000.5But even with this increase, the nineteenth century growth rate was still a small 0.7% per year.6By comparison, in the 1940s the Muslim growth rate in the Middle East was closer to 3.07%.7

A number of factors account for this dramatic underpopulation, one of which is environmental. Many people fled the area as early as the fourteenth century as a result of the Black Plague. 

( snip )

Soon afterwards, during World War I, the Ottomans tried to muster troops from the region, prompting many of the upper classes to flee. It appears that the war prompted a massive flight, immediately followed by a huge influx. According to contemporary surveys, the Arab population declined by 35,000 during the years 1915 to 1919. While many Arabs may have fled to escape the draft, others were expelled by force. To defend against the British, the Ottomans, still nominally in control, expelled both Jews and Arabs from cities across the coast on the assumption that their nationalistic intentions could lead them to sympathize with the British invaders. This effort was massive: twenty-eight thousand Arabs were forced out of Gaza alone.21By 1922, however, just three years later, the Arab population had increased by 80,000 above the 1919 level.22

( snip ) 

After years of relative stagnation, the few decades leading up to 1948 saw significant growth in both Arab and Jewish populations. Had the Arab population remained at its pre-WWI growth rate (0.8%) after 1922, one would have expected a population of approximately 785,000 by 1947. But there were in fact between 1.2 and 1.3 million Arabs in all of Palestine by 1947.26What could have caused this sudden burst?

To investigate possible causes, it is important to examine where in the country the growth took place. Non-Jewish population growth rates were highest within modern-day sovereign Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip regions. These rates cannot be explained by higher birth rates alone.

One major factor accounting for the unexpected growth was the potential for upward mobility that existed in the western cities. The wages of western cities were more attractive, no doubt bringing many people from surrounding areas. Port cities also offered greater employment opportunities, which helps explain the fact that there was a dramatic influx into Haifa and Jaffa relative to cities like Beit-Shean and Jerusalem.

( big snip ) 

End Quote 

That link is endlessly entertaining but the question of where all these Arabs came from is pretty well defined. 

We know they were largely immigrants given the historically low pop growth rates. And we know the time frame of their arrival. We can also know that the Arab pop growth somehow miraculously matched the Judaic pop growth ( coincidence ? ) 

So the only conclusion can be that we have two distinct waves of Arab immigration. One in the Arab conquest period and another in the late Zionist period. 

Ergo the Arabs cannot be the indigenous people of Judea 

Case closed ;--)


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> The indigenous people of Palestine are the people that have always lived there, the Palestinians who are descendants of the original people of the area that underwent foreign influences including Jewish, Assyrian and other influences early on and Roman, Greek and Arabian influence later on.
> 
> The Zionists are self-described colonists from Europe.


The Ottoman colonists as well as the Syrian, Lebanese and Egyptian colonists are invaders who have not "always lived there".


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the muslims had won in 1948/1949, or at any point after that the Jews would now be extinct in that part of the world. So who would have represented them then ? ? ?
Click to expand...



But they didn't, so that's just another pointless statement.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
Click to expand...


Well yes.  It can.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?
> 
> Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which European states have religious, cultural and racial ties to the Jewish people, when you find one then please let the world know. Then let the world know what ties muslims have to Jerusalem other that dar al islam and conquest
Click to expand...


Since when is that a requirement?  Folks are talking about equalizing the number of states per religious grouping (totally ridiculous argement to begin with).  Christians have more states.  They need to give some up since they did, afterall, kill 2/3 of the Jews in Europe.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> On multiple levels the Arab Muslims can be shown to have immigrated into Israel in several waves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care to show me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No problem, and to save time I'll quote Wiki a bit but if you have trouble with it I'm sure I can find many other sources for the information.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The *Islamization of Palestine* occurred as a result of the Islamic conquest in 640. It was a long process that included immigration of Muslim Arabs, as well as other Muslims, from other regions, as well as conversion to Islam by some of the indigenous Christian, Samaritan and Jewish population of the area. Islam did not become the majority religion of Palestine until at least the 9th century and possibly even as late as the Mamluk era (1250–1516)
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Thus we have the first wave of Arab Muslim immigrants.
> 
> Lets look at another source just to make sure we can agree
> 
> Feel free to vet Mr Parks
> 
> Quote
> 
> According to the historian James William Parkes, during the 1st century after the Arab conquest (640–740), the caliph and governors of Syria and the Holy Land ruled entirely over Christian and Jewish subjects. He further states that apart from the Bedouin in the earliest days, the only Arabs west of the Jordan were the garrisons.[5]
> 
> James William Parkes, _Whose Land? A History of the Peoples of Palestine_ (Penguin books, 1970), p. 66
> 
> End Quote
> 
> OK so now lets look at how many Muslims were actually in Jerusalem in the 1800s
> 
> Not sure this graph will paste but I'll give it a shot.
> 
> Nope
> 
> Ugh, OK I'll write out a few years showing just how few Muslims were in jerusalem
> 
> Year   Jew  Muslim Christian
> 
> *1853*, 8000, 4000, 3500,
> Source
> "Histoire de la rivalité et du protectorat des églises chrétiennes en Orient". Archive.org. Retrieved 2015-10-23.
> 
> *1866* 8000, 4000, 4000
> Source
> Kark, Ruth; Oren-Nordheim, Michal (2001). _Jerusalem and its environs: quarters, neighborhoods, villages, 1800-1948_. Wayne State University Press. p. 28. ISBN 0-8143-2909-8. Retrieved 14 July 2011.
> 
> Lets look at 1885 which is one of the last years before we get to the Zionist period
> 
> *1885* 15000, 6000, 14000
> Source
> Kark, Ruth; Oren-Nordheim, Michal (2001). _Jerusalem and its environs: quarters, neighborhoods, villages, 1800-1948_. Wayne State University Press. p. 28. ISBN 0-8143-2909-8. Retrieved 14 July 2011.
> 
> So now lets look at the what the rest of palestine looked like. Thing to remember is that we don't really know what the area of palestine was durring the Ottoman times because there was no area specifically called palestine on Ottoman maps. Instead we have a number of provinces. Gaza, Acre and Lebanon, all in southern Syria. So unless we know what area the various sources are counting its a little difficult to compare numbers. But lets give it a shot anyway
> 
> In the graph offered on WIKI we have some specifics but they clearly will blur the issue given that these numbers include Jordan, and doesn't include internal movements.
> 
> Quote
> 
> *Demographic history of Palestine* refers to the study of the historical population of the region of Palestine, defined as the modern State of Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian territories, or the territory defined by the borders of the 1923-48 Mandatory Palestine.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Although this link does describe large numbers of Arabs immigrating into the above defined area.
> 
> Demographic history of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The following graph is of undefined palestine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=15&ved=0ahUKEwiVisrhyNnKAhVL7WMKHQDJDVYQFghmMA4&url=http://palestineisraelpopulation.blogspot.com/&usg=AFQjCNFkPjhDLDRMUXbakl_m8RXgpevANw&sig2=8wp5XYyQyaXa88LxLVf8rg&bvm=bv.113034660,d.amc
> 
> In the above graph you can see two waves of Arab immigration. One pre 1915 and one in the Zionist period matching nearly exactly the growth in the Judaic population.
> 
> Lets take a look at the "Harvard Israel Review"
> 
> Source
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=17&ved=0ahUKEwiVisrhyNnKAhVL7WMKHQDJDVYQFgh1MBA&url=http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~hireview/content.php?type=article&issue=spring01/&name=myth&usg=AFQjCNHHcVM40oadxVMyHydbwMwgZe8X1A&sig2=UWbsc4iSEhESWKyxWr38uQ&bvm=bv.113034660,d.amc
> 
> Quote
> 
> From the period of the Crusades to the beginning of modern times, the population of Palestine remained at a near constant level.2This apparent stability is significant, as populations naturally tend to increase over time. It is estimated that there were 205,000 people living in Palestine in the mid 1500s.3By 1800, the population had only grown to 275,000, reflecting about a thousandth of a percent of average growth a year.4By 1890, still before any significant Jewish immigration, the population had made a slightly larger jump, to 532,000.5But even with this increase, the nineteenth century growth rate was still a small 0.7% per year.6By comparison, in the 1940s the Muslim growth rate in the Middle East was closer to 3.07%.7
> 
> A number of factors account for this dramatic underpopulation, one of which is environmental. Many people fled the area as early as the fourteenth century as a result of the Black Plague.
> 
> ( snip )
> 
> Soon afterwards, during World War I, the Ottomans tried to muster troops from the region, prompting many of the upper classes to flee. It appears that the war prompted a massive flight, immediately followed by a huge influx. According to contemporary surveys, the Arab population declined by 35,000 during the years 1915 to 1919. While many Arabs may have fled to escape the draft, others were expelled by force. To defend against the British, the Ottomans, still nominally in control, expelled both Jews and Arabs from cities across the coast on the assumption that their nationalistic intentions could lead them to sympathize with the British invaders. This effort was massive: twenty-eight thousand Arabs were forced out of Gaza alone.21By 1922, however, just three years later, the Arab population had increased by 80,000 above the 1919 level.22
> 
> ( snip )
> 
> After years of relative stagnation, the few decades leading up to 1948 saw significant growth in both Arab and Jewish populations. Had the Arab population remained at its pre-WWI growth rate (0.8%) after 1922, one would have expected a population of approximately 785,000 by 1947. But there were in fact between 1.2 and 1.3 million Arabs in all of Palestine by 1947.26What could have caused this sudden burst?
> 
> To investigate possible causes, it is important to examine where in the country the growth took place. Non-Jewish population growth rates were highest within modern-day sovereign Israel and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip regions. These rates cannot be explained by higher birth rates alone.
> 
> One major factor accounting for the unexpected growth was the potential for upward mobility that existed in the western cities. The wages of western cities were more attractive, no doubt bringing many people from surrounding areas. Port cities also offered greater employment opportunities, which helps explain the fact that there was a dramatic influx into Haifa and Jaffa relative to cities like Beit-Shean and Jerusalem.
> 
> ( big snip )
> 
> End Quote
> 
> That link is endlessly entertaining but the question of where all these Arabs came from is pretty well defined.
> 
> We know they were largely immigrants given the historically low pop growth rates. And we know the time frame of their arrival. We can also know that the Arab pop growth somehow miraculously matched the Judaic pop growth ( coincidence ? )
> 
> So the only conclusion can be that we have two distinct waves of Arab immigration. One in the Arab conquest period and another in the late Zionist period.
> 
> Ergo the Arabs cannot be the indigenous people of Judea
> 
> Case closed ;--)
Click to expand...


*UNITED*​*NATIONS​**A*





*General Assembly*












 A/364
3 September 1947

*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *​*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY​*​*SUPPLEMENT No. 11​*
​*UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE​*


*REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

*VOLUME 1*

The only case that is closed is the one that you keep all that Zionist propaganda in.  There was no Arab immigration to Palestine speak of.  Nearly all the immigration was Jewish European.

(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration.* From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths*. Indeed, the natural rate of increase of Moslem Arabs in Palestine is the highest in recorded statistics,1 a phenomenon explained by very* high fertility rates coupled with a marked decline in death rates as a result of improved conditions of life and public health,* The natural rate of increase of Jews is also relatively high, but is conditioned by a favorable age distribution of the population due to the high rate of immigration.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

*Case closed.*


----------



## Boston1

LOL 

Are you seriously expecting us to believe that on Sept 3 1947 in a report to the general assembly it said. 

Quote 

The only case that is closed is the one that you keep all that Zionist propaganda in. There was no Arab immigration to Palestine speak of. Nearly all the immigration was Jewish European.

End Quote 

Although it was a nice bait and switch. 

The question wasn't if SOME Judaic people didn't return from outside the mandated area. We know they did. Roughly 35% from Europe and roughly 37% from the immediate vicinity. 

The question was if the Arabs colonized the area in two waves. One during the initial Arab expansion and another in step with the late Zionist period. 

Which can easily be seen in the information I presented in post # 244






Not that I'm expecting a straight answer but how is it that Arab immigration virtually exactly matches Judaic pop ? 

Oh and the UN ? really ? Of the 190 or so state members we have what 22 Muslim and 57 Arab states. I'll err on the conservative side and suggest that all the Muslim states are also Arab in which case we have a voting block of 57 out of 190ish states. No room for bias there now is there.


----------



## montelatici

The information you are providing is useless Zionist propaganda.  The UN Report is derived from actual British census and immigration reports and records contemporaneous to the period of immigration. It is also reported in the "Survey of Palestine" Vol. 1

Nearly 100% of the immigration to Palestine was from Europe, the Americas and Oceania before partition.  Almost none from the immediate vicinity. This data is also available in "The Survey of Palestine" Vol. 1. All three volumes are available at the NYU/Wagner Berman Jewish Policy Archive.  Here is the link to vol. 1.

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ NYU Wagner

This is where you will find facts. You won't find facts in the propaganda you link to.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The indigenous people of Palestine are the people that have always lived there, the Palestinians who are descendants of the original people of the area that underwent foreign influences including Jewish, Assyrian and other influences early on and Roman, Greek and Arabian influence later on.
> 
> The Zionists are self-described colonists from Europe.








 While the arab muslims are self described recent invaders from the arab league nations


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The information you are providing is useless Zionist propaganda.  The UN Report is derived from actual British census and immigration reports and records contemporaneous to the period of immigration. It is also reported in the "Survey of Palestine" Vol. 1
> 
> Nearly 100% of the immigration to Palestine was from Europe, the Americas and Oceania before partition.  Almost none from the immediate vicinity. This data is also available in "The Survey of Palestine" Vol. 1. All three volumes are available at the NYU/Wagner Berman Jewish Policy Archive.  Here is the link to vol. 1.
> 
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ NYU Wagner
> 
> This is where you will find facts. You won't find facts in the propaganda you link to.







 So you find facts in an anti semitic novel written by a committee paid by the arab league. How is it the previous page to the one you cut and paste says the Jews owned the most land. And how is it they add all the various muslim groups together because the arab muslims were less in numbers than the Christians


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the muslims had won in 1948/1949, or at any point after that the Jews would now be extinct in that part of the world. So who would have represented them then ? ? ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But they didn't, so that's just another pointless statement.
Click to expand...






 Not when you read their testimony from before the war of independence, and their many charters from after the war of independence. You can even read their letters to the UN that say the same thing.  There will never be peace while a Jew is allowed to live in Palestine, and the Palestinians will fight until either the Jews are wiped out or the Palestinians are eradicated.   You can keep on saying that the Palestinians proclamations are pointless all you want, they show that they are out to massacre every Jew. So why are you in denial, is it your anti Semitism and Jew hatred that is driving your POV ?


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Nearly 100% of the immigration to Palestine was from Europe, the Americas and Oceania before partition.  Almost none from the immediate vicinity.



You and Boston are arguing two different things.  One is saying that most of the Jewish immigration prior to 1948 was from Europe and the Americas.  The other is saying that only 35% of current Jewish citizens are descended from European and American immigrants (which would include both pre- and post- independence immigration).  Its apples and oranges.  Give it up.  Its not important anyway, since the Jewish people are there now and they aren't going to go away.


----------



## montelatici

The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:

1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
3. The Palestinians don't exist.
4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.

etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.

And the lies  go on and on.


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
Click to expand...






 Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.


 A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.

 Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?
> 
> Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which European states have religious, cultural and racial ties to the Jewish people, when you find one then please let the world know. Then let the world know what ties muslims have to Jerusalem other that dar al islam and conquest
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since when is that a requirement?  Folks are talking about equalizing the number of states per religious grouping (totally ridiculous argement to begin with).  Christians have more states.  They need to give some up since they did, afterall, kill 2/3 of the Jews in Europe.
Click to expand...







 Only you are talking about that so you can demonise the Jews again. The fact is the arab muslims have 99.9% of the land in the M.E. and they still want more. In fact they want to dominate the world and turn it into an Islamic caliphate ruled from Mecca.  As for killing 2/3 of the Jews didn't the Russians already do that a few years earlier. And what about the American illegal colonists that killed 9/10 of the indigenous population then ?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.








 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law

 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)

 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league

 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.



 Yes your lies do go on and on and on


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.




You are doing a very poor job of following and understanding our argument, Monte.  Intentional?

1.  No one is arguing on this board from a theological perspective.  Everyone on the pro-Israel side is arguing from the perspective of law and humanitarian rights.

2.  No one is arguing that there weren't Arab Muslims and Arab Christians living in Palestine and nor that they haven't been living there for thousands of years.

3.  No one is arguing that the Palestinians don't exist.  We all acknowledge their existence.

4.  No one is arguing that the Palestinians "arrived" after Israel's independence. 


What we are arguing is:

1.  The Jewish people have the right to re-constitute our national homeland on that territory.  That right is based on the fact of our being indigenous to the territory, that we have had historical sovereignty over that territory, that we have a legal claim to that territory and we need a safe and secure homeland for all the world's Jewish people. 

2.  Those Jewish people living in the Diaspora have a right to return to our homeland.  (We are not colonizers, foreigners or invaders). 

3.  The Palestinian people ALSO have a right to a homeland and the right to return to it.  (With some of us arguing that this homeland is Jordan and some of us arguing that the Palestinians must be accommodated in two new States -- the four State solution). 

4.  That the two cultures can live in peace together, side-by-side both within the nations in question and as neighboring nations. 


Now, let's go over the anti-Israel arguments:

1.  Only the current inhabitants of a territory have rights to sovereignty.

2.  Past inhabitants have no rights to the territory.  Therefore, there is no right of return.  (With some arguing that the Jewish people never lived in that territory -- an obvious falsehood). 

3.  Conquest, colonization and ethnic cleansing transfer rights from the indigenous inhabitants to the conquoring and colonizing culture. 

4.  That it is impossible for the Arab Muslim Palestinians to live with the Jewish people either in the same state or in a neighboring State.  

Now, if the pro-Israel side adopted these arguments it would STILL demonstrate that the rights to Israel belong to the Jewish people.  Its a lose/lose for the anti-Israel crowd.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?
> 
> Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which European states have religious, cultural and racial ties to the Jewish people, when you find one then please let the world know. Then let the world know what ties muslims have to Jerusalem other that dar al islam and conquest
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since when is that a requirement?  Folks are talking about equalizing the number of states per religious grouping (totally ridiculous argement to begin with).  Christians have more states.  They need to give some up since they did, afterall, kill 2/3 of the Jews in Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only you are talking about that so you can demonise the Jews again. The fact is the arab muslims have 99.9% of the land in the M.E. and they still want more. In fact they want to dominate the world and turn it into an Islamic caliphate ruled from Mecca.  As for killing 2/3 of the Jews didn't the Russians already do that a few years earlier. And what about the American illegal colonists that killed 9/10 of the indigenous population then ?
Click to expand...


You need to get off the "demonize Jews" schtick you burp out at every argument.  Russia did not come anywhere close to killing 2/3 of Europes Jewish population and, they're majority Christian.  So were the American colonists. Yes, I think we need to take several of those Christian states and give them to the Jews


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the muslims had won in 1948/1949, or at any point after that the Jews would now be extinct in that part of the world. So who would have represented them then ? ? ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But they didn't, so that's just another pointless statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not when you read their testimony from before the war of independence, and their many charters from after the war of independence. You can even read their letters to the UN that say the same thing.  There will never be peace while a Jew is allowed to live in Palestine, and the Palestinians will fight until either the Jews are wiped out or the Palestinians are eradicated.   You can keep on saying that the Palestinians proclamations are pointless all you want, they show that they are out to massacre every Jew. So why are you in denial, is it your anti Semitism and Jew hatred that is driving your POV ?
Click to expand...


Wipe the "antisemitism and Jew hatred" drivel off your chin, it looks ridiculous.  As I said they *didn't win the war *so your point  is pointless.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
Click to expand...


According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
Click to expand...


You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.


----------



## Boston1

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
Click to expand...


Well now actually the mandate was a legal instrument like a deed or a title. More than thats its the last legally binding legal instrument. So I don't think its quite accurate to say its not law.

The last binding legal instrument in the middle east conflict states clearly that the area west of the Jordan is open to the creation of a National Jewish homeland. So its kinda hard to say Israel is occupying the disputed territories when they are specifically designated for Israel. Areas East of the Jordan were designated as Arab.

There is no subsequent legally binding agreement of any kind. The pali's have refused any form of negotiated settlement.

So what we are left with is the last legally binding instrument. Although it did expire, which kinda throws a wrench into a few things. 

But that last legally binding instrument supports native rights. The natives being the Judaic people. The indigenous people. If not for the Jordanian invasion during the war of independence the disputed territories wouldn't be disputed at all. Judea and Samaria are right smack in the middle of Canaan and the area where the protojudaic people developed.


----------



## montelatici

The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.



I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth. 

Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age. 

More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts. 

We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire 

We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period. 

So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts. 

The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
Click to expand...


The European Zionists were natives of Europe.  By definition.  You have ignored the facts and have only presented Zionist propaganda.  You are simply repeating lies that have no basis in fact.  The Muslim "expansion" had no effect on the Jews.  There were no Jews in Palestine to affect.  The only people affected were Christians, some of whom may have had distant ancestors of the Jewish religion.  It's really not that difficult to follow logic Boston.  You were found out as a propagandist long ago.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
Click to expand...

And no promises needed to be made. The people of the place own the place. All of the people who became Palestinian citizens after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne became, collectively, the owners of Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are Palestinians by treaty, by international law, and domestic law.
> 
> This whole thread is for Zionists to blow smoke on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then produce the treaties, international laws and domestic laws that say so. They must clearly state the formation of a Palestinian state for the arab muslims. They must not say the Mandate of Palestine as that is not a state.
> 
> 
> How do you like that smoke that destroys your reply before you even make it.
Click to expand...

The Mandate of Palestine was the Mandate of what?


----------



## theliq

Boston1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
Click to expand...

You missed the Canaanites and Moabites out..........who were there long before the Jews,of course you did because you eliminated these two peoples to STEAL THEIR LAND........todays schism with the Palestinians you are trying to eliminate these people too.........But you have failed...The World is against you.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.



And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
Click to expand...

Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE

Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
Click to expand...


Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You missed the Canaanites and Moabites out..........who were there long before the Jews,of course you did because you eliminated these two peoples to STEAL THEIR LAND........todays schism with the Palestinians you are trying to eliminate these people too.........But you have failed...The World is against you.
Click to expand...


Of course the ONLY way you know they were there is from the very Torah you seem to hate.
And you will bring up that they were there but not that it was time for them to go.
That little thing with sacrificing their kids and having sex with animals.


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE




There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
Click to expand...


The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.


----------



## Indeependent

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
Click to expand...


And they're welcome because they don't stab people or blow themselves up in buses.


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
Click to expand...

Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
Click to expand...

Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits
Click to expand...

More ad hominems...
You have been spewing hate since the beginning and you're trying, and failing, to be clever.
A hateful mind cannot be clever.


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You missed the Canaanites and Moabites out..........who were there long before the Jews,of course you did because you eliminated these two peoples to STEAL THEIR LAND........todays schism with the Palestinians you are trying to eliminate these people too.........But you have failed...The World is against you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the ONLY way you know they were there is from the very Torah you seem to hate.
> And you will bring up that they were there but not that it was time for them to go.
> That little thing with sacrificing their kids and having sex with animals.
Click to expand...

Yawn....trouble is you forgot what Phedoes some of you are


----------



## Boston1

I love how the palestinian narrative depends on making up new meanings for words that already have meaning. 

So if a native people are native to wherever they are now vs where they are indigenous too then There are 340,000,000 native americans who should all be getting free college through the native american college fund. ;--) thats brilliant. So why don't all the kids who's parents are paying an arm and a leg go down and argue they are native americans ? 

Sorry but the pali diatribe simply never washes. Its more like a game of find the flaw.


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
Click to expand...

How much available land in Australia?


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More ad hominems...
> You have been spewing hate since the beginning and you're trying, and failing, to be clever.
> A hateful mind cannot be clever.
Click to expand...

You have become a SAD PRICK,SAD INDEED


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You missed the Canaanites and Moabites out..........who were there long before the Jews,of course you did because you eliminated these two peoples to STEAL THEIR LAND........todays schism with the Palestinians you are trying to eliminate these people too.........But you have failed...The World is against you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the ONLY way you know they were there is from the very Torah you seem to hate.
> And you will bring up that they were there but not that it was time for them to go.
> That little thing with sacrificing their kids and having sex with animals.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn....trouble is you forgot what Phedoes some of you are
Click to expand...


It seems you identify very strongly with the Jordanians.
To what extent do you identify with your Jewish genetics?
Seriously...Ever refuse a ham sandwich?


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More ad hominems...
> You have been spewing hate since the beginning and you're trying, and failing, to be clever.
> A hateful mind cannot be clever.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have become a SAD PRICK,SAD INDEED
Click to expand...


More ad hominems.
You are a weak willed, self-hating Jew.
That's your business; try to contain it.


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
Click to expand...

Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You missed the Canaanites and Moabites out..........who were there long before the Jews,of course you did because you eliminated these two peoples to STEAL THEIR LAND........todays schism with the Palestinians you are trying to eliminate these people too.........But you have failed...The World is against you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course the ONLY way you know they were there is from the very Torah you seem to hate.
> And you will bring up that they were there but not that it was time for them to go.
> That little thing with sacrificing their kids and having sex with animals.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn....trouble is you forgot what Phedoes some of you are
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems you identify very strongly with the Jordanians.
> To what extent do you identify with your Jewish genetics?
> Seriously...Ever refuse a ham sandwich?
Click to expand...

How ODD YOU R


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More ad hominems...
> You have been spewing hate since the beginning and you're trying, and failing, to be clever.
> A hateful mind cannot be clever.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have become a SAD PRICK,SAD INDEED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More ad hominems.
> You are a weak willed, self-hating Jew.
> That's your business; try to contain it.
Click to expand...

How ODD ARE YOU, WHAT!!!!!!!!!stevie Jewish??????


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
Click to expand...


I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
At least until the mods delete these postings.


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Israelis are just seething with hate.
> You are one sick dude broad brushing people like that.
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all,just reading the reflection of your and the lemmings prose.......very sickening and shameful.........What you and the lemmings don't like is me ramming the truth up your noses.....just admit that you are a pack of shits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More ad hominems...
> You have been spewing hate since the beginning and you're trying, and failing, to be clever.
> A hateful mind cannot be clever.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have become a SAD PRICK,SAD INDEED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More ad hominems.
> You are a weak willed, self-hating Jew.
> That's your business; try to contain it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How ODD ARE YOU WHAT!!!!!!!!!stevie Jewish??????
Click to expand...


What did you intend to post?


----------



## theliq

"





Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
Click to expand...

I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time and me,mods told me not to bother with you...but I'm "Fcuked"if a two-bit Runt like you is ever going to influence a Titan like me.....Cry Baby


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time.....Cry Baby
Click to expand...


So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
Who cares about you line; the question is if you are living up to their standard.


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> 
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time.....Cry Baby
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
> Who cares about you line; the question is if you are living up to their standard.
Click to expand...

Are you Mental or What...Indie if you stopped Inciting we could actually communicate instead of behaving like dick heads..steve...YOUR CALL


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> How much available land in Australia?
> 
> 
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time.....Cry Baby
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
> Who cares about you line; the question is if you are living up to their standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you Mental or What
Click to expand...


You are stepping all over yourself.
You spew venom at Zionists, which everyone would presume includes a LOT of Israelis and JEWS.
THEN you just claimed you never mentioned Israelis or Jews, just Zionists.
That last statement excludes Israelis and/or Jews that live in Israel.

Thus the question...
So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?


----------



## theliq

Indeependent said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Enough for Jews,Muslims,Gentiles,Jeanes,Aboriginals,Europeans,Africans everyone.......but NOT CRIMINALS AND SELF LOATHING BIGOTS..like you.sorry you just don't meet the criteara
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time.....Cry Baby
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
> Who cares about you line; the question is if you are living up to their standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you Mental or What
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are stepping all over yourself.
> You spew venom at Zionists, which everyone would presume includes a LOT of Israelis and JEWS.
> THEN you just claimed you never mentioned Israelis or Jews, just Zionists.
> That last statement excludes Israelis and/or Jews that live in Israel.
> 
> Thus the question...
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
Click to expand...

See my post above yours.........You are either IN or Out.....me I forgive......You ?....let me know........either Quality Communication or Nothing..steve


----------



## Indeependent

theliq said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm self-loathing...Is THAT your explanation for why you're embarrassed of your ancestry.
> Now explain how Israelis are criminals.
> At least until the mods delete these postings.
> 
> 
> 
> I never mentioned Israelis or Jews you fool but YOU........At least I have a direct family line back to 964 ad.......but you ain't......look the mods know how you try to incite all the time.....Cry Baby
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
> Who cares about you line; the question is if you are living up to their standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you Mental or What
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are stepping all over yourself.
> You spew venom at Zionists, which everyone would presume includes a LOT of Israelis and JEWS.
> THEN you just claimed you never mentioned Israelis or Jews, just Zionists.
> That last statement excludes Israelis and/or Jews that live in Israel.
> 
> Thus the question...
> So your resentment lies with Zionists NOT living in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See my post above yours.........You are either IN or Out.....me I forgive......You ?....let me know........either Quality Communication or Nothing..steve
Click to expand...


You are copping out of the fact that you made statements that don't logically connect.
No problem as those who have no issue comprehending English will no doubt concur with me.


----------



## Boston1

Guys c'mon, the subject is who's indigenous to palestine. Which is a misnomer right there as there really isn't a palestine. 

The title should read "who is indigenous to Israel" Which is an actual location.


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> [
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads



You completely avoided my comment: why is wanting the same thing the Palestinians want -- self-determination on ancestral lands -- such an evil thing?  

Maybe the Palestinians should stop demanding that anyone GIVE them anything and instead start trying to build something.  And don't give me any crap about "but the Israelis won't let them".  You can use concrete to build houses and schools and hospitals instead of tunnels.


----------



## Boston1

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
Click to expand...


This is a perfect example of whats wrong with the pali's in the first place. They expect to be GIVEN everything and to WORK for nothing.

ISRAEL DOESN'T OWE THE PALI'S ANYTHING

And no Israel shouldn't GIVE the pali's one more inch of the area legally available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland. The pali's were ALREADY GIVEN about 80% of the mandated area, if thats not good enough, then tough shit.

Something else your comment shows is that its really not a land issue. Its three generations of welfare recipients who are beating down the doors for more more more. The UNs funding is drying up, in difficult economic times for the typical donors. One of the major issues is the hand outs are drying up and the mob is getting restless.

No the indigenous people have no obligation to the Arab Muslim colonists who are just going to have to satisfy themselves with the 80% of the mandate they already received.

In the end the Arab Muslim colonists will have to learn to fend for themselves. Once that is, the war is over and the POWs repatriated to neutral third party countries. Whoever might remain of the pali's in Israeli territories will be those wiling to act as civilized people within Israel.

Throw out the UNWRA and hasten the collapse of the Arab Muslim colonists welfare system such that we move that much closer to unconditional surrender, which is obviously the only viable option at this point.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> Guys c'mon, the subject is who's indigenous to palestine. Which is a misnomer right there as there really isn't a palestine.
> 
> The title should read "who is indigenous to Israel" Which is an actual location.


Sure there is a Palestine. You are just reading from Israel's bullshit book.

BTW, how about a map of Israel that does not have those fake border armistice lines?

Fake borders for a fake state.


----------



## Phoenall

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are doing a very poor job of following and understanding our argument, Monte.  Intentional?
> 
> 1.  No one is arguing on this board from a theological perspective.  Everyone on the pro-Israel side is arguing from the perspective of law and humanitarian rights.
> 
> 2.  No one is arguing that there weren't Arab Muslims and Arab Christians living in Palestine and nor that they haven't been living there for thousands of years.
> 
> 3.  No one is arguing that the Palestinians don't exist.  We all acknowledge their existence.
> 
> 4.  No one is arguing that the Palestinians "arrived" after Israel's independence.
> 
> 
> What we are arguing is:
> 
> 1.  The Jewish people have the right to re-constitute our national homeland on that territory.  That right is based on the fact of our being indigenous to the territory, that we have had historical sovereignty over that territory, that we have a legal claim to that territory and we need a safe and secure homeland for all the world's Jewish people.
> 
> 2.  Those Jewish people living in the Diaspora have a right to return to our homeland.  (We are not colonizers, foreigners or invaders).
> 
> 3.  The Palestinian people ALSO have a right to a homeland and the right to return to it.  (With some of us arguing that this homeland is Jordan and some of us arguing that the Palestinians must be accommodated in two new States -- the four State solution).
> 
> 4.  That the two cultures can live in peace together, side-by-side both within the nations in question and as neighboring nations.
> 
> 
> Now, let's go over the anti-Israel arguments:
> 
> 1.  Only the current inhabitants of a territory have rights to sovereignty.
> 
> 2.  Past inhabitants have no rights to the territory.  Therefore, there is no right of return.  (With some arguing that the Jewish people never lived in that territory -- an obvious falsehood).
> 
> 3.  Conquest, colonization and ethnic cleansing transfer rights from the indigenous inhabitants to the conquoring and colonizing culture.
> 
> 4.  That it is impossible for the Arab Muslim Palestinians to live with the Jewish people either in the same state or in a neighboring State.
> 
> Now, if the pro-Israel side adopted these arguments it would STILL demonstrate that the rights to Israel belong to the Jewish people.  Its a lose/lose for the anti-Israel crowd.
Click to expand...








 The only argument he has is the one he invented and uses all the time, and that is the theological granting of land to the Jews. No matter how many times he is told that International law supports the claims of the Jews to ALL of Jewish Palestine he still uses the verses in the OT that have no bearing on the case. The LoN as the sovereign land owners granted a parcel of land to the Jews of the world for their NATIONal home, to stop any disputes on the facts that the Mandate did not mean a wholly Jewish or arab state in Palestine the land was partitioned into two separate pieces with the allocation being along purely demographic lines. It was a  fair portioning of the land at the time and so the arab muslims started to flood the area with illegal immigrants noted by some of the worlds foremost politicians at the time. So the recent historical evidence shows that the arab muslims are recent arrivals and have no cultural, religious or historical claims to the land. Nor do they have any legal claims to the land and should be told by the UN to move back where they came from.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys c'mon, the subject is who's indigenous to palestine. Which is a misnomer right there as there really isn't a palestine.
> 
> The title should read "who is indigenous to Israel" Which is an actual location.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure there is a Palestine. You are just reading from Israel's bullshit book.
> 
> BTW, how about a map of Israel that does not have those fake border armistice lines?
> 
> Fake borders for a fake state.
Click to expand...






 Yes there is an area known as Palestine so named by the Romans when they conquered the land. There was never a nation of Palestine until 1988 when the arab muslims made step one on their race to steal Israel.

Are those the fake borders that you introduce all the time as a starting point for Palestinian demands ?

So what are the borders of Palestine, show a map delineating these borders that says these are the recognised borders of Palestine


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are now, and they should be, its the ONLY Jewish state. The Arabs on the other hand have something like 49 states, I'd have to go count them up but if anything the Arab Muslims are over represented, and the Judaic people, under.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> States aren't allocated on the basis of religion or ethnicity on a tit for tat basis.  How many states do Europeans have?  They have 51.  Don't you think we should give some of them to the Jews since they have double the number of states the Arabs do?
> 
> Arabs have 22 states: List of Arab countries by population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which European states have religious, cultural and racial ties to the Jewish people, when you find one then please let the world know. Then let the world know what ties muslims have to Jerusalem other that dar al islam and conquest
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since when is that a requirement?  Folks are talking about equalizing the number of states per religious grouping (totally ridiculous argement to begin with).  Christians have more states.  They need to give some up since they did, afterall, kill 2/3 of the Jews in Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only you are talking about that so you can demonise the Jews again. The fact is the arab muslims have 99.9% of the land in the M.E. and they still want more. In fact they want to dominate the world and turn it into an Islamic caliphate ruled from Mecca.  As for killing 2/3 of the Jews didn't the Russians already do that a few years earlier. And what about the American illegal colonists that killed 9/10 of the indigenous population then ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to get off the "demonize Jews" schtick you burp out at every argument.  Russia did not come anywhere close to killing 2/3 of Europes Jewish population and, they're majority Christian.  So were the American colonists. Yes, I think we need to take several of those Christian states and give them to the Jews
Click to expand...






 So you are now ignoring the 10 million innocents starved to death in the Ukraine, followed by the Jews thrown into Gulags and beaten to death for the crime of being Jewish. This is why so few Jews managed to escape Europe after 1944 because the Russians owned so much of the land mass that they kept them caged up.
 The Americans prior to 1730 were indigenous First Nations people who the Christian colonists mass murdered in their millions. Just as they did in Africa and South America. So the Christians should first hand back all their stolen lands to the people who own them, and then hope they can find a place to live. You never know the Jews might take a few of you arrogant land thieves in and allow you to exist as you allowed the indigenous to exist for 250 years. Maybe if you faced the atrocities meted out by the arab muslims you would change your views on who the evil vile people are.    OR YOU CAN KEEP ON DEMONIZING THE JEWS AS YOU ARE NOW, AND HOPE THAT YOU ARE NOT OSTRACISESED BY ALL YOUR FRIENDS


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't hard work, Coyote, its actually already done, basic history is about all it is. There simply is no distinct palestinian culture, its virtually indistinguishable from Arab Muslim culture as a whole.
> 
> Even if someone wants to concede the issue its irrelevant as the Arab Muslims have more than fair representation in multiple states of the region. No reason at all the Judaic people shouldn't also be represented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you and I will have to agree to disagree there.  The Judaic people ARE represented, by a Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if the muslims had won in 1948/1949, or at any point after that the Jews would now be extinct in that part of the world. So who would have represented them then ? ? ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But they didn't, so that's just another pointless statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not when you read their testimony from before the war of independence, and their many charters from after the war of independence. You can even read their letters to the UN that say the same thing.  There will never be peace while a Jew is allowed to live in Palestine, and the Palestinians will fight until either the Jews are wiped out or the Palestinians are eradicated.   You can keep on saying that the Palestinians proclamations are pointless all you want, they show that they are out to massacre every Jew. So why are you in denial, is it your anti Semitism and Jew hatred that is driving your POV ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wipe the "antisemitism and Jew hatred" drivel off your chin, it looks ridiculous.  As I said they *didn't win the war *so your point  is pointless.
Click to expand...







 Whats wrong cant you stand being proven wrong all the time. The arab muslims have stated that their intentions are to destroy Israel and wipe out the Jews. The Jews have not stated anything similar as official policy


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the gist of this thread, and indeed the foundational ideology of the entire conflict is that the Jewish people have no rights to self-determination and self-rule and that the Jewish National Home should be dismantled.. The arguments made here by myself and Boston are primarily to counter that line of thinking, both because it is the morally correct thing to do and because its the only way to peace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston is also trying to point out that the Palestinian people *also already* have representation and self-rule in Palestine -- Jordan.  They already have a State.  Boston is not wrong on that.  He is absolutely correct.  What they want now is at least one (realistically now two) more States.  Part of the reason they want those two more States, not the entire reason, but part, is to accomplish the goal described above -- to dismantle the Jewish National Home.
> 
> However, I add that, regardless of their origins and the length of time they have existed as a distinct people, the West Bank and Gaza Palestinians are one now and because of that must be addressed.  The only question is how to address them.  I don't think Boston (and he can correct me if I'm wrong) objects to self-determination for a Palestinian people -- *he just doesn't think it should be carved out of Israel*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
Click to expand...






 And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.

 Here it is again making just thaose promises




The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate




*The Palestine Mandate*
*The Council of the League of Nations:*
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;




 VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
Click to expand...








 Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from. All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through. One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
 Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.

 Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.



 Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.








Not according to you and your ilk, which is why you shouted to them " GO BACK TO IAREAL WHERE YOU BELONG"   *--- this is a no topical content post. *


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we all know by now you simply can't accept the truth.
> 
> Despite your obvious cognitive dissonance. The Judaic people are native to Judea. They developed from the Hyksos or protojudaic people in the Canaan valley area sometime in about the mid bronze age.
> 
> More than ample references have been offered supporting these facts.
> 
> We also know that there was no such people as palestinians until Arafat applied the term to the Arab Muslim Jordanians after the failed 67 attack against Israel. Previous to that they were former subjects of the Ottoman Empire
> 
> We also just went over how they colonized the area in two waves. One during the Arab Muslim expansion in roughly the 9th century CE and again in the late Zionist period.
> 
> So its really not hard to see Monty, that your statement is really just your own imagination because you are simply unable to face the facts.
> 
> The indigenous people in Judea are the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The European Zionists were natives of Europe.  By definition.  You have ignored the facts and have only presented Zionist propaganda.  You are simply repeating lies that have no basis in fact.  The Muslim "expansion" had no effect on the Jews.  There were no Jews in Palestine to affect.  The only people affected were Christians, some of whom may have had distant ancestors of the Jewish religion.  It's really not that difficult to follow logic Boston.  You were found out as a propagandist long ago.
Click to expand...








 So you are saying that no Jews existed outside of Europe until 1875 when they started to spread all over the world. Will you now dispute your own words ?


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And no promises needed to be made. The people of the place own the place. All of the people who became Palestinian citizens after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne became, collectively, the owners of Palestine.
Click to expand...








 A pity that the treaty does not even mention Palestine so it cant apply, how many more times will you show your stupidity in using a treaty that does not mention the subject matter.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the confusion is that you assume the palestinians as Arafat named them in 67 are a distinct people that can be disenfranchised. I don't think they are. I see Arab Muslims trying yet again to take more Israeli land by pretending there is a disenfranchised people, selling the PR to the world. Really it doesn't take much of a background in history to realize its all just hype.
> 
> Even if the Arab Muslims of Jordan are a distinct people they already have a state in Jordan, I think I've managed to make that clear. And its all of about 100' from Israel. In which case a strong argument cam be made that IF and thats a huge IF these people are in any way indigenous ( and we know they're not because Arab Muslims expanded from the Arabian Peninsula in about the 7th to 9th century CE ) they already have at least one state.
> 
> They also already have another state or soon to be state in Gaza. Anytime they take the time from bombing and building tunnels to kidnap Israeli's and actually declare statehood. And there is absolutely no reason they can't as of this very instant.
> 
> The fundamental problem is racism and bigotry, and the hatred fomented by the Arab leagues greed. The Arab Muslims simply want it all and if they can't take it militarily they are going to try and take at least as much as they can through the PR war.
> 
> To which I say NOT ANOTHER INCH
> 
> The Arab Muslims can satisfy themselves with the 99% of the middle east they did get and quit whining about that last 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians, Christians and Muslims want their ancestral homeland back.  The land the Palestinian people Christian and Muslim had lived on for several millennia was colonized by European Zionists.  The fact that some of the Christian Palestinians converted to Islam does not change anything. By the way, the Palestinian people declared themselves as such long before 1967. Stop your usual Zionist propagandizing.  All your propaganda and revisionism was debunked long ago by source documents.
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> *​
> 
> "............We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—
> Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority *to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews*, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving *the People of Palestine *full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant *the People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration....."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are Palestinians by treaty, by international law, and domestic law.
> 
> This whole thread is for Zionists to blow smoke on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then produce the treaties, international laws and domestic laws that say so. They must clearly state the formation of a Palestinian state for the arab muslims. They must not say the Mandate of Palestine as that is not a state.
> 
> 
> How do you like that smoke that destroys your reply before you even make it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Mandate of Palestine was the Mandate of what?
Click to expand...







 Palestine the area under discussion, it was sectioned into 2 parts with 78% becoming arab Palestine and 22% becoming Jewish Palestine.    Try reading the Mandate of Palestine again, it is in there.


 So now produce the treaties, international laws and domestic laws that make Palestine a state prior to 1988 ?


----------



## Boston1

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from. All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through. One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
Click to expand...


I can't picture Coyote going anywhere. Actually she's one of the more civil posters on this thing. While I completely disagree with most of her views. I'd rather have an at least somewhat rational opposing view than a completely irrational one. 

In any case we now return you to your normally scheduled discussion 

So who is considered an indigenous person to Judea. Obviously the Judaic people.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
Click to expand...







 And the Jewish Jews have been there for 4,500 years and are the original Palestinians. Or are you once again going to deny that Jews were there before Christians and that is why you and your religion want to wipe them out


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> But that last legally binding instrument supports native rights. The natives being the Judaic people.


If that was true, then why would the last legally binding instrument have the following caveat?

*"...nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."* ​Since migrating Zionists did not honor that part of the last legally binding instrument, it makes them in breach of said instrument.  And once they are in breach of said instrument, that instrument is no longer binding.


----------



## Boston1

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But that last legally binding instrument supports native rights. The natives being the Judaic people.
> 
> 
> 
> If that was true, then why would the last legally binding instrument have the following caveat?
> 
> *"...nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."* ​Since migrating Zionists did not honor that part of the last legally binding instrument, it makes them in breach of said instrument.  And once they are in breach of said instrument, that instrument is no longer binding.
Click to expand...


What makes you think Israel has prejudiced anyones religious or civil rights. And remember protected persons are not those who have engaged in hostile acts against the state, assisted those who engaged in hostile acts against the state or are suspected of engaging or assisting in hostile acts against the state ;--)


----------



## Billo_Really

Boston1 said:


> What makes you think Israel has prejudiced anyones religious or civil rights.


Because Zionists declared Israel an independent Jewish State on May 15, 1948, when it was only 30% of the population

I don't think the majority 70% of Arabs living there, would've voted for the creation of a Jewish State.

The fact that it was called a "Jewish State", meant that any non-Jewish residents, had no representation in the new government.

And driving out over 700,000 Arabs with Jewish terrorism, proves it.




Boston1 said:


> And remember protected persons are not those who have engaged in hostile acts against the state, assisted those who engaged in hostile acts against the state or are suspected of engaging or assisting in hostile acts against the state ;--)


There was no hostility between Arabs and Jews in that area until the Zionist migration.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from. All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through. One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't picture Coyote going anywhere. Actually she's one of the more civil posters on this thing. While I completely disagree with most of her views. I'd rather have an at least somewhat rational opposing view than a completely irrational one.
> 
> In any case we now return you to your normally scheduled discussion
> 
> So who is considered an indigenous person to Judea. Obviously the Judaic people.
Click to expand...


Judea is not indigenous to the area.  It was Canaan before it was Judea. In any case, the European Zionists were not from Judea, they were from Europe, by definition.

Furthermore, since the Judaic people can be of any national, ethnic and racial heritage, they cannot be indigenous to any one place, by definition. Descendants of European converts to Judaism, for example, cannot be indigenous to a place in the Middle East, by definition.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from.
Click to expand...


Yes, and they did not support your claim - we went over that in another thread and you kept bringing up the Catholic Encyclopedia as if it were the Bible.



> All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through.
> 
> One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.



I have no idea what "novel" you are talking about.  I used Ottoman census records for my claims.



> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.



What about it?  Are you now claiming that the Palestinians had only been their < 2 yrs?




> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.





Please do.


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But that last legally binding instrument supports native rights. The natives being the Judaic people.
> 
> 
> 
> If that was true, then why would the last legally binding instrument have the following caveat?
> 
> *"...nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."* ​Since migrating Zionists did not honor that part of the last legally binding instrument, it makes them in breach of said instrument.  And once they are in breach of said instrument, that instrument is no longer binding.
Click to expand...







 What civil and religious rights extant at the time of the signing of the mandate have been prejudiced then. List them along with their date of becoming a civil or religious right.  Then explain why it was the next part of the mandate was breached by the Palestinians before the ink was dry on the treaty.     " or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country "  So does this mean because the rights and political status of the Jews was prehudiced even before the Zionists arrived that the instrument was no longer binding on the Jews.

 You want to play stupid expect to be shown as stupid every time.   Now go away and learn all about the mandate and what it meant


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
Click to expand...






Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
Click to expand...



Yes, let's get the facts right and you're still dribbling "Jew hatred" and "anti semitic islamonazi".  I'm no expert on the Mandate and it's history, but there are others here who are far better informed (not you by the way) so I trust their analysis:

The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## Phoenall

Billo_Really said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think Israel has prejudiced anyones religious or civil rights.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Zionists declared Israel an independent Jewish State on May 15, 1948, when it was only 30% of the population
> 
> I don't think the majority 70% of Arabs living there, would've voted for the creation of a Jewish State.
> 
> The fact that it was called a "Jewish State", meant that any non-Jewish residents, had no representation in the new government.
> 
> And driving out over 700,000 Arabs with Jewish terrorism, proves it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And remember protected persons are not those who have engaged in hostile acts against the state, assisted those who engaged in hostile acts against the state or are suspected of engaging or assisting in hostile acts against the state ;--)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was no hostility between Arabs and Jews in that area until the Zionist migration.
Click to expand...







 Totally irrelevant as the International law of 1923 gave them that civil right, but did not give it to the arab muslims. The arab muslims living there did not have the right to be called Palestinians as they had less than 2 years occupancy and so were illegal immigrants.

 Where did you get that LIE from, as the non Jews are represented in the government and have the same rights as the Jews.
 According to official figures it was 50,000 enemy aliens, terrorists and militia that were evicted, and the same laws are in existence today.

Proven wrong more times than you have had sex this century. How many times have the muslims invaded Hebron and forcibly evicted the Jews so they could steal their land.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from. All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through. One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't picture Coyote going anywhere. Actually she's one of the more civil posters on this thing. While I completely disagree with most of her views. I'd rather have an at least somewhat rational opposing view than a completely irrational one.
> 
> In any case we now return you to your normally scheduled discussion
> 
> So who is considered an indigenous person to Judea. Obviously the Judaic people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judea is not indigenous to the area.  It was Canaan before it was Judea. In any case, the European Zionists were not from Judea, they were from Europe, by definition.
> 
> Furthermore, since the Judaic people can be of any national, ethnic and racial heritage, they cannot be indigenous to any one place, by definition. Descendants of European converts to Judaism, for example, cannot be indigenous to a place in the Middle East, by definition.
Click to expand...







 Arab is not indigenous neither as they came from the south after the 7C


 Are you indigenous to North America or are you still an aggressive invading colonist after stealing another persons land ?


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, and they did not support your claim - we went over that in another thread and you kept bringing up the Catholic Encyclopedia as if it were the Bible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through.
> 
> One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no idea what "novel" you are talking about.  I used Ottoman census records for my claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about it?  Are you now claiming that the Palestinians had only been their < 2 yrs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please do.
Click to expand...






 No you claimed that was the case without showing any evidence other than Because I say so.  The census records speak for themselves.

The one used by monte that has been proven fake

If you use Ottoman records then they will say the same as my posts, that the Jews were the majority in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem ) with the muslims being a minority.

I am saying nothing, I am letting the UN show the facts by its actions. And one of those is being unable to apply refugee status to the arab muslims because they did not hit the criteria for gaining citizenship of Palestine. The Jews and Christians did not have a special agency invented for there displaced persons because they hit the criteria and had already been absorbed into other nations.



OK will do.


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, let's get the facts right and you're still dribbling "Jew hatred" and "anti semitic islamonazi".  I'm no expert on the Mandate and it's history, but there are others here who are far better informed (not you by the way) so I trust their analysis:
> 
> The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
Click to expand...







 Even when I link to the official mandate documents that show the land was granted to the Jews you still argue that they have less rights than arab muslim illegal immigrants. Want to give a title to that action ?


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, and they did not support your claim - we went over that in another thread and you kept bringing up the Catholic Encyclopedia as if it were the Bible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through.
> 
> One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no idea what "novel" you are talking about.  I used Ottoman census records for my claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about it?  Are you now claiming that the Palestinians had only been their < 2 yrs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you claimed that was the case without showing any evidence other than Because I say so.  The census records speak for themselves.
Click to expand...


I claimed what was the case?  I answered one of your posts by providing links to the thread where we had discussed population demographics in detail - and yes, the census records do speak for themselves, it's just not what you claimed and now you are claiming the Palestinians had been there less than two years.



> The one used by monte that has been proven fake



No idea what it is as I haven't used it.



> If you use Ottoman records then they will say the same as my posts, that the Jews were the majority in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem ) with the muslims being a minority.



Even the Jewish Virtual Library doesn't agree with you unless you are talking about the city of Jeruselum:  Population of Israel/Palestine (1553-Present) | Jewish Virtual Library 



> I am saying nothing, I am letting the UN show the facts by its actions.* And one of those is being unable to apply refugee status to the arab muslims because they did not hit the criteria for gaining citizenship of Palestine.* The Jews and Christians did not have a special agency invented for there displaced persons because they hit the criteria and had already been absorbed into other nations.
> 
> 
> 
> OK will do.



What special agency was "invented" and what makes you think it was because it was due to not meeting criteria?  You're going to have to do a lot of convincing before I'll believe they had only been there under two years as there is no data to show that.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, let's get the facts right and you're still dribbling "Jew hatred" and "anti semitic islamonazi".  I'm no expert on the Mandate and it's history, but there are others here who are far better informed (not you by the way) so I trust their analysis:
> 
> The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even when I link to the official mandate documents that show the land was granted to the Jews you still argue that they have less rights than arab muslim illegal immigrants. Want to give a title to that action ?
Click to expand...


I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.


----------



## montelatici

Indeependent said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And they're welcome because they don't stab people or blow themselves up in buses.
Click to expand...


 George Habash is laughing in Heaven. LOL


----------



## Indeependent

montelatici said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And they're welcome because they don't stab people or blow themselves up in buses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> George Habash is laughing in Heaven. LOL
Click to expand...

At least he can't make any trouble there.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

montelatici said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And they're welcome because they don't stab people or blow themselves up in buses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> George Habash is laughing in Heaven. LOL
Click to expand...


I very much doubt that a bloodthirsty murderer/terrorist is in Heaven.


----------



## montelatici

ForeverYoung436 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now the Jewish people are in Israel.  So they are the natives of Israel and the Palestinians who no longer live there are Jordanians and Syrians.  See how easy that was?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Europeans of the Jewish faith are in Israel now. The Europeans of the Christian faith were there too, for a while. Longer than the European Jews have been there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And they're welcome because they don't stab people or blow themselves up in buses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> George Habash is laughing in Heaven. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I very much doubt that a bloodthirsty murderer/terrorist is in Heaven.
Click to expand...


What is bloodthirsty about defending your land from murderous colonial Zionists. He was a proud Christian.


----------



## abu afak

Coyote said:


> I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.


So you're arguing Israel is not legitimate/legal.. while unwittingly saying the entire Ottoman break up was.
The British weighed the interests of the parties in their decisions, and indeed the Mandate, due to ARAB interest, was altered to split Palestine into two pieces, instead of One Jewish state as envisioned by that Mandate.
Even after The Sole Representative of the Arabs had agreed to the creation of Palestine as a Jewish state.
*The Weizmann-Faisal Agreement *
That's right, *The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and Palestine/The JEWISH one. *
(Never carried out but posted for intent/state of mind at the time)
Faisal did spectacularly well for the Arabs in those years, getting them 99% of the Ottoman lands and reigning over Other groups such as the Kurds. He also got 'Jordan', 77% of the Mandate before lesser Palestine was even considered.
There were no Votes/Plebiscites at that time, and even the concept would have been foreign to Arabs, and arbitrary in geography/citizenship.


----------



## montelatici

abu afak said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're arguing Israel is not legitimate/legal.. while unwittingly saying the entire Ottoman break up was.
> The British weighed the interests of the parties in their decisions, and indeed the Mandate, due to ARAB interest, was altered to split Palestine into two pieces, instead of One Jewish state as envisioned by that Mandate.
> Even after The Sole Representative of the Arabs had agreed to the creation of Palestine as a Jewish state.
> *The Weizmann-Faisal Agreement *
> That's right, *The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and Palestine/The JEWISH one. *
> (Never carried out but posted for intent/state of mind at the time)
> Faisal did spectacularly well for the Arabs in those years, getting them 99% of the Ottoman lands and reigning over Other groups such as the Kurds. He also got 'Jordan', 77% of the Mandate before lesser Palestine was even considered.
> There were no Votes/Plebiscites at that time, and even the concept would have been foreign to Arabs, and arbitrary in geography/citizenship.
Click to expand...



The Mandate specifically did not envision a Jewish State.  In fact, the French and Italians refused to agree to the text unless it was clear that a Jewish state was not contemplated. 

Churchill made this clear in the British Mandate  policy statement of 1922:

"Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine...."

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922


----------



## ForeverYoung436

montelatici said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're arguing Israel is not legitimate/legal.. while unwittingly saying the entire Ottoman break up was.
> The British weighed the interests of the parties in their decisions, and indeed the Mandate, due to ARAB interest, was altered to split Palestine into two pieces, instead of One Jewish state as envisioned by that Mandate.
> Even after The Sole Representative of the Arabs had agreed to the creation of Palestine as a Jewish state.
> *The Weizmann-Faisal Agreement *
> That's right, *The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and Palestine/The JEWISH one. *
> (Never carried out but posted for intent/state of mind at the time)
> Faisal did spectacularly well for the Arabs in those years, getting them 99% of the Ottoman lands and reigning over Other groups such as the Kurds. He also got 'Jordan', 77% of the Mandate before lesser Palestine was even considered.
> There were no Votes/Plebiscites at that time, and even the concept would have been foreign to Arabs, and arbitrary in geography/citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate specifically did not envision a Jewish State.  In fact, the French and Italians refused to agree to the text unless it was clear that a Jewish sate was not contemplated.
> 
> Churchill made this clear in the British Mandate  policy statement of 1922:
> 
> "Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine...."
> 
> The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922
Click to expand...


Now, all of the sudden, you quote Churchill?  I thought he was unreliable when he said that the recent Arab immigration and overcrowding during the Mandate has almost crushed the Jewish dream of a homeland.  Didn't he also say that the Arabs wanting Palestine is the equivalent of King Ahab and Queen Jezebel wanting Naboth's vineyard?


----------



## montelatici

I am quoting text within an official document within an academic archive, not  made-up Zionist propaganda quotes strewn all over the internet. LOL


----------



## Coyote

abu afak said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're arguing Israel is not legitimate/legal.. while unwittingly saying the entire Ottoman break up was.
> 
> The British weighed the interests of the parties in their decisions, and indeed the Mandate, due to ARAB interest, was altered to split Palestine into two pieces, instead of One Jewish state as envisioned by that Mandate.
> Even after The Sole Representative of the Arabs had agreed to the creation of Palestine as a Jewish state.
> *The Weizmann-Faisal Agreement *
> That's right, *The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and Palestine/The JEWISH one. *
> (Never carried out but posted for intent/state of mind at the time)
> Faisal did spectacularly well for the Arabs in those years, getting them 99% of the Ottoman lands and reigning over Other groups such as the Kurds. He also got 'Jordan', 77% of the Mandate before lesser Palestine was even considered.
> There were no Votes/Plebiscites at that time, and even the concept would have been foreign to Arabs, and arbitrary in geography/citizenship.
Click to expand...


No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> The Mandate specifically did not envision a Jewish State.  In fact, the French and Italians refused to agree to the text unless it was clear that a Jewish state was not contemplated.
> 
> Churchill made this clear in the British Mandate  policy statement of 1922:
> 
> "Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine...."


British White Paper of 1939
So my links both Pre-date/1917 Mandate/1919 Paris Agreement etc, and post-date/1939 White Paper, MontelWilliam-citi's Islamist propaganda cherry picked 1922 one.
*
British White Paper of 1939*
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp
Section 1 (after preamble)

It has been urged that the expression "a national home for the Jewish people" offered a prospect that Palestine might in due course become a Jewish State or Commonwealth. *His Majesty's Government do Not wish to Contest the view, which was expressed by the Royal Commission, that the Zionist leaders at the time of the issue of the Balfour Declaration recognised that an ultimate Jewish State was Not Precluded by the terms of the Declaration.*....​

"Section I. "The Constitution"

*His Majesty's Government adhere to this intepretation of the (Balfour) Declaration of 1917 and regard it as an Authoritative and comprehensive description of the character of the Jewish National Home in Palestine. *
It envisaged the further development of the existing Jewish community with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world. Evidence that His Majesty's Government have been carrying out their obligation in this respect is to be found in the facts that, since the statement of 1922 was published, more than 300,000 Jews have immigrated to Palestine, and that the population of the National Home has risen to some 450,000, or approaching a third of the entire population of the country.
Nor has the Jewish community failed to take full advantage of the opportunities given to it. *The growth of the Jewish National Home and its acheivements in many fields are a Remarkable constructive effort which must command the Admiration of the world and must be, in particular, a source of Pride to the Jewish people.*​

Another W-P Excerpt..

In the recent discussions the Arab delegations have repeated the contention that Palestine was included within the area in which *Sir Henry McMahon*, on behalf of the British Government, in October, 1915, undertook to recognise and support Arab independence.
The validity of this claim, based on the terms of the correspondence which passed between Sir Henry McMahon and the Sharif of Mecca, was thoroughly and carefully investigated by the British and Arab representatives during the recent conferences in London.
Their report, which has been published, states that both *the Arab and the British representatives endeavoured to understand the point of view of the other party but that they were Unable to reach agreement upon an interpretation of the correspondence.* There is no need to summarize here the arguments presented by each side. His Majesty's Government regret the misunderstandings which have arisen as regards some of the phrases used. *For their part they can only adhere,* for the reasons given by their representatives in the Report, *to the view that the whole of Palestine west of Jordan was excluded from Sir Henry McMahon's pledge, and they therefore Cannot agree that the McMahon correspondence forms a just basis for the claim that Palestine should be converted into an Arab State.*​*
*
Yes, The White Paper/s, even tho a Later and more-favorable-to-Arabs documents than the original promises and agreements, still acknowledges a Jewish and Not Arab state.
You wanna play White Paper or anything else with me?
You can't, unlike everyone else here you try to Buffalo Mozarella.
ergo, You must know it is YOU are a Cherry Picking and posting Arabist propaganda.
+
*
EDIT:
Note DEFEATED Montelatici-Williams below could Not quote me, Nor Refute me.
He can't play "official Document, "white Paper," or "avalon" with me.
The reign of "official looking" Cherry picks/Arabist Propaganda is over.*
+


----------



## montelatici

I take it you have never taken a logic class.  The Mandate did not contemplate the establishment of a Jewish state.  The fact that an interpretation, one that runs counter to the understanding of the other signatories at the time of signing, attempts to claim that the Mandate did not preclude the establishment of a Jewish state does not change the fact that the Mandate did not contemplate the establishment of a Jewish state, and that in 1922 when the Mandate was signed the British declared that there was no intention of establishing a Jewish state. The only thing that can be surmised is that British misled and cheated the native people of Palestine when they stated:

""Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine...."


----------



## Coyote

*Just as a reminder - there is an entire thread devoted to discussion of the Mandate.*


----------



## theliq

Boston1 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every Dog has its Day,Shusha........be circumspect of what you have done........WITH ARROGANCE AND HATE
> 
> Footnote.....You are also ahead of yourself......Palestinians do live there and LIVE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no arrogance or hate in wanting a safe place for the Jewish people to have self-determination and sovereignty over their ancestral lands.  Isn't that exactly what the Palestinians are asking for too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble is you have NO INTENTION of giving the Palestinians anything..............So that's why I am a Shining Sentinel against Zionist Shitheads
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a perfect example of whats wrong with the pali's in the first place. They expect to be GIVEN everything and to WORK for nothing.
> 
> ISRAEL DOESN'T OWE THE PALI'S ANYTHING
> 
> And no Israel shouldn't GIVE the pali's one more inch of the area legally available for the creation of a national Jewish homeland. The pali's were ALREADY GIVEN about 80% of the mandated area, if thats not good enough, then tough shit.
> 
> Something else your comment shows is that its really not a land issue. Its three generations of welfare recipients who are beating down the doors for more more more. The UNs funding is drying up, in difficult economic times for the typical donors. One of the major issues is the hand outs are drying up and the mob is getting restless.
> 
> No the indigenous people have no obligation to the Arab Muslim colonists who are just going to have to satisfy themselves with the 80% of the mandate they already received.
> 
> In the end the Arab Muslim colonists will have to learn to fend for themselves. Once that is, the war is over and the POWs repatriated to neutral third party countries. Whoever might remain of the pali's in Israeli territories will be those wiling to act as civilized people within Israel.
> 
> Throw out the UNWRA and hasten the collapse of the Arab Muslim colonists welfare system such that we move that much closer to unconditional surrender, which is obviously the only viable option at this point.
Click to expand...

So much for Palestinians NOT WORKING Hard,in Israel they build your towns etc.,in Kuwait,Saudi Palestinian engineers,school teachers,builders are in high demand and have been for 50 years.....the Palestinians have one of the highest matriculation rates to University in the world,so your debased comment means Shit......as usual


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The native people of Palestine are the Palestinians.  The Jews were in Europe when the Mandate was signed. The Jews that colonized Palestine were natives of Europe, by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to you and your ilk, which is why you shouted to them " GO BACK TO IAREAL WHERE YOU BELONG"
Click to expand...

Lean to spell * ---- This is a "no content" post..*


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people that colonized Palestine, ejected the native people from the land they had been living on for several millennia and established a state for Jews at the expense of the Christians and Muslims were nearly all European Zionists.  That was my only point.  Whether Jews from Mars or anywhere else arrived after the native people were dispossessed is not in question. Unless the Jews face the fact that they expropriated a whole people to create their Jewish state, why would they ever compromise and come to some sort of peace.  If all Jews believe the propaganda that Boston posts, then the propaganda has them believing:
> 
> 1. God  gave them the land so it was ok to expropriate the Christians and Muslims
> 2. There were no non-Jews living in Palestine before the Zionists colonized the place.
> 3. The Palestinians don't exist.
> 4. The Palestinians arrived after partition.
> 
> etc. etc.etc.  all Zionist propaganda.
> 
> And the lies  go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from. All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through. One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
Click to expand...

You are so FULL OF SHIT....you should be Banned,for Excessive Verbal Shit Distribution on here  *--- This is a "no content post".. *


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> See, I'm not seeing it that way....I see the arguments about indiginous-ity as a means to disenfranchise one or the other side, and I see it just as strongly played out by the pro-Israeli side seeking make Palestinians "non-People" with every rhetorical tool available:  they are an invented people, they don't have a unique (enough) culture, they didn't exist before a certain date, they are squatters, they are colonists, they should be sent to some other country - the propoganda on that is relentness.  How can you not see that?  If arguments need to be countered - surely, they should be countered on both sides.
> 
> If you mean by dismanteling Israel - I agree.
> 
> However, Israel took for itself the territory the Palestinians live on and has held it under occupation - utilizing that territory to create their state is not carving it out of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it has not taken it, and those that say they have are the ones trying to dismantle Israel. *The land was Jewish in law, and that can not be disputed by anyone*. The evidence was the Jordanian enacting of a law to relieve the Jews of ownership of the lands that Jordan occupied in 1949 and turning it over to Palestinian ownership. The Oslo accords turned back the pages of history and allowed the Jews who owned land in the west bank to reclaim it and make it theirs again. So get your facts right and stop posting from the Jew hatred anti semitic islamonazi POV
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well yes.  It can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then dispute it in law, lets see how far you are prepared to go in your demonization  of the Jews.
> 
> 
> A history lesson for you that in itself proves that the land was Jewish.
> 
> Prior to 1900 the land was owned by the Ottoman empire that allowed minimal self rule by certain parts of the empire. The Ottomans went to war as allies of Germany and the Palestinians fought alongside their Mufti. They lost the war and so in line with the usual practise the losers lost land and goods to offset the costs incurred by the winning side. The land of Palestine was part of the reparations made to the LoN as the negotiators for the winning side. The LoN made treaties with various people allocating land to different groups, one of the groups was the Jews who received what was called Jewish Palestine, while the arab muslims received the lions share of all the land in the M.E.     So dispute the international laws and the facts all you dare, as doing so will just show that you are a rabid anti Jew racist and Nazi.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> According to the debate in the Mandate thread there were NO promises made to either the Jews or the Arabs and no land legally allocated to either group.  It was an agreement between powers, not law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who said this then as the Mandate is very clear in its words.
> 
> Here it is again making just thaose promises
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Palestine Mandate*
> *The Council of the League of Nations:*
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,* in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people*, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and
> 
> *Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*; and
> 
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and
> 
> Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
> 
> Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
> 
> Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VERY VERY VERY CLEAR PROMISES, UNLESS YOU ARE A JEW HATER
Click to expand...

Usual JEW HATING Comments..........only you say Jew Haters* -- this post has no topical content. *


----------



## flacaltenn

*Want to try for four in a row? *


----------



## theliq

flacaltenn said:


> *Want to try for four in a row? *


I was responding to a previous post from Phoenall,I suggest you alert him..steve,you see you blithely give me sarcasm,but the root cause you remain mute..funny that.


----------



## flacaltenn

theliq said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Want to try for four in a row? *
> 
> 
> 
> I was responding to a previous post from Phoenall,I suggest you alert him..steve,you see you blithely give me sarcasm,but the root cause you remain mute..funny that.
Click to expand...


*I did in #309.. Obviously warnings aren't working. Thought I'd try to HIGHLIGHT what we're trying to reduce. Not particularly picking on anyone.  PM the moderators if you want to discuss moderation.. *


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.



 This is Palestine.






 It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.

 Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination. 

 My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?


 This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy.  If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.  

 On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.


----------



## montelatici

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> 
> This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy.  If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
Click to expand...


A 2005 map from a Zionist propaganda site doesn't change historical fact.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

montelatici said:


> A 2005 map from a Zionist propaganda site doesn't change historical fact.



 Good grief, you are a broken record with this stupid crap.

 This is not propaganda. It is the original mandate of Palestine, just as it was when I learned history in the 1960s.


----------



## montelatici

You learned propaganda.  Amman was in the southern part of the Arab Kingdom of Syria ruled by the Hashemites.  The French invaded Damascus and expelled the Hashemite King.  In a compromise, the French agreed to transfer Amman and the south of the Arab Kingdom of Syria to the British who named it Trans-Jordania where the Hashemites continued to rule with an Arab administration.  It was inhabited by Bedouins not Palestinians.  

This is very clear in official historical documents available in the UN archives.  You have confirmed how Americans are taught Zionist propaganda in high school.

"Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania. It is bounded on the north by the frontier of Syria, placed under the mandate of France; on the south by the kingdom of the Hejaz; and on the west by the line of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while on the east it stretches into the desert and ends--the boundary is not yet defined--where Mesopotamia begins. Trans-Jordania has a population of probably 350,000 people. It contains a few small towns and large areas of fertile land, producing excellent wheat and barley. The people are partly settled townsmen and agriculturists, partly wandering Bedouin; the latter, however, cultivate areas, more or less fixed, during certain seasons of the year.

When Palestine west of the Jordan was occupied by the British Army and placed under a British military administration, over *Trans-Jordania and a large part of Syria there was established an Arab administration, with its capital at Damascus. The ruler was His Highness the Emir Feisal, the third son of H.M. King Hussein, the King of the Hejaz. When Damascus was occupied by French troops in July, 1920, and the Emir Feisal withdrew, *it was necessary to adopt fresh measures in Trans-Jordania. I proceeded to the central town of Salt on August 20th, and, at an assembly of notables and sheikhs of the district, announced that His Majesty's Government favoured the establishment of a system of local self- government, assisted by a small number of British officers as advisers.


https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/349B02280A930813052565E90048ED1C


----------



## flacaltenn

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> 
> This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy.  If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
Click to expand...


I'm not in this thread because I don't deem "being indigenous" as any particular proud achievement. So your comments are right on. In that being born as a SUBJECT of the Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire or British Empire doesn't come with a deed for future statehood. To me -- all of that is mute and silly. It takes something LIKE the Zionist movement to create a nation. 

The only other point is -- if after 50 years of occupation and conflict -- you cannot settle out a "status" for Self Rule of the people falling under your Adminstration -- life must go on. Israel has waited long enough for a Palestinian Statehood movement to form --- and the prospects are now as bleak as ever. So --- it's understandable that pressures for development and settlement of the unresolved occupied territorities would be an increasing problem. 

Evidently -- on the scale of organization and leadership and vision -- "indigenous" is about as far as the "Palestine Freedom Movement" is able to go...


----------



## theliq

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> 
> This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy.  If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
Click to expand...

YOU WILL NOTE THE WORD PALESTINE ON THIS MAP.........NO MORE NEEDS TO BE SAID.......the Jews were a small minority in Palestine in 1920.......It does say where Jews wanted a homeland.........but the only way this could be done was by STEALING PALESTINIANS LAND........which is what and still is happening...........Anything else is Zionist BULLSHIT


----------



## theliq

flacaltenn said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> 
> This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy.  If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not in this thread because I don't deem "being indigenous" as any particular proud achievement. So your comments are right on. In that being born as a SUBJECT of the Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire or British Empire doesn't come with a deed for future statehood. To me -- all of that is mute and silly. It takes something LIKE the Zionist movement to create a nation.
> 
> The only other point is -- if after 50 years of occupation and conflict -- you cannot settle out a "status" for Self Rule of the people falling under your Adminstration -- life must go on. Israel has waited long enough for a Palestinian Statehood movement to form --- and the prospects are now as bleak as ever. So --- it's understandable that pressures for development and settlement of the unresolved occupied territorities would be an increasing problem.
> 
> Evidently -- on the scale of organization and leadership and vision -- "indigenous" is about as far as the "Palestine Freedom Movement" is able to go...
Click to expand...

YOU really mean Flac>>>>>>>ALLOWED TO GO<<<<<<<<<<<


----------



## theliq

Dogmaphobe said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> A 2005 map from a Zionist propaganda site doesn't change historical fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good grief, you are a broken record with this stupid crap.
> 
> This is not propaganda. It is the original mandate of Palestine, just as it was when I learned history in the 1960s.
Click to expand...

Then you leant nothing


----------



## abu afak

theliq said:


> YOU WILL NOTE THE WORD PALESTINE ON THIS MAP.........NO MORE NEEDS TO BE SAID.......the Jews were a small minority in Palestine in 1920.......It does say where Jews wanted a homeland.........but the only way this could be done was by STEALING PALESTINIANS LAND........which is what and still is happening...........Anything else is Zionist BULLSHIT


False.
1. The land was very sparse
2. Arabs, aka palestinians, got 87% of Dogmaphobe's map you quoted (77% Jordan and 10% rejected palestine)
3. Jews bought alot of the private land
4. Of the roughly Half of lesser palestine that became Israel, most was owned by NO Arab, and and was State land under the Ottomans. (Miri/belonging to the Emir).
That includes the HALF of Israel that is the Negev Desert. A thought-useles/near-empty  throw-in to make a viable amount of land.
5. Your posts SUCK and are mostly one line TROLLS containing NO information, just empty hostility.
+


----------



## montelatici

1. Land was about as populated as anywhere else in the general area.  There is a documentary film from 1896 that validates 
2. Palestinians, Christians and Muslims got no part of the land they lived on.
3. Jews had bought less than 7% of the land by the time of partition.  93% was owned by the non-Jews.
4. None of the land was owned by any Emir when the Mandate came into effect.
5. You are a propagandist and a liar with no information, just racial hate for the native people of Palestine.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

theliq said:


> Then you leant nothing




Ah, yes -- all those atlases I studied when I was a kid were just part of some great conspiracy.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> 1. Land was about as populated as anywhere else in the general area.  There is a documentary film from 1896 that validates


Except more than 30x as many people live there now.



			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> 2. Palestinians, Christians and Muslims got no part of the land they lived on.


False and nonsensical. Again, 87% of the Mandate land was given as Arab states, and the 13% that the partition designated as Israel required NO Arabs to leave.



			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> 3. Jews had bought less than 7% of the land by the time of partition.  93% was owned by the non-Jews.
> 4. None of the land was owned by any Emir when the Mandate came into effect.


7% is true, but 93% is False. As I explained above, most of what became Israel was State land under the Ottomans.
You simply can't just say "No" to what someone else posted without explanation, otherwise you are Trolling. No surprise.
Nonetheless, I will take the burden anyway since my posting IS about Content and facts.

CAMERA: Back to the Future:

"..Mattar's clear, and false, implication is that if Jews owned only some small percentage of the land, then Arabs must have owned the rest, in this case more than 93% of the country.

But this is nonsense – *in Mandate Palestine the Arabs owned little more land than did the Jews. *Indeed, going back to Ottoman times, most of the country was state-owned land, not under any individual ownership. Thus, under the Ottoman code one of the main land categories was miri, meaning land belonging to the Emir. 
During the Mandate, the British carried out detailed land surveys, marking off who owned what, and according to figures in the _'British Survey of Palestine'_ (republished and endorsed by Mattar's Institute for Palestine Studies), *at least 65% of the country was state land, and probably much more than that.*[.....]​


			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> 5. You are a propagandist and a liar with no information, just racial hate for the native people of Palestine.


The usual Montel-al-Williams Lie.
My posts are always meaty and fact-filled/Link backed, while You are just the usual foaming at the mouth anti-semite parading as an anti-cough-zionist.
+


----------



## montelatici

CAMERA is a propaganda site.



abu afak said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Land was about as populated as anywhere else in the general area.  There is a documentary film from 1896 that validates
> 
> 
> 
> Except more than 30x as many people live there now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Palestinians, Christians and Muslims got no part of the land they lived on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False and nonsensical. Again, 87% of the Mandate land was given as Arab states, and the 13% that the partition designated as Israel required NO Arabs to leave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Jews had bought less than 7% of the land by the time of partition.  93% was owned by the non-Jews.
> 4. None of the land was owned by any Emir when the Mandate came into effect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 7% is true, but 93% is False. As I explained above, most of what became Israel was State land under the Ottomans.
> You simply can't just say "No" to what someone else posted without explanation, otherwise you are Trolling. No surprise.
> Nonetheless, I will take the burden anyway since my posting IS about Content and facts.
> 
> CAMERA: Back to the Future:
> 
> "..Mattar's clear, and false, implication is that if Jews owned only some small percentage of the land, then Arabs must have owned the rest, in this case more than 93% of the country.
> 
> But this is nonsense – *in Mandate Palestine the Arabs owned little more land than did the Jews. *Indeed, going back to Ottoman times, most of the country was state-owned land, not under any individual ownership. Thus, under the Ottoman code one of the main land categories was miri, meaning land belonging to the Emir.
> During the Mandate, the British carried out detailed land surveys, marking off who owned what, and according to figures in the _'British Survey of Palestine'_ (republished and endorsed by Mattar's Institute for Palestine Studies), *at least 65% of the country was state land, and probably much more than that.*[.....]​
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. You are a propagandist and a liar with no information, just racial hate for the native people of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The usual Montel-al-Williams Lie.
> My posts are always meaty and fact-filled/Link backed, while You are just the usual foaming at the mouth anti-semite parading as an anti-cough-zionist.
> +
Click to expand...


CAMERA is surely a reliable neutral source. LOL

Game, set, match.  You win, Arabs possessed only 85% of the land.

*UNITED*
*NATIONS
A*






*General Assembly*













 A/364
3 September 1947
*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *
*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*


*SUPPLEMENT No. 11*



*UNITED NATIONS*
*SPECIAL COMMITTEE*
*ON PALESTINE*



*REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

*VOLUME 1*

164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately* 85 per cent of the land. "*


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> CAMERA is a propaganda site
> ..
> 164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately* 85 per cent of the land. "*


Really?
1. *You're impeaching Your own "93%" Lie. *LOL/OUCHER
2. 85% is ALL of Palestine (and slightly incorrect according to the British Survey's own numbers), while I was talking ONLY about the part that became Israel
Apples and Oranges, Akhmed.
oooops!
Speak English.
3. WHO owned the 50% of what became Israel that was the Negev Desert?
4. SPLAT!
5. Your Unispal repertoire/document dumps are very limited and leave you Rigid and Nonconversant.


----------



## montelatici

Just facts.  You do not appear to comprehend  written English. Maybe an illustration of where the calculation came from will help.


----------



## montelatici

All I hear is crickets.  

I love it when a propaganda debunking plan comes together.


----------



## abu afak

The crickets still await YOU Yassir.
Yes, we've seen that Incorrect map hundreds of times
Even YOU just refuted it Akhmed!
So which is it Goofy? 85%/93%?
Take a position at least!
*And you'll note the/Your Stupid map says 93% Ownership, while your UN Link says in "Arabs in Possession of 85%". Possession is NOT Ownership. It's squatting.
I/CAMERA/'British Survey of Palestine' gave the correct figure for OWNERSHIP. At least 65% State owned.*

And You call others propagandists: Great stuff!
You  either don't speak English well or use it Disingenuously.. or Both.
I was talking about the part that became Israel which was yet more NON-Arab owned.
Still UNTOUCHED By you.



montelatici said:


> CAMERA is a propaganda site
> ..
> 164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains *in possession *of approximately* 85 per cent of the land. "*





abu afak said:


> Really? 1. *You're impeaching Your own "93%" Lie. *LOL/OUCHER
> 2. 85% is ALL of Palestine (and slightly incorrect according to the British Survey's own numbers), while I was talking ONLY about the part that became Israel. Apples and Oranges, Akhmed. oooops! Speak English.
> *3. WHO owned the 50% of what became Israel that was the Negev Desert?*
> 4. SPLAT!
> 5. Your Unispal repertoire/document dumps are very limited and leave you Rigid and Nonconversant.


Still waiting for your answer (next Lie attempt) on WHO owned the 50% of Israel that is/was the Negev Desert.
Again.... Your Unispal repertoire/document dumps are very limited and leave you Rigid and Nonconversant.
Crickets!
Crickets!
Crickets!
+


----------



## montelatici

There is nothing incorrect about UN Map no. 94.  It is the result of the official survey performed by the Ad-Hoc committee on Palestine in order to organize the partition.

The 85% was an approximate figure, flattering the Jews, the 93% is the figure arrived at after the catastral survey and is depicted in text in the Survey of Palestine Vol. 2. as well, and has been posted many times.

All you idiots can do is deny verifiable fact contained in official archives and rely on propagandists that attempt to deny official facts. This Zionist game has been going on for some time.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> There is nothing incorrect about UN Map no. 94.  It is the result of the official survey performed by the Ad-Hoc committee on Palestine in order to organize the partition.
> The 85% was an approximate figure, flattering the Jews, the 93% is the figure arrived at after the catastral survey and is depicted in text in the Survey of Palestine Vol. 2. as well, and has been posted many times.
> All you idiots can do is deny verifiable fact contained in official archives and rely on propagandists that attempt to deny official facts. This Zionist game has been going on for some time.


*1. Montel-al-Williams can't get his own story straight. HE posted that it was 85%, AND 93%, contradickting himself.

2. Of course, my claim was NOT even about Overall Palestine, but rather the part that became Israel.
So you are a NONentrant in this debate due to your Lack of understanding/Ineptitude.

3. Montel confuses/Conflates "possesion" with "ownership"!
Mere possession is "Squatting".

4. You're such a Knee-Jerk Link Dumper, you are undebatable because you just throw up anything in the area, but are NONconversant on specific topics if it's not in your Unispal repertoire.

5. He now calls the UN Link HE posted Propaganda too because it contradicts.. him.
IOW, everything he disagrees with is "propaganda".

6. He was WHiFFED several times on telling us who "owned" the Negev/50% of Israel.

IOW, and overall, you are totally Inept with the language, and DISHONEST/NONresponsive in debate. Always trying to move the goal posts. 
And you're getting Eviscerated.*

Crickets
Crickets
Crickets
+


----------



## montelatici

You just can't handle the truth.  The verifiable facts.  Available to all in official archives. Whether Arabs "possessed" approximately 85% of the land as stated in UN Resolution A-364:

"The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of *approximately* 85 per cent of the land."

*or exactly 95%* of the land as calculated after the cadastral survey as depicted in the official map, is of little consequence. 

Nor is the fact that the Jews owned less than 1% of the Beersheba district (which includes the Nejev) germane to the issue.

The fact is, the Arabs owned an overwhelming majority of the land.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> You just can't handle the truth.  The verifiable facts.  Avail to all in official archives. Whether Arabs "possessed" approximately 85% of the land as stated in UN Resolution A-364:
> "The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of *approximately* 85 per cent of the land."
> *or exactly 95%* of the land as calculated after the cadastral survey as depicted in the official map, is of little consequence.
> Nor is the fact that the Jews owned less than 1% of the Beersheba district (which includes the Nejev) germane to the issue.
> The fact is, the Arabs owned an overwhelming majority of the land.


I note you don't quote me any more... rightly Afraid I'll notice and then again Torch your FAILED posts.
You were UNABLE to address my NUMBERED points.
Numbered for easy but NONevasive reply.
YOU FAILED Again
You Cannot debate me, only Link Dump everyone else.
You are/remain NONresponsive.
AGAIN...

*1. Montel-al-Williams can't get his own story straight. HE posted that it was 85%, AND 93%, contradickting himself.

2. Of course, my claim was NOT even about Overall Palestine, but rather the part that became Israel.
So you are a NONentrant in this debate due to your Lack of understanding/Ineptitude.

3. Montel confuses/Conflates "possesion" with "ownership"!
Mere possession is "Squatting".

4. You're such a Knee-Jerk Link Dumper, you are undebatable because you just throw up anything in the area, but are NONconversant on specific topics if it's not in your Unispal repertoire.

5. He now calls the UN Link HE posted Propaganda too because it contradicts.. him.
IOW, everything he disagrees with is "propaganda".

6. He was WHiFFED several times on telling us Who "Owned" the Negev/50% of Israel.

IOW, and overall, you are totally Inept with the language, and DISHONEST/NONresponsive in debate. Always trying to move the goal posts. 
And you're getting Eviscerated.*

Crickets
Evasion
Crickets


----------



## montelatici

You are so silly.  

1. The Survey stated exactly who owned the land.  If you want play games with semantics, the record shows that Arabs owned exactly 93% of the land and possessed approximately 85% of it.  Take your pick.

2. 15% of the Negev was was owned by Arabs, as depicted on the map. 85% was public and less than 1% was owned by Jews.  Are you implying that the public land automatically belonged to people living in Europe planning to go to Palestine and none of it was owned by the native inhabitants?  They were not part of the public?

3.  Your attempts at validating Zionist propaganda, that has been found out for some time now, is silly.  We have access to the source documentation now.  It is easily debunked. Can't you get that through your thick skull?


----------



## theliq

Dogmaphobe said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then you leant nothing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, yes -- all those atlases I studied when I was a kid were just part of some great conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Hi Dog.....But you only viewed the world from America....As for me as a kid,I moved my globe and atlas to Tuva or Finland and the world takes on a different perspective completely,my friend.......and there in is the difference between us..........did you never think to expand your mind in this way......No,I think not.

Try it some time,you will be surprised.....just sayin steve.......the only conspiracies were in your head,indoctorinated by an educational system that never allowed you to roam.....that is why many Americans are so myopic of any individual thought,only what your politicians tell you.....and they have a very poor record of any reality at all.


----------



## abu afak

montelatici said:


> You are so silly.
> 
> 1. The Survey stated exactly who owned the land.  If you want play games with semantics, the record shows that Arabs owned exactly 93% of the land and possessed approximately 85% of it.  Take your pick.


So now you're Changing again your initial Charge that the 85% Link was be flattering to Jews/Propaganda to... its correct?
you really are in a Panic from my Gutting of your posts.
You're getting creamed and making idiotic Contradictory claims. 85% of 50% of Israel was "public land" but 93% was owned by Arabs?




			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> *2. 15% of the Negev was was owned by Arabs, as depicted on the map. 85% was Public..*


*If 85% of the Negev was Public Land, at least 42% of Israel was Public/State Land (Israel is /was 50% Negev Desert), and at least 20% of overall Palestine was State Land.
Ergo BOTH 93% "Arab owned", and 85% are WRONG and you are TERRIBLE at math/Logic as well as a Liar with Links for every Contradicktory POS post. 
OMFG!

*


			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> 3.  Your attempts at validating Zionist propaganda, that has been found out for some time now, is silly.  We have access to the source documentation now.  It is easily debunked. Can't you get that through your thick skull?


Well you at least tried  to answer 2 of my six points but as we see, you got Crushed even worse.
Are you really that OBTUSE that you think you can Admit 85% of the Negev was "Public" but maintain 93% of Palestine was Arab owned?
You can't be that frigging bad at math.. just so in Bigoted and in denial, you can't calculate at all.
Like claiming 2+2=5 with straight face.


----------



## montelatici

You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.


----------



## abu afak

Montel-al-Williams (Math failure) has been reduced to one sentence and could only attempt 2 of my 6 points.
His English/Logic also suck, as He attempted to refute my claim that a "majority of Israel was State Land", with posts that only included "Overall/Palestine."
He STILL hasn't addressed my claim.

He doesn't understand English/logic well enough to debate...
and he lies
and he can't do math..
and his links contradict each other...
and he confused/conflated "owned" with "Posessed"/SQUATTED.
He got "93% Arab-owned" Wrong.
He 'answered' how much of Israel was state land, with how much of palestine was....
Sorry goofy, you just are undebatably BAD.

He's not used to getting GUTTED like this, rather he usually tries to intimidate with Vague large link dumps.
But I have reduced prolific al-Montel to one pathetic sentence.
Sqooosh
Last-word away tho buddy .. but You got CREAMED.


----------



## montelatici

LOL.  The attempt to deflect facts is hilarious.  You have nothing, son.  Arabs owned almost all of Palestine and you just can't accept that fact. Bye, bye.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.



But public land is Arab land?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
Click to expand...

Public land is collectively owned by the citizens.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
Click to expand...


Public land would be the public's therefore the 85% of the Negev desert (15% was owned by Christians or Muslims at the time) that was public would be split roughly along the population at the time, i.e. roughly 2/3s Arab and 1/3 Jewish.   

Negev Desert
Arabs 15% owned outright
Arabs 2/3s of 85% (public land) = 56.666%
Jews 1/3 of 85% (public land) = 28.333%

Negev Desert overall division:

Total Arab 71.666%
Total Jewish 28.333%

But this was just in the Negev Desert, the rest of Palestine had very little public land as the U.N. map shows, so the Christians and Muslims owned an overwhelming amount of the land in Palestine, as the map confirms.

Another Zionist myth debunked.


----------



## abu afak

Poor Montel-Williams-altici has to try and make a few in a row to TRY and compensate for his Many BLUNDERS throughout
Note above there is NO "93% Arab-owned Palestine", NO "85% Arab-owned Palestine"
He got Busted.
*Immediately above He says/LIES that Jews owned 1/3 of the Negev. NO They didn't. Jews got all of the State-Land Negev when it passed from the Ottomans to The British to them. NO one owned the Negev, 50% of Israel, ergo His original "93% Arab owned" palestine is False, as was "85%", his second blunder. *
Realizing this he again tried to Fudge the numbers/Massage the Terms and numbers..
Here was the exchange




montelatici said:


> You are so silly.
> 
> 1. The Survey stated exactly who owned the land.  If you want play games with semantics, the record shows that Arabs owned exactly 93% of the land and possessed approximately 85% of it.  Take your pick.


So now you're Changing again your initial Charge that the 85% Link was be flattering to Jews/Propaganda to... its correct?
you really are in a Panic from my Gutting of your posts.
You're getting creamed and making idiotic Contradictory claims. 85% of 50% of Israel was "public land" but 93% was owned by Arabs?




			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> *2. 15% of the Negev was was Owned by Arabs, as depicted on the map. 85% was Public..*


*If 85% of the Negev was Public Land, at least 42% of Israel was Public/State Land (Israel is /was 50% Negev Desert), and at least 20% of overall Palestine was State Land.
Ergo BOTH 93% "Arab owned", and 85% are WRONG and you are TERRIBLE at math/Logic as well as a Liar with Links for every Contradictory POS post. 
OMFG!

*


			
				montelatici said:
			
		

> 3.  Your attempts at validating Zionist propaganda, that has been found out for some time now, is silly.  We have access to the source documentation now.  It is easily debunked. Can't you get that through your thick skull?


Well you at least tried  to answer 2 of my six points but as we see, you got Crushed even worse.
Are you really that OBTUSE that you think you can Admit 85% of the Negev was "Public" but maintain 93% of Palestine was Arab owned?
You can't be that frigging bad at math.. just so in Bigoted and in denial, you can't calculate at all.
Like claiming 2+2=5 with straight face.

Last word away Akhmed.
You still got PORKED

Again:
*Immediately above He says/LIES that Jews owned 1/3 of the Negev. NO They didn't. Jews got all of the State-Land Negev when it passed from the Ottomans to The British to them. NO one owned the Negev, 50% of Israel, ergo His original "93% Arab owned" palestine is False, as was "85%", his second self-contradicting blunder.*
+
EDIT 1 to below:
note Montel, the 'Zionist'-obsessed Klown, will respond within 20 minutes at ANY time of day.
But he won't quote me, as he doesn't want to see it/get embarrassed by it again, nor have me alerted he did reply, and get Crushed again.

Edit 2: and note Two posts below.
So embarrassed, He's back with... More/Different Numbers and Terms!
+


----------



## montelatici

I realize that being made a fool causes ranting, but take it easy.  Yes, 93% of Palestine was Arab owned as reported by the UN.  The Negev was 15% Arab owned, also as reported by the UN. 

You seem to be crushing yourself.


----------



## montelatici

By the way, your rants allow me to respond and make the point even clearer. From Survey of Palestine Vol. 2, page 566 available at the Berman Jewish Policy Archive, NYU-Wagner University:

A Survey of Palestine Volume 2  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
Click to expand...


Where have I attacked Israel's legitimacy?  I've always stated I support it's right to exist as a state.  What I don't support is it's "right" to claim the entire Palestine as it's own.  My "championing" of the rights of the Palestinians is limited to their right to a state so I'm  not clear on what you mean by "championing the agenda of the Arabs"?  I'm  firm supporter of a two state solution (maybe three, if Gaza can't be connected).  



> *This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy. * If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.



I couldn't agree more.  The indiginous argument is serves only one purpose and that is for one side or the other to disenfranchise the rights of the other or to derail threads (the main reason for the creation of this thread).  That also I have said multiple times.  I've also said, multiple times, that the indiginous people's consist of a variety of religious and ethnic groups who have roots there for centuries if not millenia.

One person's propaganda can be another person's realpolitic - it's in the eye of the beholder.




> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.



And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Public land is collectively owned by the citizens.
Click to expand...



But not the Jewish citizens?


----------



## Shusha

Everyone is making the error that land ownership has something to do with sovereignty.  It doesn't.


----------



## Shusha

But Coyote  has the most important point in all this.  The entire "indigenous" argument is intended to delegitimize and the solution to the conflict will never lay in delegitimizing a people.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Everyone is making the error that land ownership has something to do with sovereignty.  It doesn't.



Well, that was not the point, was it.  The point was that the Zionist myth that claims that the land colonized by the European Zionists was purchased, is a myth.  The land was overwhelmingly owned by the Christians and Muslims.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Public land is collectively owned by the citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But not the Jewish citizens?
Click to expand...

The native Jews were not excluded from anything.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Public land is collectively owned by the citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But not the Jewish citizens?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The native Jews were not excluded from anything.
Click to expand...



It seems me to me that I have asked you very specifically about who should have had sovereignty in the territory in question.  And I remember you answering that should have been the Arabs.  So, for clarity, do you or do you not believe that there should be Jewish sovereignty in the territory in question?


----------



## montelatici

In a perfect world, the people that inhabited Palestine (about 90% Christians and Muslims) would have been guided by the Mandatory to full independence and sovereignty as stipulated in the Covenant of the League of Nations, and the country would not have been opened up to European colonization.  The Muslims and Christians got screwed, now what do we do?

*"ARTICLE 22.*
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it, and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the League.

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone."


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really haven't figured out that public land was not Jewish land, have you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But public land is Arab land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Public land is collectively owned by the citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But not the Jewish citizens?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The native Jews were not excluded from anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It seems me to me that I have asked you very specifically about who should have had sovereignty in the territory in question.  And I remember you answering that should have been the Arabs.  So, for clarity, do you or do you not believe that there should be Jewish sovereignty in the territory in question?
Click to expand...

Good question, thanks. I have never said that the "Arabs" should have sovereignty in Palestine. The citizens of Palestine are the sovereigns. Palestinian citizenship was laid down in international and domestic law. Those citizens included Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others. Race, religion, etc. are irrelevant.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> In a perfect world, the people that inhabited Palestine (about 90% Christians and Muslims) would have been guided by the Mandatory to full independence and sovereignty as stipulated in the Covenant of the League of Nations



And that happened in mostly -- with the birth of Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel.  Millions of people achieved independence and sovereignty.  




montelatici said:


> The Muslims and Christians got screwed, now what do we do?


Not exactly.   

Arab Muslims (and Christians who associate with being "Palestinian") got less land than they think they deserved (which was all of it).   

Tell me, do you believe that there should be some opportunity for Jewish sovereignty and self-determination in the territories in question?  I just want to get a handle on whether you are arguing against any sort of Jewish sovereignty or if you are arguing that the Jewish people should just have less land.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> In a perfect world, the people that inhabited Palestine (about 90% Christians and Muslims) would have been guided by the Mandatory to full independence and sovereignty as stipulated in the Covenant of the League of Nations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that happened in mostly -- with the birth of Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel.  Millions of people achieved independence and sovereignty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Muslims and Christians got screwed, now what do we do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not exactly.
> 
> Arab Muslims (and Christians who associate with being "Palestinian") got less land than they think they deserved (which was all of it).
> 
> Tell me, do you believe that there should be some opportunity for Jewish sovereignty and self-determination in the territories in question?  I just want to get a handle on whether you are arguing against any sort of Jewish sovereignty or if you are arguing that the Jewish people should just have less land.
Click to expand...


The Christians and Muslims got nothing.  Most were evicted from the Jewish part of the partition before the Arab armies arrived to try to stop the ethnic cleansing.  If the Arab armies had not arrived the Jews would have expelled all the non-Jews. 

Under the terms of the Covenant, only the inhabitants were to have sovereignty, not an imported foreign population from Europe.  The inhabitants did not want to be colonized again. 

Unless the Christians and Muslims agreed to it, no, the Europeans should not have had exclusive sovereignty for their own kind.  The Christians were prepared to live in a secular state with a Muslim majority. Why not the few Jews that were there?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Good question, thanks. I have never said that the "Arabs" should have sovereignty in Palestine. The citizens of Palestine are the sovereigns. Palestinian citizenship was laid down in international and domestic law. Those citizens included Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others. Race, religion, etc. are irrelevant.



I think what I asked you was, "Should the sovereignty of Palestine be turned over to the Arab Muslim Palestinians".  And you answered in the affirmative.  But I think I understand the gist of your belief system now that I've been here a while. 

Here's my thinking -- ethnicity and culture are NOT irrelevant.  They are key to solving the conflict -- either through acceptance or through rejection.  So, regardless of what happened or what either of us think should have happened in the past, are you willing or unwilling to accept some sort of Jewish sovereignty in at least some of the land in question?


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> ... no, the Europeans should not have had exclusive sovereignty for their own kind..



Please be very clear here.  Are you saying that the Jewish people should not have sovereignty over the Jewish people?

Is your argument that Jews should have NO land, or LESS land.  It makes a very great difference.


----------



## montelatici

If it were still possible, and it is not.  A viable Palestinian state (not riddled with fortified Jewish settlements and IDF troop presence) might have allowed the Palestinian leadership to agree to a settlement of some sort.  (without being lynched)

Sovereignty was not to be turned over to Muslim Palestinians, as you keep on saying, sovereignty was to be turned over to the inhabitants of Palestine, which included native and a much less destabilizing number of European Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good question, thanks. I have never said that the "Arabs" should have sovereignty in Palestine. The citizens of Palestine are the sovereigns. Palestinian citizenship was laid down in international and domestic law. Those citizens included Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others. Race, religion, etc. are irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think what I asked you was, "Should the sovereignty of Palestine be turned over to the Arab Muslim Palestinians".  And you answered in the affirmative.  But I think I understand the gist of your belief system now that I've been here a while.
> 
> Here's my thinking -- ethnicity and culture are NOT irrelevant.  They are key to solving the conflict -- either through acceptance or through rejection.  So, regardless of what happened or what either of us think should have happened in the past, are you willing or unwilling to accept some sort of Jewish sovereignty in at least some of the land in question?
Click to expand...

The Jews already had equal sovereignty in Palestine.

What are you trying to say?


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The Christians and Muslims got nothing.



That is blatantly false.  At the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire the Arabs (Muslim and Christian) got Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  They also have Gaza and Areas A and B and potentially large portions of Area C or land swaps to make up (should they make use of it).


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> What are you trying to say?



I am not trying to "say" anything.  I am asking if you can support any kind of Jewish sovereignty in the territories in question.  Sovereignty meaning self-determination of the Jewish people, by the Jewish people, in a Nation built around those things.


----------



## montelatici

The Palestinians got nothing and have nothing.  There was no one to give it to them.  My question is, why should Europeans, who were not the inhabitants of Palestine, have gotten anything?  Can't you get it though your head that the Christians and Muslims inhabited Palestine along with a small number of Arab Jews and some European immigrants when the Covenant was signed. They were the ones that should have been guided to become citizens of an independent Palestinian state.


----------



## P F Tinmore

montelatici said:


> The Palestinians got nothing and have nothing.  There was no one to give it to them.  My question is, why should Europeans, who were not the inhabitants of Palestine, have gotten anything?  Can't you get it though your head that the Christians and Muslims inhabited Palestine along with a small number of Arab Jews and some European immigrants when the Covenant was signed. They were the ones that should have been guided to become citizens of an independent Palestinian state.


They were the ones that should have been guided to become citizens of an independent Palestinian state.​
Indeed, and that is what the Mandate was supposed to do. Nobody was denied sovereignty.

*ART. 7.*
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to *facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews* who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.​


----------



## abu afak

Coyote said:


> ...
> *And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?*


ME!
I have often criticized Israel, mostly on other forums, but also this one.
The current Netanyahu Govt is obviously 'closing out' the Palestinians. Perhaps leaving them with only Gaza and a small pond somewhere in the West Bank.
I have always argued Israel was entitled to a Small strategic buffer as a result of the 1967 Pre-emptive if defensive war and Res 242.
Perhaps as far as the Green line/app 3%.
Resolution 242: It does NOT mean withdrawal to 1967 lines
Enjoy. I understood this conflict a long time ago.
Making that post many times over a dozen years. I stick with it even now that the pendulum has moved to the other side.

Because it's clear to me for the last 5 years or so that Netanyahu et al, Unlike previous Israeli govt's/Offers, are Intent on taking over the Lion's share of the WB and squeezing out the 'Palestinians' (whatever that is/and however late in history that group of Arabs took the name)
abu afak/mbig
+


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where have I attacked Israel's legitimacy?  I've always stated I support it's right to exist as a state.  What I don't support is it's "right" to claim the entire Palestine as it's own.  My "championing" of the rights of the Palestinians is limited to their right to a state so I'm  not clear on what you mean by "championing the agenda of the Arabs"?  I'm  firm supporter of a two state solution (maybe three, if Gaza can't be connected).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy. * If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I couldn't agree more.  The indiginous argument is serves only one purpose and that is for one side or the other to disenfranchise the rights of the other or to derail threads (the main reason for the creation of this thread).  That also I have said multiple times.  I've also said, multiple times, that the indiginous people's consist of a variety of religious and ethnic groups who have roots there for centuries if not millenia.
> 
> One person's propaganda can be another person's realpolitic - it's in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?
Click to expand...



 You have indulged in at least three fallacies right here.

First of all, the "they do it too" argument is no excuse for your own.  I have no problem criticizing the attitudes of the minority of the Jewish population as represented by the militant Settlers.  I have yet to see you criticize the great majority of this new people called Palestinian for their incredible degree of ethnic hatred.  Even when they vote into power those committed to genocide, you find ways to make excuses or else side-step the issue. At no point have I seen you criticize anything about the truly awful belief systems the large majority of Palestinians hold.

 The second fallacy lies in your "eye of the beholder" comment, which represents such an extreme moral relativism as to be nihilistic.  You might as well offer that putrid "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" nonsense so common to those who promote the same agenda as you. 

 The third error lies in your statement about Israel wanting it all. As you can see so clearly from the map I provided and which Abu Afak keeps mentioning is that they DON'T have it all. They have just a tiny piece. Perhaps this is more a matter of dishonesty on your part than fallacious reasoning, but keeping it real would go a long way towards making your positions more credible.

 In any case, should you desire to raise the level of your discourse, here is a little run down on some logical fallacies. 

List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Learning some of these might help you avoid the "well, they do it too" sorts of excuses as well as various others.


----------



## montelatici

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where have I attacked Israel's legitimacy?  I've always stated I support it's right to exist as a state.  What I don't support is it's "right" to claim the entire Palestine as it's own.  My "championing" of the rights of the Palestinians is limited to their right to a state so I'm  not clear on what you mean by "championing the agenda of the Arabs"?  I'm  firm supporter of a two state solution (maybe three, if Gaza can't be connected).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy. * If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I couldn't agree more.  The indiginous argument is serves only one purpose and that is for one side or the other to disenfranchise the rights of the other or to derail threads (the main reason for the creation of this thread).  That also I have said multiple times.  I've also said, multiple times, that the indiginous people's consist of a variety of religious and ethnic groups who have roots there for centuries if not millenia.
> 
> One person's propaganda can be another person's realpolitic - it's in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You have indulged in at least three fallacies right here.
> 
> First of all, the "they do it too" argument is no excuse for your own.  I have no problem criticizing the attitudes of the minority of the Jewish population as represented by the militant Settlers.  I have yet to see you criticize the great majority of this new people called Palestinian for their incredible degree of ethnic hatred.  Even when they vote into power those committed to genocide, you find ways to make excuses or else side-step the issue. At no point have I seen you criticize anything about the truly awful belief systems the large majority of Palestinians hold.
> 
> The second fallacy lies in your "eye of the beholder" comment, which represents such an extreme moral relativism as to be nihilistic.  You might as well offer that putrid "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" nonsense so common to those who promote the same agenda as you.
> 
> The third error lies in your statement about Israel wanting it all. As you can see so clearly from the map I provided and which Abu Afak keeps mentioning is that they DON'T have it all. They have just a tiny piece. Perhaps this is more a matter of dishonesty on your part than fallacious reasoning, but keeping it real would go a long way towards making your positions more credible.
> 
> In any case, should you desire to raise the level of your discourse, here is a little run down on some logical fallacies.
> 
> List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Learning some of these might help you avoid the "well, they do it too" sorts of excuses as well as various others.
Click to expand...


1. It is understandable to any neutral observer, that people that have undergone oppression, ethnic cleansing, periodic massacres and 24/7 discrimination would have a deep hate for the oppressor.  Israelis, on the other hand, oppress as well as hate the Christians and Muslims they have under their control. Israel are also constantly calling for the genocide and/or ethnic cleansing of the non-Jews.  Government ministers like Naftali Bennet casually state that it is no big deal killing Arabs: "(I)personally killed "lots of Arabs" and "there is no problem in that"".
'I've Killed lots of Arabs' says Israeli Minister Bennett as Washington Peace Talks Begin

or the Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked with the Gaza children being "little snakes" and her call for genocide as reported in even U.S. newspapers

2. Terrorist or Freedom Fighter is based on one's point of view.  

a. The Contras were labelled murderous terrorists by the Europeans (and most of the world) while the U.S. armed them and labelled them Freedom Fighters.

b. The Muhajedin in Afghanistan, that burned Russian built girls schools to the ground with the students in them (and committed many other atrocities) were labelled Freedom Fighters by the U.S. when they were fighting the Russians. Their children, re-named Taliban, became terrorists overnight when they didn't follow the U.S. line.

c. Until 2008, the ANC and Nelson Mandela, Freedom Fighters to part of the world were labelled terrorists by the U.S. and the UK.

d. Israel which hopes to change the Palestinian's support for Hamas in Gaza through brutal bombings and the massacre of thousands, mostly women and children, is considered an ally by the U.S. and "defending itself".  While terrorizing a population to achieve a political objective is the most common definition of terrorism.

3. Your map is a made up piece of Zionist propaganda, garbage, that has no basis in historical fact or reality.  It is one of the Playbook tactics that Zionists know is bullshit, but is used to muddy the waters.  Trans-Jordan was never part of Palestine as a territory.  Before falling to the British it was a province of the Arab Kingdom of Syria and was never intended for any other people but the indigenous Bedouins to be ruled by a Hashemite (Bedouin) ruler. A leader Britain had promised to reward for his family's help against the Turks.


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where have I attacked Israel's legitimacy?  I've always stated I support it's right to exist as a state.  What I don't support is it's "right" to claim the entire Palestine as it's own.  My "championing" of the rights of the Palestinians is limited to their right to a state so I'm  not clear on what you mean by "championing the agenda of the Arabs"?  I'm  firm supporter of a two state solution (maybe three, if Gaza can't be connected).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy. * If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I couldn't agree more.  The indiginous argument is serves only one purpose and that is for one side or the other to disenfranchise the rights of the other or to derail threads (the main reason for the creation of this thread).  That also I have said multiple times.  I've also said, multiple times, that the indiginous people's consist of a variety of religious and ethnic groups who have roots there for centuries if not millenia.
> 
> One person's propaganda can be another person's realpolitic - it's in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You have indulged in at least three fallacies right here.
Click to expand...


I am familiar with logical fallacies and their use *and abuse*.



> First of all, the "they do it too" argument is no excuse for your own.  I have no problem criticizing the attitudes of the minority of the Jewish population as represented by the militant Settlers.  I have yet to see you criticize the great majority of this new people called Palestinian for their incredible degree of ethnic hatred.  Even when they vote into power those committed to genocide, you find ways to make excuses or else side-step the issue. At no point have I seen you criticize anything about the truly awful belief systems the large majority of Palestinians hold.



I have yet to see you even once - criticize anything Israel has done.  A brief search of your posts and "militant" or "settlers" produces only this post.  I have on multiple occassions criticized Palestinian attacks on civilians.   If you wish, I'll provide links.

Something about glass houses, stones and a smoke screen of "fallacies" to obscure that comes to mind. If you're demanding it of others, I suggest you get your own house in order first.



> The second fallacy lies in your "eye of the beholder" comment, which represents such an extreme moral relativism as to be nihilistic. You might as well offer that putrid "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" nonsense so common to those who promote the same agenda as you.



What is considered propaganda is most certainly "in the eyes of the beholder" and that is not a logical fallacy.  As a matter of fact - *what specific fallacy are you identifying here?*

Propoganda: _information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view._

What is considered "biased" and "misleading" depends on the listener.  I think that should at least be obvious to you when reading posts here.



> The third error lies in your statement about Israel wanting it all. As you can see so clearly from the map I provided and which Abu Afak keeps mentioning is that they DON'T have it all. They have just a tiny piece. Perhaps this is more a matter of dishonesty on your part than fallacious reasoning, but keeping it real would go a long way towards making your positions more credible.



There is a difference between *"wanting it all" *and *"having it all"* - you do realize that don't you?  There are plenty Israeli's who believe God intended all of Palestine to be theirs.




> In any case, should you desire to raise the level of your discourse, here is a little run down on some logical fallacies.
> 
> List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Learning some of these might help you avoid the "well, they do it too" sorts of excuses as well as various others.



I suggest you review them.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I've never argued Israel is not legitimate or legal.  States come into being in many different ways.  Israel is here, it exists, it has for some time now, it's legitimate as far as I am concerned and the world in 2016 is a different place than the world at the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.  The way I understand it, the  Mandate was an agreement amongst the allied powers only to sort out the division of Palestine.  No promises were made to any else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was created in 1920, so anybody born there is indiginous.  Since Jews, Arabs, and Druze have been born there, they would be considered such.
> 
> Now, since Arabs cannot get along with anybody,  it was necessary to divide the territory in such a way that the portion of the population they routinely persecute was to have a place to exercise their self-determination.
> 
> My question to you is this:  If you claim to support such legitimacy, why does the entirety of your posting history on the subject consist of attacking it while championing the agenda of the Arabs who do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where have I attacked Israel's legitimacy?  I've always stated I support it's right to exist as a state.  What I don't support is it's "right" to claim the entire Palestine as it's own.  My "championing" of the rights of the Palestinians is limited to their right to a state so I'm  not clear on what you mean by "championing the agenda of the Arabs"?  I'm  firm supporter of a two state solution (maybe three, if Gaza can't be connected).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This entire sidebar as to who is "indiginous" only distracts from the issue of legitimacy. * If you believe Israel is legitimate, why all these thousands of postings attacking such?  I would think if you found Israel to be legitimate, your main concern would be issues of realpolitic instead of propaganda, and you would be focused on ways to figure out the best ways to administer to the division of this territory called Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I couldn't agree more.  The indiginous argument is serves only one purpose and that is for one side or the other to disenfranchise the rights of the other or to derail threads (the main reason for the creation of this thread).  That also I have said multiple times.  I've also said, multiple times, that the indiginous people's consist of a variety of religious and ethnic groups who have roots there for centuries if not millenia.
> 
> One person's propaganda can be another person's realpolitic - it's in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On one hand, you have the Israeli settler movement and Eratz Israel types pushing for more land. On the other hand, you have an entire subculture of Arabs who celebrate mass murder and elect leadership promising genocide.  With all your focusing of criticism against Israel, you conveniently ignore all the savagery ingrained into this dysfunctional Arab subculture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And how many pro-Israeli's here are willing to ever criticize Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You have indulged in at least three fallacies right here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am familiar with logical fallacies and their use *and abuse*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, the "they do it too" argument is no excuse for your own.  I have no problem criticizing the attitudes of the minority of the Jewish population as represented by the militant Settlers.  I have yet to see you criticize the great majority of this new people called Palestinian for their incredible degree of ethnic hatred.  Even when they vote into power those committed to genocide, you find ways to make excuses or else side-step the issue. At no point have I seen you criticize anything about the truly awful belief systems the large majority of Palestinians hold.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have yet to see you even once - criticize anything Israel has done.  A brief search of your posts and "militant" or "settlers" produces only this post.  I have on multiple occassions criticized Palestinian attacks on civilians.   If you wish, I'll provide links.
> 
> Something about glass houses, stones and a smoke screen of "fallacies" to obscure that comes to mind. If you're demanding it of others, I suggest you get your own house in order first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The second fallacy lies in your "eye of the beholder" comment, which represents such an extreme moral relativism as to be nihilistic. You might as well offer that putrid "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" nonsense so common to those who promote the same agenda as you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is considered propaganda is most certainly "in the eyes of the beholder" and that is not a logical fallacy.  As a matter of fact - *what specific fallacy are you identifying here?*
> 
> Propoganda: _information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view._
> 
> What is considered "biased" and "misleading" depends on the listener.  I think that should at least be obvious to you when reading posts here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The third error lies in your statement about Israel wanting it all. As you can see so clearly from the map I provided and which Abu Afak keeps mentioning is that they DON'T have it all. They have just a tiny piece. Perhaps this is more a matter of dishonesty on your part than fallacious reasoning, but keeping it real would go a long way towards making your positions more credible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a difference between *"wanting it all" *and *"having it all"* - you do realize that don't you?  There are plenty Israeli's who believe God intended all of Palestine to be theirs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In any case, should you desire to raise the level of your discourse, here is a little run down on some logical fallacies.
> 
> List of fallacies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Learning some of these might help you avoid the "well, they do it too" sorts of excuses as well as various others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suggest you review them.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between *"wanting it all" *and *"having it all"* - you do realize that don't you? There are plenty Israeli's who believe God intended all of Palestine to be theirs.​
The Palestinians want all of Palestine?

*Shocking!*

How dare they?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians want all of Palestine?
> 
> *Shocking!*
> 
> How dare they?



Yeah, but here's the thing.  The Palestinians want all of "Palestine" and the Jewish people want all of "Israel".  It can't happen.  We have to share.  Can we not just solve the problem by doing that?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians want all of Palestine?
> 
> *Shocking!*
> 
> How dare they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but here's the thing.  The Palestinians want all of "Palestine" and the Jewish people want all of "Israel".  It can't happen.  We have to share.  Can we not just solve the problem by doing that?
Click to expand...


From his armchair in America, Tinmore will fight to the last Palestinian.


----------



## José

From his armchair in America, ForeverYoung will continue the honorable jewish american tradition of supporting mass non-white immigration to the US to provide a safer environment for Jews in America while sounding like a Grand Dragon of the KKK in Palestine.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians want all of Palestine?
> 
> *Shocking!*
> 
> How dare they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but here's the thing.  The Palestinians want all of "Palestine" and the Jewish people want all of "Israel".  It can't happen.  We have to share.  Can we not just solve the problem by doing that?
Click to expand...


Yeah but here's the thing, the Palestinians were ready and willing to share in the 1920's-30's, but the Zionists wanted it all; they still do. Are the Zionists prepared to return to the 181 borders in exchange for a binding peace?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

José said:


> From his armchair in America, ForeverYoung will continue the honorable jewish american tradition of supporting mass non-white immigration to the US to provide a safer environment for Jews in America while sounding like a Grand Dragon of the KKK in Palestine.



I have no idea what you're talking about.  If I'm deciphering correctly, are you saying that I'm anti-immigration?  I have no problem with Hispanics coming to America, if they apply legally.  I don't know what that has to do with the Israel/Palestine conflict, though.  And if I'm not deciphering correctly, then please speak in English.


----------



## montelatici

It's probably time to start looking at alternatives.


"Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday evening derided opposition leader Yitzhak Herzog's admission that the two-state solution isn't currently viable, mockingly "congratulating" the Labor party leader for finally "waking up" to the reality of the Middle East.

"A year ago I said that the current circumstances do not seem to allow the realization of a two states for two peoples solution. You certainly would be surprised to know or remember that even then you attacked me furiously."


----------



## José

> Origianally posted by *ForeverYoung*
> I have no problem with Hispanics coming to America, if they apply legally.




This is what I'm talking about. You have no problem with hispanics, blacks and asians with no historical right to live in the US destroying America's non supremacist white majority and at the same time suport a jewish supremacist state keeping the native arab population herded in enclaves.

And your opinion is representative of most american Jews.

Jews are historically afraid of countries with large white population and you recently provided the best explanation for this fear:



> *ForeverYoung* said:
> Thousands of Jews were killed during 2000 years in the name of your savior (and I'm not even talking about the Holocaust now.) *They were burnt at the stake, killed in pogroms, squeezed into ghettos, expelled from their homes, lynched after blood libels*, etc.--and you have the nerve to say the name of Jesus!! I and my co-religionists will not continue to pay for what my ancestors may or may not have done to someone 2 millenia ago.



I fully understand the historic reasons behind jewish fear of white majority countries, FY, I even empathize with you for the cruelties commited against your people, but lobbying for the destruction of the racial composition of a non supremacist country like America as jewish americans did last century was *OVER THE TOP*, totally *OUT OF LINE*.

Please notice that I'm in no way letting America's white leadership off the hook...

If anything they should bear the lion's share of the blame for having failed to oppose the jewish american efforts to change the country's immigration laws in the 60's.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians want all of Palestine?
> 
> *Shocking!*
> 
> How dare they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but here's the thing.  The Palestinians want all of "Palestine" and the Jewish people want all of "Israel".  It can't happen.  We have to share.  Can we not just solve the problem by doing that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah but here's the thing, the Palestinians were ready and willing to share in the 1920's-30's, but the Zionists wanted it all; they still do. Are the Zionists prepared to return to the 181 borders in exchange for a binding peace?
Click to expand...


A blatant lie. 

The Israeli's accepted each of the UN proposals and the Arab League refused each. 

It wasn't the Zionists which wanted it all. 

The indigenous people are the original people of this area, or the Hyksos or protojudaic peoples, existing from at least the mid to early bronze age in this area. The Arabs on the other hand came from the Arabian peninsula in several colonial waves. The earliest of which was about 900 CE. 

So how this issue of who is indigenous even came up I'm not sure but its a no brainer. The ancestors of all modern Jews, Judaic people, developed from the earliest known times of antiquity, right smack where Israel is now.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians want all of Palestine?
> 
> *Shocking!*
> 
> How dare they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but here's the thing.  The Palestinians want all of "Palestine" and the Jewish people want all of "Israel".  It can't happen.  We have to share.  Can we not just solve the problem by doing that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah but here's the thing, the Palestinians were ready and willing to share in the 1920's-30's, but the Zionists wanted it all; they still do. Are the Zionists prepared to return to the 181 borders in exchange for a binding peace?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A blatant lie.
> 
> The Israeli's accepted each of the UN proposals and the Arab League refused each.
> 
> It wasn't the Zionists which wanted it all.
> 
> The indigenous people are the original people of this area, or the Hyksos or protojudaic peoples, existing from at least the mid to early bronze age in this area. The Arabs on the other hand came from the Arabian peninsula in several colonial waves. The earliest of which was about 900 CE.
> 
> So how this issue of who is indigenous even came up I'm not sure but its a no brainer. The ancestors of all modern Jews, Judaic people, developed from the earliest known times of antiquity, right smack where Israel is now.
Click to expand...

Didn't the Hebrews come from Egypt?


----------



## abu afak

P F Tinmore said:


> ...
> Didn't the Hebrews come from Egypt?


There is No proof of that. That is Biblical.
However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
And that's one of the things that counts, if not as important as more Recent settlement/last 2 centuries. (and other returns throughout the period)
+


----------



## ForeverYoung436

abu afak said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> Didn't the Hebrews come from Egypt?
> 
> 
> 
> There is No proof of that. That is Biblical.
> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
> And that's one of the things that counts, if not as important as more Recent settlement/last 2 centuries. (and other returns throughout the period)
> +
Click to expand...


Besides, the Hebrews were in Israel/Canaan before they went down to Egypt because of a famine.  Some scholars believe that not all of the Hebrews went to Egypt, but that some remained in Canaan.  When the other Hebrews returned, according to this theory, there was never complete harmony between these 2 groups.  That's why the kingdom split into 2 after Solomon's death.


----------



## Boston1

I can't imagine the "scholars" you are referring to are anything but nonsecular scholars. 

I've yet to read a single actual scholar not involved in the dogma of religion suggest that the biblical story is in any way accurate. 

There is not a shred of archeological evidence to support the exodus myth.


----------



## Challenger

"The agricultural community that the Arabs found in Eretz Israel in the 7th century was none other than the Hebrew farmers that remained on their land despite all the persecution and oppression of the Roman and Byzantine emperors. Some of them accepted Christianity, at least on the surface, but many held on to their ancestral faith and occasionally revolted against their Christian oppressors. After the Arab conquest, the Arabic language and Muslim religion spread gradually among the countrymen. In his essay "Ancient Names in Palestine and Syria in Our Times," Dr. George Kampmeyer proves, based on historico-linguistic analysis, that for a certain period of time, both Aramaic and Arabic were in use and only slowly did the former give way to the latter.
The greater majority and main structures of the Muslim _falahin_ in western Eretz Israel present to us one racial strand and a whole ethnic unit, and there is no doubt that much Jewish blood flows in their veins—the blood of those Jewish farmers, "lay persons," who chose in the travesty of times to abandon their faith in order to remain on their land."--- David Ben Gurion

Seems the founder of the Zionist paradise, Ben Gurion, agreed with what I've been saying all along; modern Palestinians are the "Arabised" indigenous population of Palestine; they never went away, they never died off; they were never disposessed by Arab invaders, only by a bunch of European colonisers.


----------



## Challenger

abu afak said:


> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.


Wrong!

The Merneptah stele merely mentions the existence of a foreign people called "Israel", it doesn't say anything else about them other than at best, if they were sedentary, their grain stores/fields had been razed/devastated; or at worst if they were nomadic, they had been exterminated/dispersed. Their is no mention of their religion other than the suggestion that they may have been "followers" (Isr) of "El" one of several deities in the area. For that matter, it is unclear what "area" they lived in. All of this is currently under dispute by historians and archaeologists, so to state that "Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC" is inaccurate.


----------



## abu afak

Challenger said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong!
> 
> The Merneptah stele merely mentions the existence of a foreign people called "Israel", it doesn't say anything else about them other than at best, if they were sedentary, their grain stores/fields had been razed/devastated; or at worst if they were nomadic, they had been exterminated/dispersed. Their is no mention of their religion other than the suggestion that they may have been "followers" (Isr) of "El" one of several deities in the area. For that matter, it is unclear what "area" they lived in. All of this is currently under dispute by historians and archaeologists, so to state that "Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC" is inaccurate.
Click to expand...

No, You're wrong Goebbels boy. It is "evidence" as Israel was the land of the Jews, and Not coincidentally, roughly correlates with the Biblical timing of the Jews arrival there. Is it 1000% "Proof", No, but it is "Evidence."
Other Archaelogical Evidence Follows this first extra-biblical mention. 
You're such a predictable anti-semitic asshole, and always wrong.
+


----------



## Challenger

abu afak said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong!
> 
> The Merneptah stele merely mentions the existence of a foreign people called "Israel", it doesn't say anything else about them other than at best, if they were sedentary, their grain stores/fields had been razed/devastated; or at worst if they were nomadic, they had been exterminated/dispersed. Their is no mention of their religion other than the suggestion that they may have been "followers" (Isr) of "El" one of several deities in the area. For that matter, it is unclear what "area" they lived in. All of this is currently under dispute by historians and archaeologists, so to state that "Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC" is inaccurate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, You're wrong Goebbels boy. It is "evidence" as Israel was the land of the Jews, and Not coincidentally, roughly correlates with the Biblical timing of the Jews arrival there. Is it 1000% "Proof", No, but it is "Evidence."
> Other Archaelogical Evidence Follows this first extra-biblical mention.
> You're such a predictable anti-semitic asshole, and always wrong.
> +
Click to expand...

...and that, is conclusive evidence of the difference between objective information and Zionist wet-dream fantasy hasbara.


----------



## abu afak

AGAIN Challenger: You Dishonest Word-twisting antisemite..

"No, You're wrong Goebbels boy. It is "evidence" as Israel was the land of the Jews, and Not coincidentally, roughly correlates with the Biblical timing of the Jews arrival there. Is it 1000% "Proof", No, but it is "Evidence."
Other Archaelogical Evidence Follows this first extra-biblical mention.
You're such a predictable anti-semitic asshole, and always wrong."​+


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Seems the founder of the Zionist paradise, Ben Gurion, agreed with what I've been saying all along; modern Palestinians are the "Arabised" indigenous population of Palestine; they never went away, they never died off; they were never disposessed by Arab invaders, only by a bunch of European colonisers.



But be really, really clear about what you are saying here.  

1.  You are saying that the Palestinians are the Arabized *indigenous* population.  The indigenous population were the people who originated on the land (despite the oppression and persecution by foreign invaders) -- the Jewish people.  The Palestinians claim to being indigenous is by virtue of being originally Jewish.  So the indigenous people are the Jewish people.  

AND

2.  If the indigenous people were "Arabized" by invaders and those invaders, by mixing with the local population, obtain the right to self-determination and sovereignty over territory regardless of their "foreignization" then you must, if you are being non-discriminatory, apply that concept over all populations.  Which means that the "European invaders"  (who, of course, are really the indigenous people and not invaders at all) who colonize and "Europeanize" the territory also obtain the right to self-determination and sovereignty.  And if those indigenous peoples who were dispossessed of the land have no right of return, then this must apply to the Palestinians as well. You can't have a double standard here. You can't have it both ways.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong!
> 
> The Merneptah stele merely mentions the existence of a foreign people called "Israel", it doesn't say anything else about them other than at best, if they were sedentary, their grain stores/fields had been razed/devastated; or at worst if they were nomadic, they had been exterminated/dispersed. Their is no mention of their religion other than the suggestion that they may have been "followers" (Isr) of "El" one of several deities in the area. For that matter, it is unclear what "area" they lived in. All of this is currently under dispute by historians and archaeologists, so to state that "Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC" is inaccurate.
Click to expand...


So, wait, what?  You are denying that the Jewish people are linked to the ancient nation of Israel?


----------



## Shusha

The OP question has been answered.  The Jewish people are the indigenous people.  The Palestinian claim to indigeneity arises from their claim to be direct ancestors of the indigenous Jewish people.  Case closed.  

What we are really arguing here is:

1.  What is the morally correct view of territorial self-determination and sovereignty when an indigenous peoples intersects with an invading culture.  

2.  What is the morally correct view of territorial self-determination and sovereignty when an indigenous peoples are successfully dispossessed of their land.


----------



## Challenger

abu afak said:


> AGAIN Challenger: You Dishonest Word-twisting antisemite..
> 
> "No, You're wrong Goebbels boy. It is "evidence" as Israel was the land of the Jews, and Not coincidentally, roughly correlates with the Biblical timing of the Jews arrival there. Is it 1000% "Proof", No, but it is "Evidence."
> Other Archaelogical Evidence Follows this first extra-biblical mention.
> You're such a predictable anti-semitic asshole, and always wrong."​+


You know you're right once they start repeating the same drivel ans calling you names.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:
			
		

> But be really, really clear about what you are saying here.
> 
> 1. You are saying that the Palestinians are the Arabized *indigenous* population. The indigenous population were the people who originated on the land (despite the oppression and persecution by foreign invaders) -- the Jewish people. The Palestinians claim to being indigenous is by virtue of being originally Jewish. So the indigenous people are the Jewish people.





To be *really, really,* clear about what I’m saying is the indigenous population did not necessarily follow Judean monotheism or El/Yahweh worship, which was just one of several local cults, so were not “Jewish” in any religious sense, nor were they a homogenous “people” or ethnic group at the time, so to state “the indigenous people are the Jewish people” is wildly inaccurate and displays a lack of understanding of how social structures of Antiquity functioned.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, there IS Evidence (Merneptah Stele, etc) that the Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong!
> 
> The Merneptah stele merely mentions the existence of a foreign people called "Israel", it doesn't say anything else about them other than at best, if they were sedentary, their grain stores/fields had been razed/devastated; or at worst if they were nomadic, they had been exterminated/dispersed. Their is no mention of their religion other than the suggestion that they may have been "followers" (Isr) of "El" one of several deities in the area. For that matter, it is unclear what "area" they lived in. All of this is currently under dispute by historians and archaeologists, so to state that "Jews were/were in "Israel" by the 13th Century BC" is inaccurate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, wait, what?  You are denying that the Jewish people are linked to the ancient nation of Israel?
Click to expand...


Define "Jewish people".


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> The OP question has been answered. The Jewish people are the indigenous people. The Palestinian claim to indigeneity arises from their claim to be direct ancestors of the indigenous Jewish people. Case closed.



Dream on.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Define "Jewish people".



I'm not sure why I should bother.  No matter what I say you are going to find a way to deny the legitimacy of the Jewish people either by denying the definition or denying the link from the Jewish people to people in the territory in question in ancient times. 

Besides, you know very well who I'm speaking of when I say the Jewish people. 

But I'll play your little game and say:  The Jewish people are those who self-identify with Jewish culture and are accepted by the group.  The Jewish culture is defined by:

the distinct Hebrew language
distinct religious beliefs and practices
written and oral cultural histories and creeds, such as Torah, Tanach, Mishna, Gemara, etc
association with a specific territory as a place of origin
a system of laws and social conventions
distinctive practices for life rituals:  birth, adulthood, marriage, death and burial, etc
holiday celebrations and rituals
food laws and rituals
distinctive clothing items, laws and rituals

This list is not exhaustive.  Now, would you care to define the "Palestinians"?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Jewish people".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why I should bother.  No matter what I say you are going to find a way to deny the legitimacy of the Jewish people either by denying the definition or denying the link from the Jewish people to people in the territory in question in ancient times.
> 
> Besides, you know very well who I'm speaking of when I say the Jewish people.
> 
> But I'll play your little game and say:  The Jewish people are those who self-identify with Jewish culture and are accepted by the group.  The Jewish culture is defined by:
> 
> the distinct Hebrew language
> distinct religious beliefs and practices
> written and oral cultural histories and creeds, such as Torah, Tanach, Mishna, Gemara, etc
> association with a specific territory as a place of origin
> a system of laws and social conventions
> distinctive practices for life rituals:  birth, adulthood, marriage, death and burial, etc
> holiday celebrations and rituals
> food laws and rituals
> distinctive clothing items, laws and rituals
> 
> This list is not exhaustive.  Now, would you care to define the "Palestinians"?
Click to expand...


Any distinctive Palestinian trait (food, dress, customs, language, names, etc.), would apply to any of the Arab peoples, except for the place of residence perhaps.  And, since many Arabs are nomads, even THAT is questionable.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Besides, you know very well who I'm speaking of when I say the Jewish people.



No I don't. I can guess, but just asked for confirmation. To me, Jewish people are those of any nationality or culture who profess to follow the religion known as "Judaism", to be equally clear. 



Shusha said:


> The Jewish people are those who self-identify with Jewish culture and are accepted by the group. The Jewish culture is defined by:



Well examples of those who self-identify with a particular "culture" and who are accepted by the group include Mormons, Freemasons, Branch Davidians, Aum Shinrikyo(-ists), Moonies, Jehova's Witnesses and many, many, others. None of them can be defined as an "ethnic" group.



Shusha said:


> Now, would you care to define the "Palestinians"?



Certainly. Palestinians are those people indigenous to the politico-geographic area called Palestine, regardless of their religion.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, you know very well who I'm speaking of when I say the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No I don't. I can guess, but just asked for confirmation. To me, Jewish people are those of any nationality or culture who profess to follow the religion known as "Judaism", to be equally clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are those who self-identify with Jewish culture and are accepted by the group. The Jewish culture is defined by:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well examples of those who self-identify with a particular "culture" and who are accepted by the group include Mormons, Freemasons, Branch Davidians, Aum Shinrikyo(-ists), Moonies, Jehova's Witnesses and many, many, others. None of them can be defined as an "ethnic" group.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, would you care to define the "Palestinians"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Certainly. Palestinians are those people indigenous to the politico-geographic area called Palestine, regardless of their religion.
Click to expand...


Gotcha

So you admit that there is absolutely nothing unique about these so called palestinians other than geopolitical location.

And my favorite part, according to the UNWRA persons wishing to register as palestinians only need have resided in the area for a period of 2 years. WOW

IE they are in no way a distinct or unique culture or people indigenous to the area. They are just more Arab Muslims who just happen to be there at a given time in history. An extremely select time I might add.

Took you long enough

So now that thats settled we can move on to indigenous characteristics

Which are that someone have actual ties to the land, which doesn't include having immigrated to it like the Arab Muslims did thousands of years AFTER a race and culture already developed there, the Judiac people.

Finally some progress.

Honestly Challenged, I didn't think you had it in you


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> No I don't. I can guess, but just asked for confirmation. To me, Jewish people are those of any nationality or culture who profess to follow the religion known as "Judaism", to be equally clear.
> 
> Well examples of those who self-identify with a particular "culture" and who are accepted by the group include Mormons, Freemasons, Branch Davidians, Aum Shinrikyo(-ists), Moonies, Jehova's Witnesses and many, many, others. None of them can be defined as an "ethnic" group.



Ah.  So you are going with the Jewish-is-just-a-religion fallacy, denying the Jewish people the right to a national homeland because religions don't get homelands, only ethnic groups get homelands and the Jewish people are not an ethnic group and have no distinct culture.  

Unfortunately, this argument fails before if has even begun due to the cultural qualities I have already listed which clearly demonstrate that the Jewish people have a distinct culture apart from and in addition to the religion. 

If you are insistent on discussing further, though, please provide an objective set of criteria for defining an ethnic culture as distinct from a religion, ensuring it is widely applicable to all groups.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Certainly. Palestinians are those people indigenous to the politico-geographic area called Palestine, regardless of their religion.



Define "indigenous" in this context.  What criteria determines whether or not a group is "indigenous"?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> So you are going with the Jewish-is-just-a-religion fallacy, denying the Jewish people the right to a national homeland because religions don't get homelands, only ethnic groups get homelands and the Jewish people are not an ethnic group and have no distinct culture.



It's not a fallacy; it was the majority view amongst Jewish people at least until the second world war. The Zionist "re-write" of history makes out there was an "eternal yearning amongst the Jewish people to return to their homeland from which they were exiled" whereas in actual fact the opposite was the case. From the 12th to the 19th century there was absolutely no restrictions placed on Jewish settlement anywhere within the Levant. Jewish people in the rest of the world have had the opportunity to settle in Palestine for the last 600+ years and didn't take it. Why? Because they were natives of their own countries who just happened to follow a particular religion.

Lord Montague (a member of one of the most powerful Jewish famillies in Britain, along with the Rotheschilds and Montifiores) sums up the majority view in his response to Balfour in 1917, (remarkably prophetic of him):

"I assert that there is not a Jewish nation. The members of my family, for instance, who have been in this country for generations, have no sort or kind of community of view or of desire with any Jewish family in any other country beyond the fact that they profess to a greater or less degree the same religion. It is no more true to say that a Jewish Englishman and a Jewish Moor are of the same nation than it is to say that a Christian Englishman and a Christian Frenchman are of the same nation: of the same race, perhaps, traced back through the centuries – through centuries of the history of a peculiarly adaptable race. The Prime Minister and M. Briand are, I suppose, related through the ages, one as a Welshman and the other as a Breton, but they certainly do not belong to the same nation.

When the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every country will immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and you will find a population in Palestine driving out its present inhabitants, taking all the best in the country, drawn from all quarters of the globe, speaking every language on the face of the earth, and incapable of communicating with one another except by means of an interpreter. I have always understood that this was the consequence of the building of the Tower of Babel, if ever it was built, and I certainly do not dissent from the view, commonly held, as I have always understood, by the Jews before Zionism was invented, that to bring the Jews back to form a nation in the country from which they were dispersed would require Divine leadership. I have never heard it suggested, even by their most fervent admirers, that either Mr. Balfour or Lord Rothschild would prove to be the Messiah. I claim that the lives that British Jews have led, that the aims that they have had before them, that the part that they have played in our public life and our public institutions, have entitled them to be regarded, not as British Jews, but as Jewish Britons. I would willingly disfranchise every Zionist. I would be almost tempted to proscribe the Zionist organisation as illegal and against the national interest. But I would ask of a British Government sufficient tolerance to refuse a conclusion which makes aliens and foreigners by implication, if not at once by law, of all their Jewish fellow-citizens.

I deny that Palestine is to-day associated with the Jews or properly to be regarded as a fit place for them to live in. The Ten Commandments were delivered to the Jews on Sinai. It is quite true that Palestine plays a large part in Jewish history, but so it does in modern Mahommendan history, and, after the time of the Jews, surely it plays a larger part than any other country in Christian history. The Temple may have been in Palestine, but so was the Sermon on the Mount and the Crucifixion. I would not deny to Jews in Palestine equal rights to colonisation with those who profess other religions, but a religious test of citizenship seems to me to be the only admitted by those who take a bigoted and narrow view of one particular epoch of the history of Palestine, and claim for the Jews a position to which they are not entitled. If my memory serves me right, there are three times as many Jews in the world as could possible get into Palestine if you drove out all the population that remains there now. So that only one-third will get back at the most, and what will happen to the remainder?

I can easily understand the editors of the Morning Post and of the New Witness being Zionists, and I am not in the least surprised that the non-Jews of England may welcome this policy. I have always recognised the unpopularity, much greater than some people think, of my community. We have obtained a far greater share of this country’s goods and opportunities than we are numerically entitled to. We reach on the whole maturity earlier, and therefore with people of our own age we compete unfairly. Many of us have been exclusive in our friendships and intolerant in our attitude, and I can easily understand that many a non-Jew in England wants to get rid of us. But just as there is no community of thought and mode of life among Christian Englishmen, so there is not among Jewish Englishmen. More and more we are educated in public schools and at the Universities, and take our part in the politics, in the Army, in the Civil Service, of our country. And I am glad to think that the prejudices against inter-marriage are breaking down.

But when the Jew has a national home, surely it follows that the impetus to deprive us of the rights of British citizenship must be enormously increased. Palestine will become the world’s Ghetto. Why should the Russian give the Jew equal rights? His national home is Palestine. Why does Lord Rothschild attach so much importance to the difference between British and foreign Jews? All Jews will be foreign Jews, inhabitants of the great country of Palestine. I do not know how the fortunate third will be chosen, but the Jew will have the choice, whatever country he belongs to, whatever country he loves, whatever country he regards himself as an integral part of, between going to live with people who are foreigners to him, but to whom his Christian fellow-countrymen have told him he shall belong, and of remaining as an unwelcome guest in the country that he thought he belonged to."

Memorandum of Edwin Montagu on the Anti-Semitism of the Present (British) Government | The Balfour Project

Apparently Zionists were considered anti-Semitic in those days.



Shusha said:


> Unfortunately, this argument fails before if has even begun due to the cultural qualities I have already listed which clearly demonstrate that the Jewish people have a distinct culture apart from and in addition to the religion.



So what "cultural qualities" make Jewish people "unique" that don't stem from their religious practices?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Certainly. Palestinians are those people indigenous to the politico-geographic area called Palestine, regardless of their religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define "indigenous" in this context.  What criteria determines whether or not a group is "indigenous"?
Click to expand...


Already have done, but you'll need to go back through this thread to find out where as I can't be bothered to repeat myself.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Gotcha
> 
> So you admit that there is absolutely nothing unique about these so called palestinians other than geopolitical location.



Point out to me please where I ever said there was. I've no idea what shit you are on, but it seems to be really good stuff.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gotcha
> 
> So you admit that there is absolutely nothing unique about these so called palestinians other than geopolitical location.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Point out to me please where I ever said there was. I've no idea what shit you are on, but it seems to be really good stuff.
Click to expand...


Quote

Gotcha

So you admit that there is absolutely nothing unique about these so called palestinians other than geopolitical location.

And my favorite part, according to the UNWRA persons wishing to register as palestinians only need have resided in the area for a period of 2 years. WOW

IE they are in no way a distinct or unique culture or people indigenous to the area. They are just more Arab Muslims who just happen to be there at a given time in history. An extremely select time I might add.

Took you long enough

So now that thats settled we can move on to indigenous characteristics

Which are that someone have actual ties to the land, which doesn't include having immigrated to it like the Arab Muslims did thousands of years AFTER a race and culture already developed there, the Judiac people.

End Quote 

Pathetic, so now your going to argue that you never said the pali's were indigenous to Israel. 

I thought you said you were a master-debater ( oops autocorrect is at it again ) Cause flip flopping isn't exactly a well founded technique among the more rational among us.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> It's not a fallacy; it was the majority view amongst Jewish people at least until the second world war. The Zionist "re-write" of history makes out there was an "eternal yearning amongst the Jewish people to return to their homeland from which they were exiled" whereas in actual fact the opposite was the case.



You are just plain wrong here.  The return from exile back to our homeland is a constant theme running through all the texts and commentaries.  It is a meritous act to live in Israel.  The very last words of the Tanakh are:  _Whoever there is among you of His entire people -- may HASHEM his God be with him, and let him go up!  (_make aliyah_).  _The Ramban included it in his enumeration of the 613 mitzvot.  The Talmud states that if a spouse wishes to live in Israel, one is obligated to go and if you choose not to -- it is grounds for divorce.  And in the commentary it is said that this one commandment has the worth of all the other commandments combined.  

The words "Next year in Jerusalem!" have been spoken for well over a thousand years.  

But even so -- this is all beside the point.  The Jewish people don't need to prove a thousands-year-long desire to return to their homeland in order to be considered a people.  The Jewish people, just like every other people has the right to self-determination on ancestral lands.  Your denying that right doesn't actually change that.  




> So what "cultural qualities" make Jewish people "unique" that don't stem from their religious practices?



What "cultural qualities" make ANY people "unique"?  Why must cultural qualities be divorced from religion to be valid?  Other than your poor excuse to deny the Jewish people rights that you would give any other ethnic group?


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Pathetic, so now your going to argue that you never said the pali's were indigenous to Israel.



Why should I? the Palestinians *are *indigenous to the territory that includes, for the moment, the Zionist paradise, which was created by European colonists in 1948; the so called "state of Israel".  Now you are just making things up.



Boston1 said:


> I thought you said you were a master-debater ( oops autocorrect is at it again ) Cause flip flopping isn't exactly a well founded technique among the more rational among us.



No. something else you are making up. Anyway the title of master-debater surely falls to you, you are so very good at it (I see what you mean about autocorrect...)


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> You are just plain wrong here.



Am I? I don't think so. This book, one of several available, goes into the conflict amongst mainstream Jewish groups and Zionists prior to the drafting and issuing of the Balfour letter in 1917 The Balfour Declaration: The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Schneer: 9781408809709: Books



Shusha said:


> The words "Next year in Jerusalem!" have been spoken for well over a thousand years.



Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption. Of course, the rise of Zionism and Jewish nationalism in the late 19th century created different interpretations which the article also goes into:

"What, then, does it mean for today’s Jew to utter the words “next year in Jerusalem” at the end of every Passover seder?

Redemption, Past & Future

The most straightforward answer is that “Jerusalem” refers to the future city–and its Temple–rebuilt when the Messiah comes. Most traditional Jews feel quite comfortable expressing this messianic longing at the end of the seder, just as at the end of each Shabbat Jews recite the hope that the Messiah should come “speedily in our day.” ...

Although the phrase itself entered the Haggadah only in the Middle Ages, it resonates thematically with ancient biblical themes of past and future redemption. On the seder night, each participant has personally experienced the physical redemption at that Red Sea. As the Haggadah says, “For it was not our forefathers alone whom the Holy One redeemed; He redeemed us, too, with them,” and, “In every generation, every individual must feel as if he or she personally had come out of Egypt.” Then, as we end the seder, we utter this phrase that reaches forward to the coming of the Messiah and to complete spiritual redemption, represented by Jerusalem." Next Year in Jerusalem

This goes a long way to explain why for over 600 years Jewish people did not all migrate to the Levant to create a significant Jewish presense there; they were all natives of their own countries and like Lord Montague considered themselves English, French, German, etc. Just like English, French, German Catholics or Protestants did. The idea and concept of Jewish people as an ethnicity was created in the 19th century by Zionists.



Shusha said:


> What "cultural qualities" make ANY people "unique"? Why must cultural qualities be divorced from religion to be valid?



Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.



Shusha said:


> Other than your poor excuse to deny the Jewish people rights that you would give any other ethnic group?



If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pathetic, so now your going to argue that you never said the pali's were indigenous to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why should I? the Palestinians *are *indigenous to the territory that includes, for the moment, the Zionist paradise, which was created by European colonists in 1948; the so called "state of Israel".  Now you are just making things up.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you said you were a master-debater ( oops autocorrect is at it again ) Cause flip flopping isn't exactly a well founded technique among the more rational among us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. something else you are making up. Anyway the title of master-debater surely falls to you, you are so very good at it (I see what you mean about autocorrect...)
Click to expand...








So first you say palestinian was never more than a designation of location and that only within a two year period within the mandate years. Then you claim in this latest that they are indigenous. 

Too funny 

Brilliant argument ;--) just brilliant


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pathetic, so now your going to argue that you never said the pali's were indigenous to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why should I? the Palestinians *are *indigenous to the territory that includes, for the moment, the Zionist paradise, which was created by European colonists in 1948; the so called "state of Israel".  Now you are just making things up.
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you said you were a master-debater ( oops autocorrect is at it again ) Cause flip flopping isn't exactly a well founded technique among the more rational among us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. something else you are making up. Anyway the title of master-debater surely falls to you, you are so very good at it (I see what you mean about autocorrect...)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So first you say palestinian was never more than a designation of location and that only within a two year period within the mandate years. Then you claim in this latest that they are indigenous.
> 
> Too funny
> 
> Brilliant argument ;--) just brilliant
Click to expand...


I think you are confusing me with someone else. Care to show me the post(s) where I'm supposed to have said this or are you just going to carry on constructing straw men and knocking them down?

You are correct, you are too funny to take seriously.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...



Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong. 

(Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)



> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.



You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people. 



> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.



I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

"Those tunnels that Hamas are building don't lead into Israel."  That statement is so ridiculous that it's laughable.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple. The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.



That's the Zionist "interpretation" co-opting Judaism to support it's irridentist colonial aspirations.



Shusha said:


> Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people



I've no bias against any religion or religious group; Zionism is neither.



Shusha said:


> What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination"



...because there's no such ethnic group, just a religious cult.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
Click to expand...

The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.

The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that

[m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.

7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).

Oxford Public International Law: Self​
The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.


----------



## Boston1

You are confused. 

The term palestinian was historically used in reference to Judaic people still living in Judea. 

you are twisting its meaning and applying it to the Arab Muslims who colonized the area in several waves. The smaller wave coming in about 900 CE and the larger in the early to mid 20th century when the majority of Arabs presently called by some, and incorrectly palestinians, arrived. 

And most of those were illegal immigrants arriving in the mandated period. 






As we can all see that illegal immigration was intended to maintain the status quo of population however it backfired when the Mandate administrators invented Jordan and all Arabs within the Mandate area became Jordanians from 1928 on. 

You also forgot that little part about the war. Legal citizens give up their protected persons status once they engage in, assist those engaged in or are suspected of assisting or being engaged in war. 

In which case as POWs they MUST be repatriated to their countries of origin. In this case JORDAN 

In the end there are no such people as palestinians anymore, they changed their name to Israeli's or Jordanians


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.



Cool.  The Jewish people are now the people of the place and inhabit that territory.  Done.


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1  The lands legal sovereign owners gave the Jews the land under International law
> 
> 2 The Catholic encyclopedia shows that the Ottomans counted more Jews than muslims in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem)
> 
> 3 Define Palestinians as the evidence shows that most arrived in the invasion forces from the arab league
> 
> 4 So the evidence shows that they did arrive during the invasion, care to show they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes your lies do go on and on and on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep going back to the Catholic encyclopedia.  Nothing else supports your claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from the Ottoman census records and the LoN records that are where the data comes from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, and they did not support your claim - we went over that in another thread and you kept bringing up the Catholic Encyclopedia as if it were the Bible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All team Palestine has is a novel written by a committee and that contains errors all the way through.
> 
> One of which is that the Jews own the most land on one page, and then on the next the whole of the muslim peoples are lumped together to show they inhabit more land.
> Now as any intelligent person will tell you I can own land and you can inhabit it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no idea what "novel" you are talking about.  I used Ottoman census records for my claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then how about the UN setting up the Palestinians own refugee agency because the "Palestinians" did not meet the two year residency criteria to be classed as refugees otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about it?  Are you now claiming that the Palestinians had only been their < 2 yrs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now prove that I have lied or I will be putting in a formal complaint about your behaviour and be asking that you be removed from this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you claimed that was the case without showing any evidence other than Because I say so.  The census records speak for themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I claimed what was the case?  I answered one of your posts by providing links to the thread where we had discussed population demographics in detail - and yes, the census records do speak for themselves, it's just not what you claimed and now you are claiming the Palestinians had been there less than two years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The one used by monte that has been proven fake
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No idea what it is as I haven't used it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you use Ottoman records then they will say the same as my posts, that the Jews were the majority in Palestine ( sanjak of Jerusalem ) with the muslims being a minority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the Jewish Virtual Library doesn't agree with you unless you are talking about the city of Jeruselum:  Population of Israel/Palestine (1553-Present) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am saying nothing, I am letting the UN show the facts by its actions.* And one of those is being unable to apply refugee status to the arab muslims because they did not hit the criteria for gaining citizenship of Palestine.* The Jews and Christians did not have a special agency invented for there displaced persons because they hit the criteria and had already been absorbed into other nations.
> 
> 
> 
> OK will do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What special agency was "invented" and what makes you think it was because it was due to not meeting criteria?  You're going to have to do a lot of convincing before I'll believe they had only been there under two years as there is no data to show that.
Click to expand...







 You really need to learn to read, and not see what you want to see.

 I said that in 1949 the UN had to create a new agency to deal with arab muslims who migrated to Palestine from 1947 to fight against the Jews. This meant they did not meet the criteria for citizenship, and they faced possible execution if they tried to return to their homes.

 The UNRWA has no mandate or remit to eliminate the refugee status of palestinian refugees, so it is in their interests to see the numbers rise year on year. It allows refugee status to be inherited making the Palestinians the only group with this as a right. The agency had to invent its own definition of refugee that does not cover final status. So if I declared myself Palestinian and a refugee the UNRWA would support me if I was a muslim, any other group and they would send me to the UNHCR.

Over 99% of the UNRWA employees are local Palestinians and not multi-nationals who would be fairer in how they allocated recources.


 In effect the UN is funding Palestinian terrorism, violence and war. Imagine what damage Mexico could do to California if the UN gave them $1.1 billion


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not arguing that ANYONE has less rights - you're the one doing that.  I'm just pointing out that regardless of what the mandate says, it was an agreement between powers and did not include either representatives of or promises to Jewish or Arab people nor did it have any force of law.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're arguing Israel is not legitimate/legal.. while unwittingly saying the entire Ottoman break up was.
> The British weighed the interests of the parties in their decisions, and indeed the Mandate, due to ARAB interest, was altered to split Palestine into two pieces, instead of One Jewish state as envisioned by that Mandate.
> Even after The Sole Representative of the Arabs had agreed to the creation of Palestine as a Jewish state.
> *The Weizmann-Faisal Agreement *
> That's right, *The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and Palestine/The JEWISH one. *
> (Never carried out but posted for intent/state of mind at the time)
> Faisal did spectacularly well for the Arabs in those years, getting them 99% of the Ottoman lands and reigning over Other groups such as the Kurds. He also got 'Jordan', 77% of the Mandate before lesser Palestine was even considered.
> There were no Votes/Plebiscites at that time, and even the concept would have been foreign to Arabs, and arbitrary in geography/citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate specifically did not envision a Jewish State.  In fact, the French and Italians refused to agree to the text unless it was clear that a Jewish state was not contemplated.
> 
> Churchill made this clear in the British Mandate  policy statement of 1922:
> 
> "Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become as Jewish as England is English. His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language or culture in Palestine...."
> 
> The Avalon Project : British White Paper of June 1922
Click to expand...







 Which is why we ended up with Jewish Palestine and arab Palestine, with the arabs getting 78%of Palestine.  Here we have another islamonazi propaganda apologist that cant read read English, so puts down what they think should have been written. And again he uses a consultation document as if it was a legal document setting out statutes in stone. I have just had to read another one and give my expert opinion to a government agency because they don't have the intelligence to do what is best for the people




The term _white paper_ originated with the British government, and many point to the Churchill White Paper of 1922 as the earliest well-known example under this name.[_citation needed_] In British government it is usually the less extensive version of the so-called _blue book_, both terms being derived from the colour of the document's cover.[2]

White papers are a "... tool of participatory democracy ... not [an] unalterable policy commitment."[4] "White papers have tried to perform the dual role of presenting firm government policies while at the same time inviting opinions upon them."[5]


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> I am quoting text within an official document within an academic archive, not  made-up Zionist propaganda quotes strewn all over the internet. LOL








 Nope you are mangling a policy document until it arrives at the same POV as you hold, hoping that no one will notice your islamonazi propaganda tendencies.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple. The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the Zionist "interpretation" co-opting Judaism to support it's irridentist colonial aspirations.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've no bias against any religion or religious group; Zionism is neither.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...because there's no such ethnic group, just a religious cult.
Click to expand...







 So who was it when the same things where being said prior to 1875, when Zionism had not been invented. The same words at the same holiday period

The same said by every Jew hater when they are pulled for showing an unfair amount of interest in Israel


And by what authority do you make that claim, other than you are a Jew hater ?   The legal proffesion in most civilised nations see the Jews as a race, they see atheists and humanists as a cult


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.
> 
> The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that
> 
> [m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.
> 
> 7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).
> 
> Oxford Public International Law: Self​
> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.
Click to expand...







 And again the underlying statement n your post is that the Jews are not to be included in this and should be denied all access to international laws. The Jews being 23% of the population of Palestine where granted 23 % of the land, the muslims being 77% of the population where granted 73% of the land. But you only see the Jewish part of Palestine as being Palestine don't you, when in reality it also included what is now Jordan and parts of Egypt, Saudi, Syria and Lebanon.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.



And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims -- each of whom is now seeking their own self-determination -- as in from each other.  Why would you deny it to the one group?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --



Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
Click to expand...


I find it absolutely astonishing that you can create and walk through the intellectually twisted hoop which says that Roman Christian and Arab Muslim invaders and colonizers gained rightful possession of the territory while the original inhabitants, returning to their homeland, even if you count them also as invaders and colonizers just exactly like the Roman Christians and the Arab Muslims, have no rights.  

It is intellectually dishonest.  Or incredibly stupid.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
Click to expand...





 So you are saying that there were 4 groups and that only one should have the right to self determination. The Jews were all one group and you will be pushed to find any that now don't want the right to Israel and self determination. Even thinking of saying that there should have been only 1 nation shows that you have no idea of the outcome and don't care if the Jews were wiped out, as the arab muslims have constantly stated since 1920 when they found they would be left with a tiny part of the M.E. not muslim


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
Click to expand...


You are daft. Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina. 

Even in the time of Hadrian, the Judaic people had been there for at least 3000 years previous


----------



## Phoenall

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are daft. Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina.
> 
> Even in the time of Hadrian, the Judaic people had been there for at least 3000 years previous
Click to expand...





You will find rat boy gets all confused about history and often claims that the Jewish prophets where actually Islamic prophets and followed allah. Then he will say that he is not of any religion after extolling the virtues of islam.

 A paid sock puppet for pallywood industries


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I find it absolutely astonishing that you can create and walk through the intellectually twisted hoop which says that Roman Christian and Arab Muslim invaders and colonizers gained rightful possession of the territory while the original inhabitants, returning to their homeland, even if you count them also as invaders and colonizers just exactly like the Roman Christians and the Arab Muslims, have no rights.
> 
> It is intellectually dishonest.  Or incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...


The only one walking through intellectually twisted hoops is you. Where have I said anything of the sort? Palestine has known the tread of many different "conquerors" in it's long history. Such conquerors form a "social veneer", a ruling elite. The lower orders are always there, to be ruled/exploited. These are the original inhabitants and over time they adapt and adopt, to a greater or lesser extent, the language, religion and customs of their rulers. There is no evidence in the historical record of any conqueror displacing or exterminating the whole population of this area. There was no "diaspora" forced on the whole population. Judaism and Christianity were both proselytising monotheistic religions keenly competing with each other for followers; missionaries from both religions abounded throughout the Roman Empire until the 4th-5th centuries when Christianity won out and set about systematically persecuting all other competing religions. 

The indigenous inhabitants have more rights to their ancestral homeland than any converts or descendents of converts. 

I have said before and I'll say it again, I have no objection to any Jewish person from anywhwere in the world living in Palestine, period. I do, however, strongly object to a cynical politico-religious group of European colonisers; Zionists, co-opting the religion of Judaism in order to conquer, colonise and disposess the indigenous people of the place.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina.



Never said they did. "Judeans" changed their name to "Palestinians" and when the Romans finally left, the same people eventually converted to Islam, got it now?


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the Palestinians included, at the time, TWO groups -- the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims --
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. The Palestinians included at the time, two groups; (1) the indigenous followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, most of whom had adopted and adapted to Arabic culture and (2) Jewish European Zionist colonisers who came to disposess the first group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I find it absolutely astonishing that you can create and walk through the intellectually twisted hoop which says that Roman Christian and Arab Muslim invaders and colonizers gained rightful possession of the territory while the original inhabitants, returning to their homeland, even if you count them also as invaders and colonizers just exactly like the Roman Christians and the Arab Muslims, have no rights.
> 
> It is intellectually dishonest.  Or incredibly stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only one walking through intellectually twisted hoops is you. Where have I said anything of the sort? Palestine has known the tread of many different "conquerors" in it's long history. Such conquerors form a "social veneer", a ruling elite. The lower orders are always there, to be ruled/exploited. These are the original inhabitants and over time they adapt and adopt, to a greater or lesser extent, the language, religion and customs of their rulers. There is no evidence in the historical record of any conqueror displacing or exterminating the whole population of this area. There was no "diaspora" forced on the whole population. Judaism and Christianity were both proselytising monotheistic religions keenly competing with each other for followers; missionaries from both religions abounded throughout the Roman Empire until the 4th-5th centuries when Christianity won out and set about systematically persecuting all other competing religions.
> 
> The indigenous inhabitants have more rights to their ancestral homeland than any converts or descendents of converts.
> 
> I have said before and I'll say it again, I have no objection to any Jewish person from anywhwere in the world living in Palestine, period. I do, however, strongly object to a cynical politico-religious group of European colonisers; Zionists, co-opting the religion of Judaism in order to conquer, colonise and disposess the indigenous people of the place.
Click to expand...








 So you admit that the Jews have more rights to Palestine than the converts or the descendants of islamonazi converts.

 You lose either way don't you. If they are arab then they are recent invaders. If they are converts then they fall into your criteria


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never said they did. "Judeans" changed their name to "Palestinians" and when the Romans finally left, the same people eventually converted to Islam, got it now?
Click to expand...






 So they are the converts that you say have no rights to the land, nice one rat boy you just blew big holes in your argument.



 But what about the rights of the indigenous that were still Jews and never left Palestine. The evidence for this is in the Roman histories and the Ottoman histories that show the Jews had never left Palestine and stayed right up until 1948 when they declared independence


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.
> 
> The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that
> 
> [m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.
> 
> 7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).
> 
> Oxford Public International Law: Self​
> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again the underlying statement n your post is that the Jews are not to be included in this and should be denied all access to international laws. The Jews being 23% of the population of Palestine where granted 23 % of the land, the muslims being 77% of the population where granted 73% of the land. But you only see the Jewish part of Palestine as being Palestine don't you, when in reality it also included what is now Jordan and parts of Egypt, Saudi, Syria and Lebanon.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, the native Jews became Palestinian citizens just like everyone else. There was no discrimination.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.
> 
> The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that
> 
> [m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.
> 
> 7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).
> 
> Oxford Public International Law: Self​
> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again the underlying statement n your post is that the Jews are not to be included in this and should be denied all access to international laws. The Jews being 23% of the population of Palestine where granted 23 % of the land, the muslims being 77% of the population where granted 73% of the land. But you only see the Jewish part of Palestine as being Palestine don't you, when in reality it also included what is now Jordan and parts of Egypt, Saudi, Syria and Lebanon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense, the native Jews became Palestinian citizens just like everyone else. There was no discrimination.
Click to expand...







 Read the mandate again and see where the arab muslims are mentioned as being the ones to get citizenship.  I do highlight this fact every time I post the Mandate of Palestine, so why haven't you picked up on this yet.


 And does your claim include the Jewish migrants who where invited to close settle and colonise the land ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, here's an interesting article about that from the "My Jewish Learning" website on this topic, I read the whole article butthis bit encapsulates Jewish thought throughout for most of history; spiritual redemption...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are arguing against yourself; in one post you list all the "cultural qualities" that make Jewish people "unique", now you say these "qualities" are irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jewish people were in fact an ethnic group, you might conceivably have a point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.
> 
> The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that
> 
> [m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.
> 
> 7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).
> 
> Oxford Public International Law: Self​
> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again the underlying statement n your post is that the Jews are not to be included in this and should be denied all access to international laws. The Jews being 23% of the population of Palestine where granted 23 % of the land, the muslims being 77% of the population where granted 73% of the land. But you only see the Jewish part of Palestine as being Palestine don't you, when in reality it also included what is now Jordan and parts of Egypt, Saudi, Syria and Lebanon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense, the native Jews became Palestinian citizens just like everyone else. There was no discrimination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the mandate again and see where the arab muslims are mentioned as being the ones to get citizenship.  I do highlight this fact every time I post the Mandate of Palestine, so why haven't you picked up on this yet.
> 
> 
> And does your claim include the Jewish migrants who where invited to close settle and colonise the land ?
Click to expand...

The natives were not mentioned because they already got citizenship.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> I have said before and I'll say it again, I have no objection to any Jewish person from anywhwere in the world living in Palestine, period. I do, however, strongly object to a cynical politico-religious group of European colonisers; Zionists, co-opting the religion of Judaism in order to conquer, colonise and disposess the indigenous people of the place.



You are such a hypocrite.  So, Roman Christians and Arab Muslims can conquer, invade and colonize the indigenous people and this actually transfers the rights from the indigenous peoples to the invaders (or the mix of indigenous and invaders).  But when the Jewish people conquer, invade and colonize (actually return from exile) they have no rights. 

Christianizing and Romanizing and  Islamizing and Arabizing is fine, but the territory must not be Judaized!


----------



## Shusha

Challenger 

Out of curiosity, how can you tell if a person is a "Jewish person" or a "cynical, politico-religious Zionist who has co-opted the religion of Judaism"?

The first being permitted to live in Israel and the second not?


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never said they did. "Judeans" changed their name to "Palestinians" and when the Romans finally left, the same people eventually converted to Islam, got it now?
Click to expand...


LMAO man you are struggling with this one. 

The Romans left in about 400 CE. Islam didn't hit the scene until about the 7th century and expanded into Judea in waves starting around the 9th century with the largest wave by far in the early to mid 20th century. 






Compare that to ancient Jerusalem 

Quote 

*1st century Jerusalem*[edit]

The population of Jerusalem in the time of Josephus has been estimated to be around 80,000.[4] The total population of Pharisees, the forerunners of modern Rabbinic Judaism, was around 6,000 ("exakischilioi"), according to Josephus.[5]

During the First Jewish–Roman War(66–73 CE), the population of Jerusalem was estimated at 600,000 persons by Roman historian Tacitus, while Josephus, estimated that there were as many as 1,100,000, who were killed in the war.[6] Josephus also wrote that 97,000 were sold as slaves. After the Roman victory over the Jews, as many as 115,880 dead bodies were carried out through one gate between the months of Nisan and Tammuz.[7]

Arguing that the numbers given in historical sources were usually grossly exaggerated, Hillel Geva estimated from the archaeological evidence that the actual population of Jerusalem before its 70 CE destruction was at most 20,000.[8]

End Quote 

So its fairly easy to see that the Arabs swarmed in droves to Israel mainly in the early to mid 20th century 

Also there is NO mention of Muslims population at all in Judea until the Ottoman period. 

Since you rely on WIKI so heavily I'll lower myself again 

Demographic history of Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and 

Quote 

*Muslim "relative majority"*[edit]

Henry Light, who visited Jerusalem in 1814, reported that Muslims comprised the largest portion of the 12,000 person population, but that Jews made the greatest single sect.[12] In 1818, Robert Richardson estimated the number of Jews to be 10,000, twice the number of Muslims.[13][14] His estimates, however, have been discredited on account of incontinuity with earlier and later estimates.

End Quote 

So tell us again how everyone converted ? and how all those Arab Muslims have been there for generations ? 

Seems to me that you have a few thousand Arabs who MIGHT have been there for a few generations but the vast majority of the Arab Muslims now in Israel IMMIGRATED there in THE EARLY TO MID 20TH CENTURY 

Got it ?


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not ONLY spiritual redemption -- but a physical return, an ingathering of the exiles, a rebuilt Temple.  The yearning to return to Zion is a theme running through daily prayers and texts and commentaries, through the holiday celebrations, its everywhere.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> (Wow.  What is in the water this week?  Genocides where no one is dying and no one is killing, people who are both obese and starving to death; magical tunnels thru which people are killed and kidnapped but don't exist, and now this where it never occurred to any of the Jewish people to want to actually return to Eretz Israel until 1912.  The world has gone mad.)
> 
> You misunderstand me.  I am not saying those qualities are irrelevant.  I am claiming their relevancy.  What I'm trying to get you to do is to come up with your own set of criteria or standard for deciding whether or not a people are a people and therefore have rights to a national self-determination.  But you are entirely incapable of doing so.  Or unwilling since it will expose your bias against the Jewish people.
> 
> I do have a point.  What you are doing is making a claim "the Jewish people have no rights to national self-determination" and then working backwards from there to try to justify your blatant bias.  Its like saying "black people have no rights" and then justifying that claim.  What you should be doing is working from the beginning:  Do all peoples have rights to national self-determination?  Or only some?  If only some, which criteria forms the standard?
> 
> 
> 
> The standard for self determination is the people of the place. It is the inhabitants of a territory who have that right.
> 
> The UN Charter also implicitly refers to the principle of self-determination in the part concerning colonies and other dependent territories. Art. 73 UN Charter affirms that
> 
> [m]embers of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories.
> 
> 7  Furthermore, Art. 76 (b) UN Charter provides that one of the basic objectives of the trusteeship system is to promote the ‘progressive development’ of the inhabitants of the trust territories towards ‘self-government or independence’, taking into account, inter alia, ‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned’ (see also United Nations Trusteeship System).
> 
> Oxford Public International Law: Self​
> The Palestinians were the legal inhabitants of Palestine and were Palestinian citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again the underlying statement n your post is that the Jews are not to be included in this and should be denied all access to international laws. The Jews being 23% of the population of Palestine where granted 23 % of the land, the muslims being 77% of the population where granted 73% of the land. But you only see the Jewish part of Palestine as being Palestine don't you, when in reality it also included what is now Jordan and parts of Egypt, Saudi, Syria and Lebanon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense, the native Jews became Palestinian citizens just like everyone else. There was no discrimination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the mandate again and see where the arab muslims are mentioned as being the ones to get citizenship.  I do highlight this fact every time I post the Mandate of Palestine, so why haven't you picked up on this yet.
> 
> 
> And does your claim include the Jewish migrants who where invited to close settle and colonise the land ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The natives were not mentioned because they already got citizenship.
Click to expand...







 Citizenship of Syria perhaps, but not Palestine as there was no nation of that name.

 You just cant accept it can you, that the arab muslims where being punished for their part in the war and as the losers they face losing it all. That is why they are not mentioned by any name in the Mandate of Palestine, and why they get nothing out of any of the mandates.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have said before and I'll say it again, I have no objection to any Jewish person from anywhwere in the world living in Palestine, period. I do, however, strongly object to a cynical politico-religious group of European colonisers; Zionists, co-opting the religion of Judaism in order to conquer, colonise and disposess the indigenous people of the place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are such a hypocrite.  So, Roman Christians and Arab Muslims can conquer, invade and colonize the indigenous people and this actually transfers the rights from the indigenous peoples to the invaders (or the mix of indigenous and invaders).  But when the Jewish people conquer, invade and colonize (actually return from exile) they have no rights.
> 
> Christianizing and Romanizing and  Islamizing and Arabizing is fine, but the territory must not be Judaized!
Click to expand...


For someone who constantly bitches about "name calling" on this forum, you seem to be remarkably prolific at it, but then again, that's a standard Hasbara troll tactic. 

You need to put things into the proper perspective, two points: 
First, again you confuse ethicity with religion, Romans didn't colonise the region, the indigenous population was, in the main, left to their own devices. Rome was interested in tax revenue. Romans eventually adopted Christianity as the official religion of their empire; it was up to individuals whether to convert or not; again no colonisation. The same applies to the Muslim conquest. In both cases the native indigenous population gradually adapted to the new situation and adopted the languages and customs of the conquerors, but I've been through all this before several times and I'm getting bored repeating myself. 

As for Jewish exile, that is the biggest myth of them all. Both during the Roman Empire and the later Caliphate and even during the Ottoman era there were no restrictions placed on the movements of people within these empires. The only place put "off limits" to followers of Judaism, from time to time, was the city of Jerusalem; usually after a rebellion or period of religious bigotry (i.e.) in the Crusader Kingdom period.

The second, and perhaps more important point, is the simple fact that from the Great War and especially during the "new World order" after WW2, acquiring territory by conquest or colonisation was beginning to be seen as illegal/immoral/unethical. European Zionists had the bad luck to want to colonise Palestine when eveyone else was turning their backs on colonialism and colonialist adventures; hence the "Mandate System" was invented to get around the fact that Britain and France were just  carving up the place creating new colonies..oops no, erm...Mandates (phew that was close, don't think anyone noticed)


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Muslims didn't exist when the name of Judea was changed by Hadrian to Palaestina.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never said they did. "Judeans" changed their name to "Palestinians" and when the Romans finally left, the same people eventually converted to Islam, got it now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LMAO man you are struggling with this one.
> 
> The Romans left in about 400 CE. Islam didn't hit the scene until about the 7th century and expanded into Judea in waves starting around the 9th century with the largest wave by far in the early to mid 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compare that to ancient Jerusalem
> 
> Quote
> 
> *1st century Jerusalem*[edit]
> 
> The population of Jerusalem in the time of Josephus has been estimated to be around 80,000.[4] The total population of Pharisees, the forerunners of modern Rabbinic Judaism, was around 6,000 ("exakischilioi"), according to Josephus.[5]
> 
> During the First Jewish–Roman War(66–73 CE), the population of Jerusalem was estimated at 600,000 persons by Roman historian Tacitus, while Josephus, estimated that there were as many as 1,100,000, who were killed in the war.[6] Josephus also wrote that 97,000 were sold as slaves. After the Roman victory over the Jews, as many as 115,880 dead bodies were carried out through one gate between the months of Nisan and Tammuz.[7]
> 
> Arguing that the numbers given in historical sources were usually grossly exaggerated, Hillel Geva estimated from the archaeological evidence that the actual population of Jerusalem before its 70 CE destruction was at most 20,000.[8]
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So its fairly easy to see that the Arabs swarmed in droves to Israel mainly in the early to mid 20th century
> 
> Also there is NO mention of Muslims population at all in Judea until the Ottoman period.
> 
> Since you rely on WIKI so heavily I'll lower myself again
> 
> Demographic history of Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> and
> 
> Quote
> 
> *Muslim "relative majority"*[edit]
> 
> Henry Light, who visited Jerusalem in 1814, reported that Muslims comprised the largest portion of the 12,000 person population, but that Jews made the greatest single sect.[12] In 1818, Robert Richardson estimated the number of Jews to be 10,000, twice the number of Muslims.[13][14] His estimates, however, have been discredited on account of incontinuity with earlier and later estimates.
> 
> End Quote
> 
> So tell us again how everyone converted ? and how all those Arab Muslims have been there for generations ?
> 
> Seems to me that you have a few thousand Arabs who MIGHT have been there for a few generations but the vast majority of the Arab Muslims now in Israel IMMIGRATED there in THE EARLY TO MID 20TH CENTURY
> 
> Got it ?
Click to expand...



You got a link to the graph and the data it is based on? The rest of your post is drivel, but as you keep publishing that graph at every opportunity, it piqued my interest.


----------



## Boston1

History according to a rodent, yikes. 

Not very bright, if you have to ask others to do your homework for you. 






Its not like I haven't provided this link about ten times already

Redirect Notice

Lots of data concerning this issue 






This link is pleasantly neutral 

Redirect Notice

But the data is the same. 






Let the denial begin


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> History according to a rodent, yikes.
> 
> Not very bright, if you have to ask others to do your homework for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its not like I haven't provided this link about ten times already
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> Lots of data concerning this issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This link is pleasantly neutral
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> But the data is the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let the denial begin



Thank you. I'll read through your blog when I get a moment.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have said before and I'll say it again, I have no objection to any Jewish person from anywhwere in the world living in Palestine, period. I do, however, strongly object to a cynical politico-religious group of European colonisers; Zionists, co-opting the religion of Judaism in order to conquer, colonise and disposess the indigenous people of the place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are such a hypocrite.  So, Roman Christians and Arab Muslims can conquer, invade and colonize the indigenous people and this actually transfers the rights from the indigenous peoples to the invaders (or the mix of indigenous and invaders).  But when the Jewish people conquer, invade and colonize (actually return from exile) they have no rights.
> 
> Christianizing and Romanizing and  Islamizing and Arabizing is fine, but the territory must not be Judaized!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For someone who constantly bitches about "name calling" on this forum, you seem to be remarkably prolific at it, but then again, that's a standard Hasbara troll tactic.
> 
> You need to put things into the proper perspective, two points:
> First, again you confuse ethicity with religion, Romans didn't colonise the region, the indigenous population was, in the main, left to their own devices. Rome was interested in tax revenue. Romans eventually adopted Christianity as the official religion of their empire; it was up to individuals whether to convert or not; again no colonisation. The same applies to the Muslim conquest. In both cases the native indigenous population gradually adapted to the new situation and adopted the languages and customs of the conquerors, but I've been through all this before several times and I'm getting bored repeating myself.
> 
> As for Jewish exile, that is the biggest myth of them all. Both during the Roman Empire and the later Caliphate and even during the Ottoman era there were no restrictions placed on the movements of people within these empires. The only place put "off limits" to followers of Judaism, from time to time, was the city of Jerusalem; usually after a rebellion or period of religious bigotry (i.e.) in the Crusader Kingdom period.
> 
> The second, and perhaps more important point, is the simple fact that from the Great War and especially during the "new World order" after WW2, acquiring territory by conquest or colonisation was beginning to be seen as illegal/immoral/unethical. European Zionists had the bad luck to want to colonise Palestine when eveyone else was turning their backs on colonialism and colonialist adventures; hence the "Mandate System" was invented to get around the fact that Britain and France were just  carving up the place creating new colonies..oops no, erm...Mandates (phew that was close, don't think anyone noticed)
Click to expand...








 Then do explain why the British and the French had no power in the M.E. and the LoN was handing out parcels of land as promised to Saudi minor royalty. So much so that 99.9% of the M.E. under the mandate system was handed to Saudi princes and populated by the arab muslims that lived in the area. So when did these colonies become real and then die outside of your fantasy world ?


----------



## Challenger

Phoenall said:
			
		

> Then do explain why the British and the French had no power in the M.E. and the LoN was handing out parcels of land as promised to Saudi minor royalty. So much so that 99.9% of the M.E. under the mandate system was handed to Saudi princes and populated by the arab muslims that lived in the area. So when did these colonies become real and then die outside of your fantasy world ?



Most of the time you spout drivel that doesn't merit any form of response other than perhaps a contemptuous derisive snort, but this is so bad, it's beyond laughable. Do everyone here a favour and read a decent history book.

If you do, amongst the things you'll find out is that the League of Nations was "controlled" by Britain and France, the two great imperial "super powers" of the time, from the outset. In effect, they decided between them who got what mandate and the Council and Assembly "rubber stamped" their decisions. The fact that Germany, USSR and America were not members at the time (and America never joined) exacerbated the problem.

Here's a few pointers for you or anyone else interested in the history:

Peacemakers Six Months that Changed The World: The Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and Its Attempt to End War: Amazon.co.uk: Margaret MacMillan: 9780719562372: Books

The Balfour Declaration: The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Schneer: 9781408809709: Books

A Line in the Sand: Britain, France and the struggle that shaped the Middle East: Amazon.co.uk: James Barr: 9781847394576: Books


Another thing you'd learn is that it was the banu Hashem not the banu Saud that got most of the area, i.e. Iraq, Jordan, Arabia, as clients states of Britain. That is, until the Hashemite King of Arabia became a bit too independantly minded for British tastes, then they switched their support to the Saudis

The Arabs: A History - Second Edition: Amazon.co.uk: Eugene Rogan: 9780718196783: Books


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then do explain why the British and the French had no power in the M.E. and the LoN was handing out parcels of land as promised to Saudi minor royalty. So much so that 99.9% of the M.E. under the mandate system was handed to Saudi princes and populated by the arab muslims that lived in the area. So when did these colonies become real and then die outside of your fantasy world ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the time you spout drivel that doesn't merit any form of response other than perhaps a contemptuous derisive snort, but this is so bad, it's beyond laughable. Do everyone here a favour and read a decent history book.
> 
> If you do, amongst the things you'll find out is that the League of Nations was "controlled" by Britain and France, the two great imperial "super powers" of the time, from the outset. In effect, they decided between them who got what mandate and the Council and Assembly "rubber stamped" their decisions. The fact that Germany, USSR and America were not members at the time (and America never joined) exacerbated the problem.
> 
> Here's a few pointers for you or anyone else interested in the history:
> 
> Peacemakers Six Months that Changed The World: The Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and Its Attempt to End War: Amazon.co.uk: Margaret MacMillan: 9780719562372: Books
> 
> The Balfour Declaration: The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Schneer: 9781408809709: Books
> 
> A Line in the Sand: Britain, France and the struggle that shaped the Middle East: Amazon.co.uk: James Barr: 9781847394576: Books
> 
> 
> Another thing you'd learn is that it was the banu Hashem not the banu Saud that got most of the area, i.e. Iraq, Jordan, Arabia, as clients states of Britain. That is, until the Hashemite King of Arabia became a bit too independantly minded for British tastes, then they switched their support to the Saudis
> 
> The Arabs: A History - Second Edition: Amazon.co.uk: Eugene Rogan: 9780718196783: Books
Click to expand...








In other words you don't have an intelligent answer to the glaringly obvious mistake that you are making. Slipping in adverts for books does not help either as these are just one persons views on the subject.

Now do explain how if Britain was one of the superpowers it had no real authority in Palestine and had to go cap in hand to the LoN if it wanted to do anything. Maybe you should read a contemporary history book that tells the truth, one that will tell you about the Russian mandate ( that's a new for you isn't it )to the north of the Mesopotamian mandate. The facts are the British and French found themselves powerless to ride roughshod over the M.E. as you claim as the other LoN countries would not let them. The council did not rubber stamp their decisions at all, and stopped many of them in their tracks. For starters calling a halt to Jewish migration was denied until the UN had a firm control in 1945.



 Keep trying one day you might get it right and stop posting islamonazi/neo Marxist propaganda and LIES


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Let the denial begin





Challenger said:


> Thank you. I'll read through your blog when I get a moment.



Okay, so having read through the blog, to be clear, can you confirm you are using this and other graphs to assert that there was an extraordinary increase in the Muslim population of Palestine at the start of the 20th Century and that this was due to Arab immigration?


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let the denial begin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. I'll read through your blog when I get a moment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay, so having read through the blog, to be clear, can you confirm you are using this and other graphs to assert that there was an extraordinary increase in the Muslim population of Palestine at the start of the 20th Century and that this was due to Arab immigration?
Click to expand...


I'm not basing my views of just one blog. Or blogs at all. I referenced ONE graph from ONE blog in a litany of data points I've cited from numerous sources. No conclusions can be drawn from any single source. Hell I didn't even agree with half the stuff in the one source I thought you'd find interesting, which is why I thought you'd find it interesting.

I've provided multiple sources to show the radical increase in Arab population within the second Arab colonial period.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let the denial begin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. I'll read through your blog when I get a moment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay, so having read through the blog, to be clear, can you confirm you are using this and other graphs to assert that there was an extraordinary increase in the Muslim population of Palestine at the start of the 20th Century and that this was due to Arab immigration?
Click to expand...







 Are you basing your assumptions of a 20% increase in population figures on the possibility of there being innumerable multiple births over and above the best case scenario for the civilised world, never mind the third world  where the figures would have been less than 1% at that time


----------



## Boston1

Its a no brainer 

This isn't a natural increase in population. 
Its an invasion 







I'm going to politely call it the second Arab colonial period. 

Although an argument could be made that it was a deliberate attempt to thwart the aspirations of the native people to reestablish a toehold in their native homeland through the peaceful purchase of land


----------



## montelatici

*UNITED*​*NATIONS​**A*





*General Assembly*












 A/364
3 September 1947

*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *​*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY​*​*​*


*UNITED NATIONS*
*SPECIAL COMMITTEE*
*ON PALESTINE*



*REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

*VOLUME 1*





*Lake Success*
*New York*
*1947*








(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. *

*https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3*


----------



## Boston1

LMAO

Sorry but A the UN isn't exactly the census bureau 
and B  the 57 0r 58 country strong Muslim voting block in the UN isn't exactly an unbiassed reporter of middle eastern issues.

In a nut shell I'm still waiting to hear how the second Arab colonial period expansion in Judea could possibly be from simple fecundity


----------



## montelatici

Hmmm, the same UN people that outvoted the Arab states  to give the European Jews a part of Palestine wrote that resolution. How peculiar. LOL


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hmmm, the same UN people that outvoted the Arab states  to give the European Jews a part of Palestine wrote that resolution. How peculiar. LOL


Hmmm. The same Arabs/Moslems who worship a 1,400 year old hate and war manual that vilifies non-islamists have yet to claw their way out of their self-inflicted Dark Ages. How typical. LOL.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hmmm, the same UN people that outvoted the Arab states  to give the European Jews a part of Palestine wrote that resolution. How peculiar. LOL








 All in line with International laws of the time, after all the Palestinians did lose the war they took part in from 1914 and had to pay the price for backing the wrong side


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Sorry but A the UN isn't exactly the census bureau
> and B the 57 0r 58 country strong Muslim voting block in the UN isn't exactly an unbiassed reporter of middle eastern issues.
> 
> In a nut shell I'm still waiting to hear how the second Arab colonial period expansion in Judea could possibly be from simple fecundity



No, but it received it's information from the Mandatory power, Britain, who provided the census data widely recognised by all sides as being the most reliably accurate. The UN doesn't get to vote on the accuracy of data in any event. Having read the blog accompanying your graph, I'm waiting to see any evidence of a "second Arab colonial period".  Palestinian fecundity has never been an issue, even with Jewish demographers. The only person with a bee in her bonnet about this is the widely debunked Joan Peters...and you.


----------



## Challenger

Hollie said:


> worship a 1,400 year old hate and war manual



Sounds more like the Old Testement/Torah to me...


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but A the UN isn't exactly the census bureau
> and B the 57 0r 58 country strong Muslim voting block in the UN isn't exactly an unbiassed reporter of middle eastern issues.
> 
> In a nut shell I'm still waiting to hear how the second Arab colonial period expansion in Judea could possibly be from simple fecundity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, but it received it's information from the Mandatory power, Britain, who provided the census data widely recognised by all sides as being the most reliably accurate. The UN doesn't get to vote on the accuracy of data in any event. Having read the blog accompanying your graph, I'm waiting to see any evidence of a "second Arab colonial period".  Palestinian fecundity has never been an issue, even with Jewish demographers. The only person with a bee in her bonnet about this is the widely debunked Joan Peters...and you.
Click to expand...


Wrong, it obtained its census data from each side individually, one side the Judaic side reported honestly and attempted to keep good records, the other side the Arabs, refused to consider any arabs as immigrants and reported only partial totals. Refusing to conduct anything but estimates. 

You fail to understand the level of deceit involved in the Arab narrative

The vast majority of Arab Muslims in the mandate area virtually have to be immigrants. 






There is no other way to explain this graph. 

The simple fact is that the Arab Muslims originated on the Arab Peninsula and invaded/colonized the rest of N Africa and points beyond


----------



## Humanity

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, the same UN people that outvoted the Arab states  to give the European Jews a part of Palestine wrote that resolution. How peculiar. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All in line with International laws of the time, after all the Palestinians did lose the war they took part in from 1914 and had to pay the price for backing the wrong side
Click to expand...


Concentration Camps were in line with international law in Nazi Germany....

Laws change for a reason Phoney... Hopefully for the better of humanity!

Indigenous and non indigenous peoples were rounded up and thrown into concentration camps...

Were the German Jews indigenous to Germany?

The clue there is "German Jews"...


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> There is no other way to explain this graph.



So now you change your graph, where's the underlying data for this one? care to provide a link or have you just made this one up as appears to be your habit?

So far the data you've produced only points to a Jewish/Zionist invasion.


----------



## Phoenall

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but A the UN isn't exactly the census bureau
> and B the 57 0r 58 country strong Muslim voting block in the UN isn't exactly an unbiassed reporter of middle eastern issues.
> 
> In a nut shell I'm still waiting to hear how the second Arab colonial period expansion in Judea could possibly be from simple fecundity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, but it received it's information from the Mandatory power, Britain, who provided the census data widely recognised by all sides as being the most reliably accurate. The UN doesn't get to vote on the accuracy of data in any event. Having read the blog accompanying your graph, I'm waiting to see any evidence of a "second Arab colonial period".  Palestinian fecundity has never been an issue, even with Jewish demographers. The only person with a bee in her bonnet about this is the widely debunked Joan Peters...and you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong, it obtained its census data from each side individually, one side the Judaic side reported honestly and attempted to keep good records, the other side the Arabs, refused to consider any arabs as immigrants and reported only partial totals. Refusing to conduct anything but estimates.
> 
> You fail to understand the level of deceit involved in the Arab narrative
> 
> The vast majority of Arab Muslims in the mandate area virtually have to be immigrants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no other way to explain this graph.
> 
> The simple fact is that the Arab Muslims originated on the Arab Peninsula and invaded/colonized the rest of N Africa and points beyond
Click to expand...





The members of team Palestine forget that one of their poster children stood up in the house of Commons and told the assembled politicians that the arab muslims had flooded into Palestine as illegal immigrants. That this was the only way the numbers of arab muslims could have increased in the numbers they did. His was a first hand experience of the problem, and not the re-telling of a report passed through countless hands altered and embellished at every stop


----------



## Phoenall

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, the same UN people that outvoted the Arab states  to give the European Jews a part of Palestine wrote that resolution. How peculiar. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All in line with International laws of the time, after all the Palestinians did lose the war they took part in from 1914 and had to pay the price for backing the wrong side
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Concentration Camps were in line with international law in Nazi Germany....
> 
> Laws change for a reason Phoney... Hopefully for the better of humanity!
> 
> Indigenous and non indigenous peoples were rounded up and thrown into concentration camps...
> 
> Were the German Jews indigenous to Germany?
> 
> The clue there is "German Jews"...
Click to expand...








 Don't you mean in line with German law

 Yes laws change, but not those based on treaties which are more difficult to alter

 True and it was the work of socialist workers just as it was in Russia a few years earlier

 YES as they had lived there since being brought as slaves by the Roman Empire

 The clue here is your inability to keep on topic, so have to deflect when you are shown to be wrong.

 Did the arab muslims we now know as Palestinians not side with the Ottomans and fight against the British

 Did they not lose that war and subsequently lose any rights to claim the land they passed through every year


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no other way to explain this graph.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So now you change your graph, where's the underlying data for this one? care to provide a link or have you just made this one up as appears to be your habit?
> 
> So far the data you've produced only points to a Jewish/Zionist invasion.
Click to expand...







 The report by Churchill to the house of his first hand experience in Palestine calls you a LIAR and points to a massive arab muslim illegal migration in the period from 1920 till 1945


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no other way to explain this graph.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So now you change your graph, where's the underlying data for this one? care to provide a link or have you just made this one up as appears to be your habit?
> 
> So far the data you've produced only points to a Jewish/Zionist invasion.
Click to expand...


So in your mind now having multiple sources for the information thats a bad thing ? Well thats just brilliant. And a graph showing ARAB immigration is somehow indicative of Israeli success ? 

Damn, you are confused. 

You know any rational observer would read that last and wonder just why reality is so difficult for you. The Arab Muslims developed on the Arab peninsula and the Judaic people developed in Judea. Its really quite simple, unless that is your so blinded by hate you think all the world is yours and nobody else's. 

Its another aspect of you and your ilk just changing definitions to suit your views 

Quote 

*Indigenous people* are *people defined* in international or national legislation as having a set of specific rights based on their historical ties to a particular territory, and their cultural or historical distinctiveness from other populations that are often politically dominant.

End Quote 

Although national legislation is not a prerequisite. 

Quote 

in·dig·e·nous

inˈdijənəs/

_adjective_

adjective: *indigenous*


originating or occurring naturally in a particular place; native."the indigenous peoples of Siberia"
_synonyms:_
native, original, aboriginal, autochthonous;

End Quote 

And again 

Quote 

indigenous

in·dig·e·nous  (ĭn-dĭj′ə-nəs)

_adj._

*1. *Originating, growing, or produced in a certain place or region. See Synonyms at *native*.

*2.*

*a. *Being a member of the original inhabitants of a particular place.

*b. *Of, belonging to, or characteristic of such inhabitants.


[From Latin indigena, _a native_; see *indigene*.]


*in·dig′e·nous·ly*_ adv._

End Quote 

Not to much wiggle room on that one eh mate. Looks like if your culture and people developed somewhere else and then moved to a new area your not indigenous to that new area now are you ;--) 

The Arab Muslims aren't from Judea ergo they are NOT the indigenous people


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> So in your mind now having multiple sources for the information thats a bad thing ?



Just a source for the data in that graph would be sufficient, otherwise it just looks like you are making things up.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> The Arab Muslims aren't from Judea ergo they are NOT the indigenous people



Unfortunately for your "argument" the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine were a mix of ethnicities, some of whom adopted Judaism, or Christianity, or any of the many Pagan cults of the area over the centuries until ultimately they converted to Islam and adopted Arab culture.

In the 13th Century Judaism was "reinvented" in Palestine by Moses ben Nahman, a Jewish Spaniard who wrote at the time that when he arrived there were only a total of 12 Jewish "worshippers" in Jerusalem. Moses is widely credited with re-introducing Judaism into the area; building a synagogue and encouraging the establishment of yeshivas. Ironically, in his correspndence he writes how, living in Jerusalem he felt the strong pangs of his exile from Spain.

The European Jewish Zionist colonists were, on the other hand, descendants of European converts, and after 1948, more Jewish immigrants arrived Berbers from Morocco and Tunisia; Jewish Arabs from Iraq and elswhere. Religion, however, does not on its own grant indigenous status.


----------



## Boston1

Knowing how blinded you are by Joooo hatred and hasbara nonsense how about a number of sources, although I'm sure you'll find something to complain about. 


arab immigration

The fact of Arab Immigration during the early to mid 20 century is so well established that you really don't hear it questioned much anymore but yeah. 

its a no brainer 

You can plot the graph yourself if you are having trouble reading 
















Just be sure and use enough sources to get a fair representation. Also one cannot go with the term Immigrant as the Arabs didn't seem to comprehend the term back in the times specified or even today for that matter.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Muslims aren't from Judea ergo they are NOT the indigenous people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately for your "argument" the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine were a mix of ethnicities, some of whom adopted Judaism, or Christianity, or any of the many Pagan cults of the area over the centuries until ultimately they converted to Islam and adopted Arab culture.
> 
> In the 13th Century Judaism was "reinvented" in Palestine by Moses ben Nahman, a Jewish Spaniard who wrote at the time that when he arrived there were only a total of 12 Jewish "worshippers" in Jerusalem. Moses is widely credited with re-introducing Judaism into the area; building a synagogue and encouraging the establishment of yeshivas. Ironically, in his correspndence he writes how, living in Jerusalem he felt the strong pangs of his exile from Spain.
> 
> The European Jewish Zionist colonists were, on the other hand, descendants of European converts, and after 1948, more Jewish immigrants arrived Berbers from Morocco and Tunisia; Jewish Arabs from Iraq and elswhere. Religion, however, does not on its own grant indigenous status.
Click to expand...







Thank you for the laughs, man, you are better than the morning funnies any day. 

You cannot be seriously suggesting that Judaism was lost and then rediscovered in the 13th century, thats just a hoot if there ever was one. 

Talk about desperate attempts to disenfranchise a native peoples existence. WOW

OK so do go on about how the Arab Muslims DIDN"T evolve on the Arab Peninsula ;--)


----------



## montelatici

Most Arab-speaking people outside of Arabia have very  Arabian genetic background.  Just as most Spanish speaking people outside of Spain have little Spanish genetic background.

As far as immigration.  The facts are clear as per the official census figures of the Mandatory as reported by the UN prior to partition in UN Resolution A 364. 

"(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths."*



*A/364 of 3 September 1947*


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> You cannot be seriously suggesting that Judaism was lost and then rediscovered in the 13th century, thats just a hoot if there ever was one.



*sigh* I'm not suggesting anything, the person credited with re-introducing Judaism into Palestine said that Judaism was all but extinct there when he arrived, in 1267, if I remember correctly. He could only find 2 Jewish families in Jerusalem, a total of 12 individuals. Now be a good boy and run along and practice your English comprehension, then read a few history books instead of Joan Peters' fantasy novel.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Knowing how blinded you are by Joooo hatred and hasbara nonsense how about a number of sources, although I'm sure you'll find something to complain about.
> 
> 
> arab immigration
> 
> The fact of Arab Immigration during the early to mid 20 century is so well established that you really don't hear it questioned much anymore but yeah.
> 
> its a no brainer
> 
> You can plot the graph yourself if you are having trouble reading
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just be sure and use enough sources to get a fair representation. Also one cannot go with the term Immigrant as the Arabs didn't seem to comprehend the term back in the times specified or even today for that matter.



I'll take this as a, "No I can't provide a link to the data behind the graph I submitted, I Bison 1, habitually make things up."


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot be seriously suggesting that Judaism was lost and then rediscovered in the 13th century, thats just a hoot if there ever was one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *sigh* I'm not suggesting anything, the person credited with re-introducing Judaism into Palestine said that Judaism was all but extinct there when he arrived, in 1267, if I remember correctly. He could only find 2 Jewish families in Jerusalem, a total of 12 individuals. Now be a good boy and run along and practice your English comprehension, then read a few history books instead of Joan Peters' fantasy novel.
Click to expand...







Pfffft You can't be serious. So you're saying that after the countless pogroms in the area designed to wipe out the Judiac people one guy goes back and says "wow, where are all the jews" and "I don't see anyone praying at the wall" 

You can't be serious. 

And what does that have to do with indigenous people, that the indigenous people were run off a few times. Guess what, they survived and are now back, and there is nothing you can do about it. 

Its a win for native peoples everywhere


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Knowing how blinded you are by Joooo hatred and hasbara nonsense how about a number of sources, although I'm sure you'll find something to complain about.
> 
> 
> arab immigration
> 
> The fact of Arab Immigration during the early to mid 20 century is so well established that you really don't hear it questioned much anymore but yeah.
> 
> its a no brainer
> 
> You can plot the graph yourself if you are having trouble reading
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just be sure and use enough sources to get a fair representation. Also one cannot go with the term Immigrant as the Arabs didn't seem to comprehend the term back in the times specified or even today for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll take this as a, "No I can't provide a link to the data behind the graph I submitted, I Bison 1, habitually make things up."
Click to expand...


When your response is a lie. 

I'll take that as a lie. 

And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Muslims aren't from Judea ergo they are NOT the indigenous people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately for your "argument" the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine were a mix of ethnicities, some of whom adopted Judaism, or Christianity, or any of the many Pagan cults of the area over the centuries until ultimately they converted to Islam and adopted Arab culture.
> 
> In the 13th Century Judaism was "reinvented" in Palestine by Moses ben Nahman, a Jewish Spaniard who wrote at the time that when he arrived there were only a total of 12 Jewish "worshippers" in Jerusalem. Moses is widely credited with re-introducing Judaism into the area; building a synagogue and encouraging the establishment of yeshivas. Ironically, in his correspndence he writes how, living in Jerusalem he felt the strong pangs of his exile from Spain.
> 
> The European Jewish Zionist colonists were, on the other hand, descendants of European converts, and after 1948, more Jewish immigrants arrived Berbers from Morocco and Tunisia; Jewish Arabs from Iraq and elswhere. Religion, however, does not on its own grant indigenous status.
Click to expand...






 You know how you say if the Jews are from Europe they cant be indigenous, well you must also say if the arabs are from arabia they cant be indigenous. Also if the muslims are from Palestine they cant be arab, meaning they cant win when it comes to scientific method.
 Now about the official recorded speech by the British foreign minister that stated the arab muslims were flooding palestine with illegal immigrants from 1920 onwards. Why do you deny his words yet accept his white paper.
 The evidence shows that the Jews outnumbered the muslims in the sanjak of Jerusalem for many a year until the sudden influx of muslims in the 1920's


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Most Arab-speaking people outside of Arabia have very  Arabian genetic background.  Just as most Spanish speaking people outside of Spain have little Spanish genetic background.
> 
> As far as immigration.  The facts are clear as per the official census figures of the Mandatory as reported by the UN prior to partition in UN Resolution A 364.
> 
> "(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths."*
> 
> 
> 
> *A/364 of 3 September 1947*









 Did you read this in your link freddy boy, that shows it is illegal for the muslims to live in Israel


 3. During the transitional period, no Jew shall be permitted to establish residence in the area of the proposed Arab State, and no Arab shall be permitted to establish residence in the area of the proposed Jewish State, except by special leave of the Administration.

(b) Settling all international disputes in which the State may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

(c) Accepting the obligation of the State to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or' political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

_(d)_ Guaranteeing to all persons equal and non-discriminatory rights in civil, political and religious matters and the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religious worship, language, speech and publication, education, assembly and association.

_(e)_ Preserving freedom of transit and visit for all residents and citizens of the other State in Palestine and the City of Jerusalem, subject to security considerations; provided that each State shall control residence within its borders.




 All of these are breached by the Palestinians daily, so they should be called to face the charges


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot be seriously suggesting that Judaism was lost and then rediscovered in the 13th century, thats just a hoot if there ever was one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *sigh* I'm not suggesting anything, the person credited with re-introducing Judaism into Palestine said that Judaism was all but extinct there when he arrived, in 1267, if I remember correctly. He could only find 2 Jewish families in Jerusalem, a total of 12 individuals. Now be a good boy and run along and practice your English comprehension, then read a few history books instead of Joan Peters' fantasy novel.
Click to expand...







 And what is your source for this, which as you know is different to what the person allegedly stated... In other words who claimed he said this ?


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Pfffft You can't be serious. So you're saying that after the countless pogroms in the area designed to wipe out the Judiac people one guy goes back and says "wow, where are all the jews" and "I don't see anyone praying at the wall"
> 
> You can't be serious.
> 
> And what does that have to do with indigenous people, that the indigenous people were run off a few times. Guess what, they survived and are now back, and there is nothing you can do about it.
> 
> Its a win for native peoples everywhere



"Countless pogroms in the area designed to wipe out the Judiac people" Please provide evidence to support this assertion, or are you just making things up as usual?

"the indigenous people were run off a few times." Please provide evidence to support this assertion, or are you just making things up as usual?


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.



From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich. 

There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.
> 
> There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
Click to expand...


1)  Judaic=Jewish, tomaito=tamahto (both tomatoes).

2)  Are you saying there was no land called Canaan in ancient times?

3)  Churchill (who lived in those times) said that the Arabs have crowded into Palestine in such great numbers, so that all of World Jewry could not compete with them.

4)  The word Hasbara (which simply means "public relations" in Hebrew, from the root word "explanation") has been co-opted by Arab sympathizers to mean something negative.  Boston is just turning the tables on you.


----------



## Challenger

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.
> 
> There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1)  Judaic=Jewish, tomaito=tamahto (both tomatoes).
> 
> 2)  Are you saying there was no land called Canaan in ancient times?
> 
> 3)  Churchill (who lived in those times) said that the Arabs have crowded into Palestine in such great numbers, so that all of World Jewry could not compete with them.
> 
> 4)  The word Hasbara (which simply means "public relations" in Hebrew, from the root word "explanation") has been co-opted by Arab sympathizers to mean something negative.  Boston is just turning the tables on you.
Click to expand...


1) In that it appertains to a religious cult, I can accept that, but an ethnicity? No.
2) Where was the georgraphical feature "Canaan Valley"?
3) Just because Churchill said something dosn't make it necessarily true; Churchill was a well known racist who despised "brown people" in general.
4) Hasbara is what it is, the Zionists use the term "Public Deplomacy", pro-Palestinians call it "Israeli Bullshit"

Boston1 just likes to make things up.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.
> 
> There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1)  Judaic=Jewish, tomaito=tamahto (both tomatoes).
> 
> 2)  Are you saying there was no land called Canaan in ancient times?
> 
> 3)  Churchill (who lived in those times) said that the Arabs have crowded into Palestine in such great numbers, so that all of World Jewry could not compete with them.
> 
> 4)  The word Hasbara (which simply means "public relations" in Hebrew, from the root word "explanation") has been co-opted by Arab sympathizers to mean something negative.  Boston is just turning the tables on you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) In that it appertains to a religious cult, I can accept that, but an ethnicity? No.
> 2) Where was the georgraphical feature "Canaan Valley"?
> 3) Just because Churchill said something dosn't make it necessarily true; Churchill was a well known racist who despised "brown people" in general.
> 4) Hasbara is what it is, the Zionists use the term "Public Deplomacy", pro-Palestinians call it "Israeli Bullshit"
> 
> Boston1 just likes to make things up.
Click to expand...







 Is that because it would burst your bubble and show you to be a rabid Jew hater

 Didn't you see the map that showed it, or are you suffering from selective vision again

 Not that when you rant about his white paper is it, is that because you can twist it to meet your POV

 So the people who speak the language it is part of would know better than you and 2 billion semiliterate muslim's



 IT IS YOU THAT MAKES THINGS UP BECAUSE YOU ARE ONE OF THE SHEEPLE


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.
> 
> There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
Click to expand...


Note to the mods

Can we get these last few posts by Challenged moved over to the delusions thread where they belong, they guys gone off the deep end completely 

Thank you


----------



## Boston1

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your response is a lie.
> 
> I'll take that as a lie.
> 
> And obviously you have no rebuttal to having been supplied with the source information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time, who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.
> 
> There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1)  Judaic=Jewish, tomaito=tamahto (both tomatoes).
> 
> 2)  Are you saying there was no land called Canaan in ancient times?
> 
> 3)  Churchill (who lived in those times) said that the Arabs have crowded into Palestine in such great numbers, so that all of World Jewry could not compete with them.
> 
> 4)  The word Hasbara (which simply means "public relations" in Hebrew, from the root word "explanation") has been co-opted by Arab sympathizers to mean something negative.  Boston is just turning the tables on you.
Click to expand...


And here I thought hasbara meant 

Complete and utter racist nonsense spoken by terrorist and Arab Muslim sympathizers. 

Which I guess does mean public relations, the Arab Muslim terrorist way. 

So I got it right ?


----------



## abu afak

Challenger said:


> *From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time,* who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.



Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The *Jews* (/dʒuːz/;[11] Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 _Yehudim_, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]), also known as the *Jewish People*, are an* ethnoreligious group*[12] originating from the Israelites, or Hebrews, of the Ancient Near East.[13][14] *Jewish ethnicity, nationhood and religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish Nation*,[15][16][17] while its observance varies from strict observance to complete nonobservance.

Jews originated as a national and religious group in the Middle East during the Second Millennium BCE,[10] in the part of the Levant known as the Land of Israel.[18]
*The Merneptah Stele appears to confirm the existence of a people of Israel, associated with the god El,[19] somewhere in Canaan as far back as the 13th century BCE.*[20][21] *The Israelites, as an outgrowth of the Canaanite population*,[22] consolidated their hold with the emergence of the Kingdom of Israel, and the Kingdom of Judah. Some consider that these Canaanite sedentary Israelites melded with incoming nomadic groups known as 'Hebrews'.[23]...​`


----------



## Challenger

abu afak said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> *From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time,* who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The *Jews* (/dʒuːz/;[11] Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 _Yehudim_, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]), also known as the *Jewish People*, are an* ethnoreligious group*[12] originating from the Israelites, or Hebrews, of the Ancient Near East.[13][14] *Jewish ethnicity, nationhood and religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish Nation*,[15][16][17] while its observance varies from strict observance to complete nonobservance.
> 
> Jews originated as a national and religious group in the Middle East during the Second Millennium BCE,[10] in the part of the Levant known as the Land of Israel.[18]
> *The Merneptah Stele appears to confirm the existence of a people of Israel, associated with the god El,[19] somewhere in Canaan as far back as the 13th century BCE.*[20][21] *The Israelites, as an outgrowth of the Canaanite population*,[22] consolidated their hold with the emergence of the Kingdom of Israel, and the Kingdom of Judah. Some consider that these Canaanite sedentary Israelites melded with incoming nomadic groups known as 'Hebrews'.[23]...​`
Click to expand...


"Judaic" not "Jewish" and of course, it's in Wikipedia so it HAS to be true. Go talk to Phoenall about Wikipedia....


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> *From someone who invented a "Judaic People" who lived in a mythical, non-existant "Canaan Valley", once upon a time,* who then declares there were "waves of Arab migration" and then presents a graph that demonstrates quite the opposite and is unable to provide source data for that graph but instead substitutes another graph again without supporting source data; who patheticaly tries to reinvent "Hasbara" as an Islamist concept and then accuses ME of lying, that's rich.There's nothing I need to rebut because your own "evidence" does it for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The *Jews* (/dʒuːz/;[11] Hebrew: יְהוּדִים ISO 259-3 _Yehudim_, Israeli pronunciation [jehuˈdim]), also known as the *Jewish People*, are an* ethnoreligious group*[12] originating from the Israelites, or Hebrews, of the Ancient Near East.[13][14] *Jewish ethnicity, nationhood and religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish Nation*,[15][16][17] while its observance varies from strict observance to complete nonobservance.
> 
> Jews originated as a national and religious group in the Middle East during the Second Millennium BCE,[10] in the part of the Levant known as the Land of Israel.[18]
> *The Merneptah Stele appears to confirm the existence of a people of Israel, associated with the god El,[19] somewhere in Canaan as far back as the 13th century BCE.*[20][21] *The Israelites, as an outgrowth of the Canaanite population*,[22] consolidated their hold with the emergence of the Kingdom of Israel, and the Kingdom of Judah. Some consider that these Canaanite sedentary Israelites melded with incoming nomadic groups known as 'Hebrews'.[23]...​`
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Judaic" not "Jewish" and of course, it's in Wikipedia so it HAS to be true. Go talk to Phoenall about Wikipedia....
Click to expand...








 Why don't you talk to monte then and ask him how many entries he has "edited" to meet with his personal POV


----------



## dosmin.pavas

Palestine is nothing more than a label. what we are observing today is a game of playing with labels to cause confusion.

The Palestinian cause is a political cause. There are Palestinians and Zionists. The people are the Arabs and The Jews. There is no such thing as a Palestinian national Identity.
Zuhir Mohsen - a member of the PLO - says:
"The Palestinian people do not exist ... Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism. "

Before 1948 The Arabs refused to call themselves Palestinian as in the picture bellow:





Indeed at those times The Jews were called Palestinians:





in 1964 PLO created the Arab Palestinian flag (by applying a minor modification to the Jordanian flag) with the intention of fabricating history and pretending Arabs are indigenous to Palestine:





Palestine comes from the Hebrew word pilishtim which means *invaders*. When the Romans conquered the Jews they called them Palestinians to humiliate them. For 2000 years the Jews were humiliated until the declared independence and stopped calling themselves Palestinians.

So calling people Palestinian is really a game of playing with labels and has no root in reality.

Now the all important question is that were do today's Arabs and Jews come from? More than 95% of Arabs and Jews in Israel are descendant of those who immigrated to British mandate for Palestine after 1920 Balfour declaration. 5% of them were living there for hundreds (in case of Arabs) or even thousands of years (in case of Jews). Many of the Arab Muslims were Jews who were forced converts. Depending on time and place Jews or Arabs were a majority in the area:





So except for a minority, they are all immigrants. The Jews have a ancestral connection to the land while the Arabs don't. I think it is safe to say that Jews come from Judea and Arabs come from Arabia. Also note worthy that most of the Israeli Jews are Arab Jews who were expelled from the Arab world:


----------



## montelatici

Palestinians, Muslim and Christians are the same people that have always lived in the area.  The fact that some converted to Islam does not make them Arabians.  Arab is a language distinction.  A Moroccan has very little in common with an Arabian genetically.  

As far as Jews being a majority in Jerusalem in 1864, they weren't even a majority in 1896 after years of Jewish invasion.  There are film documentaries to the effect. The Jewish propaganda is so easily debunked by fact.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Palestinians, Muslim and Christians are the same people that have always lived in the area.  The fact that some converted to Islam does not make them Arabians.  Arab is a language distinction.  A Moroccan has very little in common with an Arabian genetically.
> 
> As far as Jews being a majority in Jerusalem in 1864, they weren't even a majority in 1896 after years of Jewish invasion.  There are film documentaries to the effect. The Jewish propaganda is so easily debunked by fact.






Then they cant be arab's and claim they are fighting for arab nationalism. The fact that some Jews and Christians were forcibly converted to islam means nothing as that is against International law.   The arabs are a distinct race as are the majority of Jews, which is why the DNA of both groups is so markedly different.  
 The Ottomans show that the Jews were the majority as does the Catholic encyclopedia and all you have is some booklet that used muslims to collect the date and send it to France for the committee to mull over. Not that long before this the British foreign secretary went to Palestine and saw for himself the masses of muslims invading the land. Much as the hordes are invading Europe now.

 Your islamnazi propaganda and LIES are so easily disproven by cold hard facts from multiple sources and not just one that was always taken with a pinch of salt


----------



## dosmin.pavas

> Palestinians, Muslim and Christians are the same people that have always lived in the area. The fact that some converted to Islam does not make them Arabians. Arab is a language distinction. A Moroccan has very little in common with an Arabian genetically.
> 
> As far as Jews being a majority in Jerusalem in 1864, they weren't even a majority in 1896 after years of Jewish invasion. There are film documentaries to the effect. The Jewish propaganda is so easily debunked by fact.


I prefer to refrain from derogatory and questionable phrases such as Jewish invasion and Jewish propaganda.

You did not counter any of my claims but rather agreed with them. I said according to time and place, sometimes Jews were majority, sometimes Arabs. your statement only supports mine. The rest of your statements is a game of playing with Label of Palestine.

You did not counter any of my arguments:
1- The Mass Arab immigration.
2- a label does not make someone indigenous.
3- Jews were called Palestinians (which means Palestine is just a label).
4- Palestinian Arab flag was created in 1964.

You actually need to counter my points you know!

I am aware that the Arabs do not consider Jews human, let alone Arabs. I am baffled as to why you say Israeli Jews do not have Arab roots.


----------



## montelatici

1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.

*"UNITED*








*General Assembly*













 A/364
3 September 1947
*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *
*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*


*SUPPLEMENT No. 11*

*UNITED NATIONS*
*SPECIAL COMMITTEE*
*ON PALESTINE*

*REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

*VOLUME 1*

*Lake Success*
*New York*
*1947*
*
*
b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*

2.  Non sequitur

3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.

*"PALESTINE.*

*CORRESPONDENCE *
*WITH THE*
*PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION*
*AND THE *
*ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*

*Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.*
*JUNE, 1922.*
*LONDON:

*
HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
_February 21st, _1922.

Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE


4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.

Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> 1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.
> 
> *"UNITED*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> 
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947
> 
> *
> b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> 2.  Non sequitur
> 
> 3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.
> 
> *"PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> 
> *
> HOTEL CECIL,
> London, W.C.,
> _February 21st, _1922.
> 
> Sir,
> We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."
> 
> https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE
> 
> 
> 4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.
> 
> Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.


There actually was a mass Arab-Moslem invasion of the geographic region called "Palestine". That invasion was a part of the Turkish gee-had conquest. 

You're really ignorant of the history surrounding the Islamist conquest.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> 1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.
> 
> *"UNITED*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> 
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947
> 
> *
> b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> 2.  Non sequitur
> 
> 3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.
> 
> *"PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> 
> *
> HOTEL CECIL,
> London, W.C.,
> _February 21st, _1922.
> 
> Sir,
> We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."
> 
> https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE
> 
> 
> 4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.
> 
> Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.








 How come you never post the UN's denial to the arab delegation then freddy, could it be you want people to think the UN was on their side.


----------



## dosmin.pavas

montelatici said:


> 1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.
> 
> *"UNITED*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> 
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947
> 
> *
> b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> 2.  Non sequitur
> 
> 3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.
> 
> *"PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> 
> *
> HOTEL CECIL,
> London, W.C.,
> _February 21st, _1922.
> 
> Sir,
> We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."
> 
> https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE
> 
> 
> 4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.
> 
> Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.



1- UN is the place where lies are told. Its the same place that condemned the peace between Israel and Egypt! But hey nice try! 
2- I'm glad we both agree game of playing with labels is a non sequitur.

3- While externally they were called Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews The Arabs rarely refereed to themselves As Palestinians. They didn't like the label as they considered it to be a Jewish Label. but it does not matter anyway because as we agreed earlier this is nothing more than a label and therefore a non sequitur.

4- I'm glad that we both agree that the flag was the flag of the Arab revolt and was not the flag of a sovereign Arab country called Palestine. Palestine is an imaginary country which has never existed. The flag was not flag of PLO until 1964.

PS: I am not saying that Arabs in Judea and Samrea do not deserve to be free (i.e. live in a free democracy) just like I do not call for the destruction of US. both are successful settler colonial projects.


----------



## montelatici

1.  We have the source data as reported by the British Mandatory.  You can't seem to accept the facts.


. 



Vol. 1, page 185

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University

2.  You don't appear to understand the term non-sequitur.  What doesn't follow is your statement, not the association of national identity with a people.

3.  As the Palestinians themselves wrote the referenced letters to the British calling themselves Palestinians, you are again unable to separate yourself from the propaganda you have been fed.

4.  Who has ever claimed that there was a sovereign country called Palestine?  Independence of Palestine was prevented by the European invasion and colonial settlement. There are  Kurdish and Tibetan flags, for example but no sovereign Kurdish or Tibetan states, what is unusual about Palestinians having a flag?


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> 1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.
> 
> *"UNITED*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> 
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947
> 
> *
> b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> 2.  Non sequitur
> 
> 3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.
> 
> *"PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> 
> *
> HOTEL CECIL,
> London, W.C.,
> _February 21st, _1922.
> 
> Sir,
> We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."
> 
> https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE
> 
> 
> 4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.
> 
> Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.


Actually, there was a mass invasion and settler colonization by Arabs-Moslems to the geographic area of "Palestine".

It was first by the Turk conquerors / colonists and later by Syrian, Egyptian and Lebanese squatters.

You have a poor grasp of history but a lot of islamo-propaganda.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> 1.  We have the source data as reported by the British Mandatory.  You can't seem to accept the facts.
> 
> 
> . View attachment 69095
> 
> Vol. 1, page 185
> 
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2.  You don't appear to understand the term non-sequitur.  What doesn't follow is your statement, not the association of national identity with a people.
> 
> 3.  As the Palestinians themselves wrote the referenced letters to the British calling themselves Palestinians, you are again unable to separate yourself from the propaganda you have been fed.
> 
> 4.  Who has ever claimed that there was a sovereign country called Palestine?  Independence of Palestine was prevented by the European invasion and colonial settlement. There are  Kurdish and Tibetan flags, for example but no sovereign Kurdish or Tibetan states, what is unusual about Palestinians having a flag?








 WRONG AGAIN more LIES as it was the anglo American committee and had no ties to the mandate


----------



## Phoenall

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  There was no mass Arab immigration.  There was a mass European immigration which turned out to be an invasion given the consequences.
> 
> *"UNITED*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> 
> *SUPPLEMENT No. 11*
> 
> *UNITED NATIONS
> SPECIAL COMMITTEE
> ON PALESTINE*
> 
> *REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> *VOLUME 1*
> 
> *Lake Success
> New York
> 1947
> 
> *
> b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> 2.  Non sequitur
> 
> 3. The Arab Palestinians (Christians and Muslims) called themselves the people of Palestine after Turkey relinquished control. The Palestinians communicated with the British in official letters as the people of Palestine at least as early as 1922.
> 
> *"PALESTINE.*
> 
> *CORRESPONDENCE
> WITH THE
> PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
> AND THE
> ZIONIST ORGANISATION.*
> 
> *Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
> JUNE, 1922.
> LONDON:
> 
> *
> HOTEL CECIL,
> London, W.C.,
> _February 21st, _1922.
> 
> Sir,
> We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab *People of Palestine.....*.
> If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist _con-dominium, _put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the *People of Palestine *— who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day *the People of Palestine *assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."
> 
> UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)
> 
> 
> 4. The Palestinian flag is the flag of the Arab revolt adopted in 1916, long before the Israeli flag.
> 
> Flag of the Arab Revolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> After you have studied the facts from source documentation, available from official governmental archives rather than the propaganda you have been taught, get back to me.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, there was a mass invasion and settler colonization by Arabs-Moslems to the geographic area of "Palestine".
> 
> It was first by the Turk conquerors / colonists and later by Syrian, Egyptian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> You have a poor grasp of history but a lot of islamo-propaganda.
Click to expand...






 He forgets Churchills speech to the house when he told of the mass immigration by arab muslims to Palestine.


----------



## Art__Allm

montelatici said:


> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.



A tiny minority of Palestinians adhered to Judaism, about 30 % of Palestinians to Christianity, and the rest of Palestinians were Muslims.

I think that Jews are a religious group, not an ethnic or racial group. You can be a Polytheist  and then convert to Judaism, and after that to Christianity, and after that to Islam, and after that you can become an atheist or agnostic.

Precisely that happened to Palestinians.

They were Polytheists, then came the crazy Hebrews (they were also called *Habiru* or *Apiru*) and forced their Monotheism upon them. Then most of them accepted Jesus Christ and became Christians. Then Muhammad said that he is the second prophet, that Jesus was just his predecessor, and most of Palestinians converted to Islam. Only a tiny minority of Palestinians preserved Judaism, the rest of them chose other types of Monotheism.

What about Zionists who claimed that they are "returning" to Palestine after 2000 years of supposed diaspora?

Well, that are silly fairy tales, invented by Zionists to justify their land grab.

Most of Zionists are descendants of different types of converts, their ancestors converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.

Some of Jews can trace their ancestry to Orient (many Arabs converted to Judaism in Yemen or North Africa, like Morocco), but the conversion to any religion does not have any influence on your genetic make up, so the oriental ancestry is no prove for Hebrew ancestry. 

What to Ashkenazi, their maternal line is of European origin, so they are per definition Europeans, because Judaism is inherited via the maternal line.

Some of Ashkenazi Cohens may really stem from Hebrews, but only about 3% of all Ashkenazi are Cohnens.

Besides that the about 70% of Russian Jews stem from mixed families, the Jews in the SU usually married non-Jews.

So the claim of Ashkenazi that they are "returning" to Palestine is just chutzpah or lunacy, or both.




Most


----------



## Art__Allm

Art__Allm said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A tiny minority of Palestinians adhered to Judaism, about 30 % of Palestinians to Christianity, and the rest of Palestinians were Muslims at the beginning of the 19th century.
> 
> I think that Jews are a religious group, not an ethnic or racial group. You can be a Polytheist  and then convert to Judaism, and after that to Christianity, and after that to Islam, and after that you can become an atheist or agnostic.
> 
> Precisely that happened to Palestinians.
> 
> They were Polytheists, then came the crazy Hebrews (they were also called *Habiru* or *Apiru*) and forced their Monotheism upon them.
> 
> After that most of them accepted Jesus Christ and became Christians.
> 
> Then Muhammad said that he is the second prophet, that Jesus was just his predecessor, and most of Palestinians converted to Islam. Only a tiny minority of Palestinians preserved Judaism, the rest of them chose other types of Monotheism.
> 
> What about Zionists who claimed that they are "returning" to Palestine after 2000 years of supposed diaspora?
> 
> Well, that are silly fairy tales, invented by Zionists to justify their land grab.
> 
> Most of Zionists are descendants of different types of converts, their ancestors converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.
> 
> Some of Jews can trace their ancestry to Orient (many Arabs converted to Judaism in Yemen or North Africa, like Morocco), but the conversion to any religion does not have any influence on your genetic make up, so the oriental ancestry is no prove for Hebrew ancestry.
> 
> What to Ashkenazi, their maternal line is of European origin, so they are per definition Europeans, because Judaism is inherited via the maternal line.
> 
> Some of Ashkenazi Cohens may really stem from Hebrews, but only about 3% of all Ashkenazi are Cohnens.
> 
> Besides that, about 70% of Russian Jews who "returned" to Palestine, stem from mixed families, the Jews in the SU usually married non-Jews.
> 
> So the claim of Ashkenazi that they are "returning" to Palestine is just chutzpah or lunacy, or both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most
Click to expand...


----------



## Challenger

dosmin.pavas said:


> UN is the place where lies are told.


Today, perhaps, but back in 1947, two years after arguably the most destructive war in human history, the U.N. took themselves far more seriously; of the then 57 members 44 could reasonably have been classed as functioning democracies; the remaining 13 being mainly Soviet bloc countries and satellites. So that speech by the neocon Douglas Murray is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Nice try though. 4/10


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A tiny minority of Palestinians adhered to Judaism, about 30 % of Palestinians to Christianity, and the rest of Palestinians were Muslims.
> 
> I think that Jews are a religious group, not an ethnic or racial group. You can be a Polytheist  and then convert to Judaism, and after that to Christianity, and after that to Islam, and after that you can become an atheist or agnostic.
> 
> Precisely that happened to Palestinians.
> 
> They were Polytheists, then came the crazy Hebrews (they were also called *Habiru* or *Apiru*) and forced their Monotheism upon them. Then most of them accepted Jesus Christ and became Christians. Then Muhammad said that he is the second prophet, that Jesus was just his predecessor, and most of Palestinians converted to Islam. Only a tiny minority of Palestinians preserved Judaism, the rest of them chose other types of Monotheism.
> 
> What about Zionists who claimed that they are "returning" to Palestine after 2000 years of supposed diaspora?
> 
> Well, that are silly fairy tales, invented by Zionists to justify their land grab.
> 
> Most of Zionists are descendants of different types of converts, their ancestors converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.
> 
> Some of Jews can trace their ancestry to Orient (many Arabs converted to Judaism in Yemen or North Africa, like Morocco), but the conversion to any religion does not have any influence on your genetic make up, so the oriental ancestry is no prove for Hebrew ancestry.
> 
> What to Ashkenazi, their maternal line is of European origin, so they are per definition Europeans, because Judaism is inherited via the maternal line.
> 
> Some of Ashkenazi Cohens may really stem from Hebrews, but only about 3% of all Ashkenazi are Cohnens.
> 
> Besides that the about 70% of Russian Jews stem from mixed families, the Jews in the SU usually married non-Jews.
> 
> So the claim of Ashkenazi that they are "returning" to Palestine is just chutzpah or lunacy, or both.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most
Click to expand...







 And you have yet to produce any concrete evidence of this happening. In the case of the Jews there is much testimony from famous Jews who stated that the pretended to convert but practised their religion in secret. In the case of Christianity it was mostly based on lighter versions of Judaism so the Jews had no problems in the pretense.

 The worlds top geneticists have shown that the Jews in Ethiopia have the same DNA as the Jews in Russia and East Europe and the M.E. Not a close match but an exact match and no arab muslims or Christians have even a close match.

Do at least research the subject fully before making a complete fool of yourself


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> dosmin.pavas said:
> 
> 
> 
> UN is the place where lies are told.
> 
> 
> 
> Today, perhaps, but back in 1947, two years after arguably the most destructive war in human history, the U.N. took themselves far more seriously; of the then 57 members 44 could reasonably have been classed as functioning democracies; the remaining 13 being mainly Soviet bloc countries and satellites. So that speech by the neocon Douglas Murray is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Nice try though. 4/10
Click to expand...







 Did not stop them from being ANTI SEMITES and Jew haters did it, as shown by the stupid partition plan that was meaqnt to put the Jews on the attack and backfired


----------



## jillian

montelatici said:


> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.



not what happened, loony toon.

history is important.

but thanks once again to the o/p for yet another jew bashing thread. 

i wonder how much she gets paid to post her propaganda


----------



## Challenger

jillian said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not what happened, loony toon.
> 
> history is important.
> 
> but thanks once again to the o/p for yet another jew bashing thread.
> 
> i wonder how much she gets paid to post her propaganda
Click to expand...


Probaby nothing. Unlike you and your Zionut friends http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/14/israel-students-social-media/2651715/


----------



## montelatici

jillian said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not what happened, loony toon.
> 
> history is important.
> 
> but thanks once again to the o/p for yet another jew bashing thread.
> 
> i wonder how much she gets paid to post her propaganda
Click to expand...


The Battle of Jericho did not happen?


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not what happened, loony toon.
> 
> history is important.
> 
> but thanks once again to the o/p for yet another jew bashing thread.
> 
> i wonder how much she gets paid to post her propaganda
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Battle of Jericho did not happen?
Click to expand...

It did. As did the war of conquest and colonization by Moslems (Turkish invaders), of the geographic area of Palestine.


----------



## montelatici

Who did the Muslim Turks conquer through this war of conquest?


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Who did this Turkish war of conquest conquer?


The Swedes. 

Ya Allah. You previously shuffled off whining and crying about putting me on ignore. 

Obviously you're not to be trusted.


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who did this Turkish war of conquest conquer?
> 
> 
> 
> The Swedes.
> 
> Ya Allah. You previously shuffled off whining and crying about putting me on ignore.
> 
> Obviously you're not to be trusted.
Click to expand...


So, you don't have a clue as to who evil Muslim Turks conquered in their war of conquest of Palestine.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who did this Turkish war of conquest conquer?
> 
> 
> 
> The Swedes.
> 
> Ya Allah. You previously shuffled off whining and crying about putting me on ignore.
> 
> Obviously you're not to be trusted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you don't have a clue as to who evil Muslim Turks conquered in their war of conquest of Palestine.
Click to expand...

So, you're going to cut and paste the same population chart?

Well golly gee. I'm sure you will be able to cut and paste lots of material to express your outrage at the colonization of Palestine by those evil muhammedans.


----------



## montelatici

You mean the official factual population tables from the Berman Jewish Policy Archive of the Survey of Palestine that contradicts the made up Hasbara chart without a reference is disturbing to you?  Inconvenient facts.  You people rely exclusively and solely on Zionist propaganda for your world view.  Unbelievable.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> You mean the official factual population tables from the Berman Jewish Policy Archive of the Survey of Palestine that contradicts the made up Hasbara chart without a reference is disturbing to you?  Inconvenient facts.  You people rely exclusively and solely on Zionist propaganda for your world view.  Unbelievable.



You tend to get befuddled regarding the various arguments you're fumbling over.

You're incensed that Jews migrated to the Middle East in spite of the doctrinal elements in Islamist ideology that define the area as an Islamist _waqf_. If you haven't yet covered that at your madrassah, consult with your prayer leader.

The Jewish return to the Middle East, their success at industry and commerce and the subsequent arab-Moslem colonization of the area to exploit that success is not difficult to understand. 

Don't let the successes of the Jewish people cause you such angst. With a historical view that continues today, Arab-Moslem societies have been defined by perpetual war and conquest with no ability for cooperation, innovation or accommodation.


----------



## montelatici

I am not incensed at all.  I just present the facts.  That is what troubles you people.  The facts.  If you can tear yourself away from propagandizing on the I/P section, go over to the European section and you will see that I present the facts there to.  The facts I present there get me accusations of being an Islamophobe.  

Partisan fanatics, Jewish or Muslim dislike facts.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> I am not incensed at all.  I just present the facts.  That is what troubles you people.  The facts.  If you can tear yourself away from propagandizing on the I/P section, go over to the European section and you will see that I present the facts there to.  The facts I present there get me accusations of being an Islamophobe.
> 
> Partisan fanatics, Jewish or Muslim dislike facts.


On the contrary, your slathering tirades are hilarious.


----------



## montelatici

Nothing hilarious about facts.  Posting excerpts from source documentation can't be called a tirade, quite dry stuff really.  Your emotional personal attacks, on the other hand, speak for themselves. You are great for laughs though.


----------



## Challenger

dosmin.pavas said:


> ...both are successful settler colonial projects.



Oh, BTW, thanks for admitting "Zionist Israel" IS a settler colonial project. How successful it is, is still to be determined.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not what happened, loony toon.
> 
> history is important.
> 
> but thanks once again to the o/p for yet another jew bashing thread.
> 
> i wonder how much she gets paid to post her propaganda
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Probaby nothing. Unlike you and your Zionut friends http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/14/israel-students-social-media/2651715/
Click to expand...







 Rat boy cant produce an adult educated reply to the thread so just goes of on one of his immature name calling rants. How can a person from Britain be so racist and not get arrested for his actions


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Who did the Muslim Turks conquer through this war of conquest?








 The indigenous Jews of Palestine along with the Christians


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Nothing hilarious about facts.  Posting excerpts from source documentation can't be called a tirade, quite dry stuff really.  Your emotional personal attacks, on the other hand, speak for themselves. You are great for laughs though.







You would not know a source document if it calmly walked up to you and said I am a source document. The novel by the Anglo American committee is not a source document as it has been edited before publication


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> dosmin.pavas said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...both are successful settler colonial projects.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, BTW, thanks for admitting "Zionist Israel" IS a settler colonial project. How successful it is, is still to be determined.
Click to expand...






 Thanks for admitting that you are a Jew hating Nazi scum with your constant use of the terms out of context and not as intended


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> You mean the official factual population tables from the Berman Jewish Policy Archive of the Survey of Palestine that contradicts the made up Hasbara chart without a reference is disturbing to you?  Inconvenient facts.  You people rely exclusively and solely on Zionist propaganda for your world view.  Unbelievable.









 Another islamonazi propagandist spewing out Jew hate and racist incitement because they have don't have any adult intelligent comments to make after being proven wrong so many times.
 Someone tell him the Anglo American committee was nothing to do with the UN and only stayed in Palestine for one short month, then paid arab muslims to collect the data for them to be collated into their novel.

 See the wiki entry for all the details.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> I am not incensed at all.  I just present the facts.  That is what troubles you people.  The facts.  If you can tear yourself away from propagandizing on the I/P section, go over to the European section and you will see that I present the facts there to.  The facts I present there get me accusations of being an Islamophobe.
> 
> Partisan fanatics, Jewish or Muslim dislike facts.








 So why wont you admit your source for the population numbers is faked if you like the facts so much


----------



## Challenger

montelatici said:


> Who did the Muslim Turks conquer through this war of conquest?



I'm just curious to know what "Muslim Turks" she's going on about....


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Your posts are full of nonsense. The simple fact remains that only about 35% of returnees to Israel come from Europe.
> 
> Your continued efforts to forward revisionist views is disingenuous at best.



Right, show us any official source census data that indicates that only 35% of the colonial invaders of Palestine between 1920 to 1947 were from Europe.  In fact, more than 95% of the colonists came from Europe between 1920 and 1947, as can be extrapolated using the immigration tables contained in the Survey of Palestine Vol. 1 pages 184-205.

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your posts are full of nonsense. The simple fact remains that only about 35% of returnees to Israel come from Europe.
> 
> Your continued efforts to forward revisionist views is disingenuous at best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, show us any official source census data that indicates that only 35% of the colonial invaders of Palestine between 1920 to 1947 were from Europe.  In fact, more than 95% of the colonists came from Europe between 1920 and 1947, as can be extrapolated using the immigration tables contained in the Survey of Palestine Vol. 1 pages 184-205.
> 
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
Click to expand...

Right. This is all the same cut and paste you cut and paste multiple times across multiple threads.

You have an apparent learning disability as you continue to falsely belch out your Joooooooo invasion slogans without understanding the history of the area.

On the other hand, you remain befuddled regarding the Ottoman colonial invasion followed by the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters and soon-to-be welfare scammers.


----------



## montelatici

1.  Just factual official census data, I understand it is inconvenient when facts debunk propaganda.

2.  You are well aware that I have forgotten more than you will ever learn about the "history of the area".  That is why you are so defensive and resort to personal insults.  It does not make your absurd assertions any more erudite.  Frankly, you don't know what you are talking about.

3. Again, what people (of what religion) did the Ottomans displace in Palestine as a result of this invasion, and who did they replace them with? If you are convinced that this happened.

4. And, these other invasions you are going on about.  What people did they displace, if any.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> 1.  Just factual official census data, I understand it is inconvenient when facts debunk propaganda.
> 
> 2.  You are well aware that I have forgotten more than you will ever learn about the "history of the area".  That is why you are so defensive and resort to personal insults.  It does not make your absurd assertions any more erudite.  Frankly, you don't know what you are talking about.
> 
> 3. Again, what people (of what religion) did the Ottomans displace in Palestine as a result of this invasion, and who did they replace them with? If you are convinced that this happened.
> 
> 4. And, these other invasions you are going on about.  What people did they displace, if any.


1 -4. As usual, you're unable to address the facts presented to you when those facts conflict with what you were given at the madrassah. I'm well aware that you have never been associated with facts so it's comical that you rattle on with cutting and pasting the same material without an underlying comprehension of the material you cut and paste.

I assigned you a task list in the hope it will help you focus. 

So tell us about the Ottoman colonial invaders. See if you can find something to cut and paste about the mandate which provided a home for the Jewish people. Take your time and see if you can come to an understanding regarding the Ottoman colonial program vs. the apparatus that enabled the state of Israel.

You can ask stupid questions. I'm considering the source.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who did the Muslim Turks conquer through this war of conquest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just curious to know what "Muslim Turks" she's going on about....
Click to expand...







 Didn't you know that Turkey had been stolen by the muslims, and the people forcibly converted. The arab muslims regret not putting every last man, woman and child to the sword now as the Turks see themselves as being superior


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> 1.  Just factual official census data, I understand it is inconvenient when facts debunk propaganda.
> 
> 2.  You are well aware that I have forgotten more than you will ever learn about the "history of the area".  That is why you are so defensive and resort to personal insults.  It does not make your absurd assertions any more erudite.  Frankly, you don't know what you are talking about.
> 
> 3. Again, what people (of what religion) did the Ottomans displace in Palestine as a result of this invasion, and who did they replace them with? If you are convinced that this happened.
> 
> 4. And, these other invasions you are going on about.  What people did they displace, if any.








 How can it be factual when it was gathered by arab muslims for the anglo American committee.


----------



## dosmin.pavas

montelatici said:


> 1.  We have the source data as reported by the British Mandatory.  You can't seem to accept the facts.
> 
> 
> . View attachment 69095
> 
> Vol. 1, page 185
> 
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2.  You don't appear to understand the term non-sequitur.  What doesn't follow is your statement, not the association of national identity with a people.
> 
> 3.  As the Palestinians themselves wrote the referenced letters to the British calling themselves Palestinians, you are again unable to separate yourself from the propaganda you have been fed.
> 
> 4.  Who has ever claimed that there was a sovereign country called Palestine?  Independence of Palestine was prevented by the European invasion and colonial settlement. There are  Kurdish and Tibetan flags, for example but no sovereign Kurdish or Tibetan states, what is unusual about Palestinians having a flag?


Thank you for your response montelatici. Its been a while since I speak to an educated person so I find this conversation very interesting although I preferred if you refrain from derogatory branding tactics such as saying Jews are invaders or that I have been fed propaganda (Note that I feel the same about you).

1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.

2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.

3. A letter to the British is an external communication and when you speak to foreign entities you trier to speak their language. I am glad we both agree they were externally called Palestinians. But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine. Here I give you some Jewish ones: Palestine post (now Jerusalem post) -  Palestine stamp (written on it land of Israel) - Mandatory Palestine football team (Mandatory Palestine national football team - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)






















4. The Palestinian cause is a political cause. We have Zionist and Palestinians. The people are Jews and Arabs. Even Arab leaders acknowledge there is no such thing as a Palestinian people (Jordan is Palestine: Quotes Arab Leaders Wish Could Be Erased From History). Something that I mentioned in my earlier post and you have completely ignored. Even if we were to go with your native, Jordan *is *Palestine and occupies 80% of the original British mandate.


----------



## montelatici

Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
_
1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
_
Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.

Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.

54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted. 

Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.

*59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant. 
*
A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University

2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.

Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.  

The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.

_3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
_
We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.

*"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.  

The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "

Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.



Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.


Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library

*By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8

The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*

The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
Click to expand...


Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL

Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're as befuddled as usual.


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, you're as befuddled as usual.
Click to expand...


You believe that calling someone "befuddled" when you have been shown to be a fool somehow helps.  You still look the fool, trust me.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, you're as befuddled as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You believe that calling someone "befuddled" when you have been shown to be a fool somehow helps.  You still look the fool, trust me.
Click to expand...

You've made yourself the laughing stock with your cutting and pasting of the same material multiple times across multiple threads. Believe me.


----------



## montelatici

No, I have presented facts from source documentation in response to Zionist propaganda.  I have angered the propagandists, but no one is laughing, trust me.

No one believes you, by the way.  Posting links to Hasbara sponsored websites does very little for your credibility.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.








 Until you start reading the official versions of the migration from such people as Churchill when you find that many tems of thousands of arab muslims illegally migrated to Palestine. Or that the British mandate was not bothered about arab muslim migration so ignored it.


Yes those who look at the archives know exactly where that map came from, the LoN treaty that set out to create a Jewish homeland in palestine


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...







 So is your islamonazi pallywood propaganda any better ?

How about your own link that states the British turned a blind eye to arab immigration as it was not in their remit ?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, you're as befuddled as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You believe that calling someone "befuddled" when you have been shown to be a fool somehow helps.  You still look the fool, trust me.
Click to expand...






 After your about turn on another section of the USMB I would not trust you with knowing where there was a birds nest. Now about your link that says that the British did not look at arab muslim immigration as it was not part of their remit. Care to comment ?


----------



## Phoenall

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeating propaganda won't make it true.
> _
> 1. The Arab mass immigration was mostly illegal therefore it was not recorded. Your numbers only count in legal immigration.
> _
> Thank you for repeating Zionist propaganda, but the official records show that there was no Arab illegal immigration to speak of and a great dela of Jewish illegal immigration.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para 54.
> 
> 54. ................It follows that the Jewish population may now include between 50,000 and 60,000 illegal immigrants who have settled in Palestine at any time since 1920 when the first Immigration Ordinance was enacted.
> 
> Survey of Palestine Vol. page 210, para. 59.
> 
> *59. The conclusion is that Arab illegal immigration for the purposes of permanent settlement is insignificant.
> *
> A Survey of Palestine Volume 1  | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University
> 
> 2. I say Labeling people Palestinians will not make them indigenous (Palestine comes from Hebrew word pilishtim which means invader BTW). you say my argument is non-sequitur?! sorry I do not understand.
> 
> Because the people currently of the Christian and Muslim religion in Palestine are people whose ancestors followed Canaanite, Philistine, Jewish, Samaritan, Roman and Eastern religions of the Roman Empire before Christianity became the state religion of the Eastern Roman Empire in about 310 AD and all citizens, particularly those in Palestine (non-Christians were banned from Jerusalem), adopted Christianity.  After the Muslim conquests most of these Christians of Palestine, in time, converted to Islam.
> 
> The Jews that colonized Palestine, on the other hand, came from another continent, Europe.  They are certainly not indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> _3.  "But can you please tell me some Arab organisations that was called Palestine."
> _
> We can start with the Palestine Arab Congress.
> 
> *"Muslim-Christian Associations* were established in all the major towns. They soon formed a national body, the *Palestine Arab Congress,* which tried to influence the developing British policy in Palestine and counter the influence of the Zionist Commission which visited Palestine in April 1918.
> 
> The *Palestine Arab Congress* was a series of congresses held by the Palestinian Arab population, organized by a nationwide network of local Muslim-Christian Associations, in the British Mandate of Palestine. Between 1919 and 1928, seven congresses were held in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and Nablus. "
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 4.  Posting the fake 2006 Hasbara produced map is rather embarrassing for me to even comment on.  Everyone knows where that map came from.  Trans-Jordan was reserved for the Hashemites, Bedouin (Arabians from the Arabian peninsula) tribal chiefs, not Christian and Muslims Palestinians who are not Bedouin Arabians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your endless cutting and pasting from edited wiki articles makes you an accomplice to the fraud of others.
> 
> 
> Myths & Facts: The British Mandate Period (Chapter 2) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> *By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants. 8
> 
> The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922–36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.” 9*
> 
> The Peel Commission reported in 1937 that the “shortfall of land is . . . due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” 10
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, propaganda from the Jewish Virtual Library, a Hasbara operation, is reliable.  LOL
> 
> Try to use objective sources if you want to be taken seriously.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, you're as befuddled as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You believe that calling someone "befuddled" when you have been shown to be a fool somehow helps.  You still look the fool, trust me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You've made yourself the laughing stock with your cutting and pasting of the same material multiple times across multiple threads. Believe me.
Click to expand...






 A pamphlet from the anglo American committee using arab muslim source material is not what anyone would call valid


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> No, I have presented facts from source documentation in response to Zionist propaganda.  I have angered the propagandists, but no one is laughing, trust me.
> 
> No one believes you, by the way.  Posting links to Hasbara sponsored websites does very little for your credibility.


That's a shame. You're befuddled when I provide you source documentation. 

Your response is the best a befuddled fool can provide: "No one believes you, by the way".

Obviously you can't refute the data so you're left to foot-stomping.


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> The worlds top geneticists have shown that the Jews in Ethiopia have the same DNA as the Jews in Russia and East Europe and the M.E. Not a close match but an exact match and no arab muslims or Christians have even a close match.



What a BS! You do not understand the scientific language, you have never read the works you are referring to.

What you are referring to is the debunked works about the so-called "Cohen genes", which refers only to the direct paternal line of the Cohens. 

But they never mention that only 3% of Jews belong to the Cohens, and that the paternal line is only a tiny percentage of the genome of a male (only a couple of markers in the Y-DNA) that are inherited from father to sons.

But the Levites do not have the same markers, though it is believed that Cohens and Levis stem from the same male that lived many thousand years ago!

And most Zionists never talk about the *mtDNA, and Autosomal DNA, whoch compose more than 90% of human DNA.*
*Dr Eran Elhaik did a comprehensive research in this regard and confirmed that the Ashkenazi Jews predominantly stem from the Slavs and Khazars. Even the East- and West-Ashkenazi are different, they have totally different maternal lines, because the founding mothers of the different European Jewish communities were different local women.*
*https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130116195333.htm*

The Ethiopian Jews do not have anything in common with Ashkenazi Jews, except that both are Homo Sapiens.


----------



## Art__Allm

Challenger said:


> Oh, BTW, thanks for admitting "Zionist Israel" IS a settler colonial project. How successful it is, is still to be determined.



Are they not "returning" to Israel after 2000 years of supposed "expulsion"?
Do they not believe that they are the only legitimate owners, because their tribal god presumably told them that Palestine forever belongs to this self-defined and self-chosen group of people?


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> The indigenous Jews of Palestine along with the Christians




How many indigenous Jews lived at this period in Palestine, and how many of the descendants of these Jews later accepted the Zionist idea of a "Jewish State"?

I guess that there was less than 1% of Jews among the Palestinians before the Turkish Conquest, and that non of the descendants of these Jews supported the idea of crazy Europeans, who called themselves "Zionists", to create a "Jewish State" on this territory, and ethnically cleanse this territory from the native population.


----------



## montelatici

The European Zionists, Europeans in every respect, "returning" to a place in the Middle East is akin to Europeans returning to Africa because. Lucy an ancient predecessor hominid, was born there.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> The European Zionists, Europeans in every respect, "returning" to a place in the Middle East is akin to Europeans returning to Africa because. Lucy an ancient predecessor hominid, was born there.



Although, as we know, there was no invasion by Europeans. There was however, an invasion and colonial project by the Ottomon Turks and later by Arab-Moslem beggars and squatters from Egypt, Jordan and Syria.


----------



## montelatici

1. There was no colonial settler project undertaken by the Ottomans.  Furthermore, you aren't even able to articulate who the Ottomans invaded in Palestine. 

2. The only migration and invasion of Palestine of the last 200 years was that of the European Zionists as confirmed in Resolution A-364:

You consistently make things up and lie.  When you provide a source it is a Hasbara Zionist propaganda source.  You have no credibility.

"b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

*16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> 1. There was no colonial settler project undertaken by the Ottomans.  Furthermore, you aren't even able to articulate who the Ottomans invaded in Palestine.
> 
> 2. The only migration and invasion of Palestine of the last 200 years was that of the European Zionists as confirmed in Resolution A-364:
> 
> You consistently make things up and lie.  When you provide a source it is a Hasbara Zionist propaganda source.  You have no credibility.
> 
> "b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> A/364 of 3 September 1947


This cut and paste which you have cut and pasted multiple times across multiple threads has previously been refuted. I gave you source documentation but your only response has been to spam multiple threads with the same cut and paste.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The worlds top geneticists have shown that the Jews in Ethiopia have the same DNA as the Jews in Russia and East Europe and the M.E. Not a close match but an exact match and no arab muslims or Christians have even a close match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a BS! You do not understand the scientific language, you have never read the works you are referring to.
> 
> What you are referring to is the debunked works about the so-called "Cohen genes", which refers only to the direct paternal line of the Cohens.
> 
> But they never mention that only 3% of Jews belong to the Cohens, and that the paternal line is only a tiny percentage of the genome of a male (only a couple of markers in the Y-DNA) that are inherited from father to sons.
> 
> But the Levites do not have the same markers, though it is believed that Cohens and Levis stem from the same male that lived many thousand years ago!
> 
> And most Zionists never talk about the *mtDNA, and Autosomal DNA, whoch compose more than 90% of human DNA.*
> *Dr Eran Elhaik did a comprehensive research in this regard and confirmed that the Ashkenazi Jews predominantly stem from the Slavs and Khazars. Even the East- and West-Ashkenazi are different, they have totally different maternal lines, because the founding mothers of the different European Jewish communities were different local women.*
> *https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130116195333.htm*
> 
> The Ethiopian Jews do not have anything in common with Ashkenazi Jews, except that both are Homo Sapiens.
Click to expand...








 So do explain the other "tribes" other than the Cohens who have distinctive DNA strands. This has been proven many times since the study you link to from 2007, a lot has happened in the last 9 years.


 Anything to racially attack the Jews with you isn't it.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, BTW, thanks for admitting "Zionist Israel" IS a settler colonial project. How successful it is, is still to be determined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are they not "returning" to Israel after 2000 years of supposed "expulsion"?
> Do they not believe that they are the only legitimate owners, because their tribal god presumably told them that Palestine forever belongs to this self-defined and self-chosen group of people?
Click to expand...







 No they say they are the owners because of an international treaty held in 1923 that gave them sovereignty of the land. It is your group that now believes that they own the world and have been commanded to kill everyone else so they can rule over it. Time you admitted that you are following a pack of savages that will slit your throat as soon as look at you.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The indigenous Jews of Palestine along with the Christians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many indigenous Jews lived at this period in Palestine, and how many of the descendants of these Jews later accepted the Zionist idea of a "Jewish State"?
> 
> I guess that there was less than 1% of Jews among the Palestinians before the Turkish Conquest, and that non of the descendants of these Jews supported the idea of crazy Europeans, who called themselves "Zionists", to create a "Jewish State" on this territory, and ethnically cleanse this territory from the native population.
Click to expand...







 Of course you would as that is what your imam told you when he gave you the pallywood video to watch


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The European Zionists, Europeans in every respect, "returning" to a place in the Middle East is akin to Europeans returning to Africa because. Lucy an ancient predecessor hominid, was born there.








 No it is like the Italians returning to Italy after they have never even seen the place as they lived in a project in Brooklyn for the last 50 years.    Time to stop being a hypocrite and hand back your lands to the Amerindians.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> 1. There was no colonial settler project undertaken by the Ottomans.  Furthermore, you aren't even able to articulate who the Ottomans invaded in Palestine.
> 
> 2. The only migration and invasion of Palestine of the last 200 years was that of the European Zionists as confirmed in Resolution A-364:
> 
> You consistently make things up and lie.  When you provide a source it is a Hasbara Zionist propaganda source.  You have no credibility.
> 
> "b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> A/364 of 3 September 1947








 You forget that the mandatory was not taxed with looking at the immigration numbers for arab muslims, so ignored them completely. Then made up some facts and figures to cover their bungling


----------



## Art__Allm

montelatici said:


> The European Zionists, Europeans in every respect, "returning" to a place in the Middle East is akin to Europeans returning to Africa because. Lucy an ancient predecessor hominid, was born there.



Yes, if you can return to your presumed land after 2000 years, why not return to Africa and kick out the squatters?



BTW, in South Africa there were no Black Africans at the time the Dutch farmers, the _Boers, _colonized this land.

There were a couple of Bushmen, but no black Africans.

Black Africans came to South Africa after the Dutch Boers already colonized the land.

But today Black Africans claim that they are the indigenous population of South Africa, and the Europeans are the wicked invader who took away their land.

And this narrative is as readily accepted as the narrative of European Zionists returning to Palestine, though their ancestors were pagans who converted to Judaism in South Russia after the 10 th century AD.


----------



## Art__Allm

montelatici said:


> 1. There was no colonial settler project undertaken by the Ottomans.  Furthermore, you aren't even able to articulate who the Ottomans invaded in Palestine.
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. There was no colonial settler project undertaken by the Ottomans.  Furthermore, you aren't even able to articulate who the Ottomans invaded in Palestine.
> 
> 2. The only migration and invasion of Palestine of the last 200 years was that of the European Zionists as confirmed in Resolution A-364:
> 
> You consistently make things up and lie.  When you provide a source it is a Hasbara Zionist propaganda source.  You have no credibility.
> 
> "b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. The only migration and invasion of Palestine of the last 200 years was that of the European Zionists as confirmed in Resolution A-364:
> 
> You consistently make things up and lie.  When you provide a source it is a Hasbara Zionist propaganda source.  You have no credibility.
> 
> "b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> *16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.*
> 
> A/364 of 3 September 1947
Click to expand...



Good post!

BTW, even if there was a small influx of population to Palestine, these migrants did not have any intention to kick out the native Semites and create their own state.

These small numbers of migrants readily integrated into the existing Palestinian society, they assimilated and you cannot find any traces of this migration which did not cause any problems to Palestinians.

If Zionists came to Palestine with the same intention as the previous small waves of migrants, if they accepted the existing Palestinian society and integrated into into it, there would be no conflict.

It is obvious that the Zionists created the conflict, because they had the intention to create an exclusive Jewish state on the land that was already settled for more than 2000 years!
*Jabotinsky *openly talks about the colonizing of Palestine against the will of the native population, he was aware that this plan could only been implemented by force, speak by violence.


*"Zionist colonisation must be either terminated or carried out against the wishes of the native population. This colonisation can, therefore, be continued and make progress only under the protection of a power independent of the native population – an iron wall, which will be in a position to resist the pressure to the native population. This is, in toto, our policy towards the Arabs ... A voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the near future".*

----
Jabotinsky, The Iron War (We and the Arabs), written in 1923.

*In this short quote Jabotinsky mentions the Palestinian Arabs as the NATIVE POPULATION three times. *

**


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> You forget that the mandatory was not taxed with looking at the immigration numbers for arab muslims, so ignored them completely. Then made up some facts and figures to cover their bungling




As already mentioned, no migrants caused any problems to the Palestinians, they readily integrated into the Palestinian society.

If Zionists did the same, there would be peace in the region.


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> As already mentioned, no migrants caused any problems to the Palestinians, they readily integrated into the Palestinian society.
> 
> If Zionists did the same, there would be peace in the region.




There would also be peace in the region if the Palestinians accepted the Jewish culture and integrated into Jewish society.  

Let's be honest -- at this point, just not going to happen.  Best put each culture in its own sandbox in a two state solution.


----------



## Hollie

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> You forget that the mandatory was not taxed with looking at the immigration numbers for arab muslims, so ignored them completely. Then made up some facts and figures to cover their bungling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As already mentioned, no migrants caused any problems to the Palestinians, they readily integrated into the Palestinian society.
> 
> If Zionists did the same, there would be peace in the region.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. 

Do yourself a favor and look at the history of islamism. Non-moslems are reviled. Do a search with the term "dhimmitude".


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> So do explain the other "tribes" other than the Cohens who have distinctive DNA strands. This has been proven many times since the study you link to from 2007, a lot has happened in the last 9 years.



What DNA strands are you talking about?
Do you really understand the matter?

Is Judaism not transferred via the maternal line?

Do you know what Mitochondrial DNA (*mtDNA) is?


"The origins of Ashkenazi Jews remain highly controversial. Like Judaism, mitochondrial DNA is passed along the maternal line. Its variation in the Ashkenazim is highly distinctive, with four major and numerous minor founders. However, due to their rarity in the general population, these founders have been difficult to trace to a source. Here we show that all four major founders, ~40% of Ashkenazi mtDNA variation, have ancestry in prehistoric Europe, rather than the Near East or Caucasus. Furthermore, most of the remaining minor founders share a similar deep European ancestry. 

Thus the great majority of Ashkenazi maternal lineages were not brought from the Levant, as commonly supposed, nor recruited in the Caucasus, as sometimes suggested, but assimilated within Europe. 

These results point to a significant role for the conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and provide the foundation for a detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history".

A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages :  Nature Communications :  Nature Publishing Group
*
As we see, all founding mothers of European Jewish communities were European women, who converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.

So how can somebody who did not inherit their maternal DNA from Sarah claim to return to Israel?



Yes, some Ashkenazi Jews can trance their paternal DNA to the Middle East, but Middle East is a huge region. Palestine is a tiny spot on this map:
*
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Haplogroup_J_(Y-DNA).PNG
*
So if some Ashkenazi males can trace his origin to the Middle East, then his ancestors may have lived in any of the areas with the high percentage of J-Haplogroups.

What is the explanation?

Well, in the Middle Ages many Semitic merchants traveled from Khazaria to Africa and Asia, some of them converted to Islam, others converted to Judaism, and these J-Haplogroups can be traced by a huge number of people on a huge territory, and most of the carriers of the J-Haplogroup have nothing to do with Judaism.

So if some Ashkenazi and Mizrahi have the same J-Haplogroups, how can this prove that they stem from Hebrews?

Are you kidding?

The conversion to Islam or Judaism does not change your genetic makeup, and the mentioned J-Haplogroup is older than any form of Monotheism.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> So do explain the other "tribes" other than the Cohens who have distinctive DNA strands. This has been proven many times since the study you link to from 2007, a lot has happened in the last 9 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What DNA strands are you talking about?
> Do you really understand the matter?
> 
> Is Judaism not transferred via the maternal line?
> 
> Do you know what Mitochondrial DNA (*mtDNA) is?
> 
> 
> "The origins of Ashkenazi Jews remain highly controversial. Like Judaism, mitochondrial DNA is passed along the maternal line. Its variation in the Ashkenazim is highly distinctive, with four major and numerous minor founders. However, due to their rarity in the general population, these founders have been difficult to trace to a source. Here we show that all four major founders, ~40% of Ashkenazi mtDNA variation, have ancestry in prehistoric Europe, rather than the Near East or Caucasus. Furthermore, most of the remaining minor founders share a similar deep European ancestry.
> 
> Thus the great majority of Ashkenazi maternal lineages were not brought from the Levant, as commonly supposed, nor recruited in the Caucasus, as sometimes suggested, but assimilated within Europe.
> 
> These results point to a significant role for the conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and provide the foundation for a detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history".
> 
> A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages :  Nature Communications :  Nature Publishing Group
> *
> As we see, all founding mothers of European Jewish communities were European women, who converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.
> 
> So how can somebody who did not inherit their maternal DNA from Sarah claim to return to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, some Ashkenazi Jews can trance their paternal DNA to the Middle East, but Middle East is a huge region. Palestine is a tiny spot on this map:
> *
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Haplogroup_J_(Y-DNA).PNG
> *
> So if some Ashkenazi males can trace his origin to the Middle East, then his ancestors may have lived in any of the areas with the high percentage of J-Haplogroups.
> 
> What is the explanation?
> 
> Well, in the Middle Ages many Semitic merchants traveled from Khazaria to Africa and Asia, some of them converted to Islam, others converted to Judaism, and these J-Haplogroups can be traced by a huge number of people on a huge territory, and most of the carriers of the J-Haplogroup have nothing to do with Judaism.
> 
> So if some Ashkenazi and Mizrahi have the same J-Haplogroups, how can this prove that they stem from Hebrews?
> 
> Are you kidding?
> 
> The conversion to Islam or Judaism does not change your genetic makeup, and the mentioned J-Haplogroup is older than any form of Monotheism.
Click to expand...


It wouldn't matter since a sincere convert to Judaism is considered to be Jewish.  My name in Hebrew is Binyamin ben (son of) Aryeh.  If a male converts to Judaism, he is called a son of Abraham (no matter what his biological father's name is), whereas a female convert to Judaism is called a daughter of Sarah.


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> There would also be peace in the region if the Palestinians accepted the Jewish culture and integrated into Jewish society.



BS, some black guys say that they are Hebrews, they believe that they are the real descendants of Hebrews.

You cannot become a Jew because the white Zionist Rabbis accept any Russian with a Jewish grandmother, who does not speak Hebrew, does not care about the religion and has noting to do with "Jewish culture".

But they will never accept anybody who does not have, according to the notion of white Jews, a Jewish ancestry.



*"Black Hebrew Israelites* (also called *Black Hebrews*, *African Hebrew Israelites*, and *Hebrew Israelites*) are groups of African Americans who believe they are descendants of the ancient Israelites. Black Hebrews adhere in varying degrees to the religious beliefs and practices of both Christianity and Judaism. *They are not recognized as Jews by the greater Jewish community.*
...
But, the Israeli government ruled in 1973 that the group did not qualify for automatic citizenship because *they could not prove Jewish descent and had not undergone Orthodox conversion".*

Black Hebrew Israelites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As we see, Zionists believe that Jewishness can be inherited, you do not have to have any Jewish culture, the "Jewish blood" is the condition that really matters.

And what do they mean by "Orthodox Conversion"?
If you are forced to convert to integrate into Israeli society, then Israel is an even worse a theocracy.

Christians and Muslims lived in peace in Palestine for centuries, nobody was forced to convert to another religion, about 30% of expelled Palestinians were Christians.


----------



## Art__Allm

ForeverYoung436 said:


> It wouldn't matter since a sincere convert to Judaism is considered to be Jewish.
> 
> My name in Hebrew is Binyamin ben (son of) Aryeh.  If a male converts to Judaism, he is called a son of Abraham (no matter what his biological father's name is), whereas a female convert to Judaism is called a daughter of Sarah.



How can a convert return to Israel and become a native Semite? 
How can converts claim that Palestine was their ancestral homeland?


----------



## Art__Allm

Hollie said:


> Do yourself a favor and look at the history of islamism. Non-moslems are reviled. Do a search with the term "dhimmitude".



About 30% of Palestinians were Christians, they lived in peace with their Muslim compatriots, till the crazy Europeans, called Zionists, implemented their crazy project in Palestine and expelled the native Semites, be they Muslims or Christians.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> You forget that the mandatory was not taxed with looking at the immigration numbers for arab muslims, so ignored them completely. Then made up some facts and figures to cover their bungling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As already mentioned, no migrants caused any problems to the Palestinians, they readily integrated into the Palestinian society.
> 
> If Zionists did the same, there would be peace in the region.
Click to expand...







 And you know that all the Jews that became Israelis were Zionists..............HOW ?       Quite a lot were those from the surrounding lands that saw the colonisation of Palestine as the answer to the past abuses and atrocities faced by the Jews. Today roughly 80% of the population of Israel was born there and meet the criteria for Palestinian citizenship, which os what the arab muslims are so afraid of.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wouldn't matter since a sincere convert to Judaism is considered to be Jewish.
> 
> My name in Hebrew is Binyamin ben (son of) Aryeh.  If a male converts to Judaism, he is called a son of Abraham (no matter what his biological father's name is), whereas a female convert to Judaism is called a daughter of Sarah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can a convert return to Israel and become a native Semite?
> How can converts claim that Palestine was their ancestral homeland?
Click to expand...






 By the same means a Catholic Italian can claim that they are American, or an arab muslim claim they are British. The wording of international treaties and laws, that don't always make sense. How can a Pakistani become a Palestinian today and an American tomorrow ?


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> How can a convert return to Israel and become a native Semite?
> How can converts claim that Palestine was their ancestral homeland?



If a Palestinian mother can't have children and her children are adopted, does that mean they have no claim to be "Palestinian"?  After all, the adopted children have no "Palestinian blood" or "ethnic markers".  

Are we going to test all Jewish people and all Palestinian people to see if they have the "correct" DNA to be considered eligible for living in Israel/Palestine/Gaza?  /sarcasm


All you are doing here is trying to use science and technology as a way to legitimize a biological racism.

A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group.  Outsiders don't get a say.  

Oh, and eyeroll at the Khazar conspiracy theory.  That has been widely and soundly debunked.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do yourself a favor and look at the history of islamism. Non-moslems are reviled. Do a search with the term "dhimmitude".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About 30% of Palestinians were Christians, they lived in peace with their Muslim compatriots, till the crazy Europeans, called Zionists, implemented their crazy project in Palestine and expelled the native Semites, be they Muslims or Christians.
Click to expand...






 And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.


----------



## Shusha

Phoenall said:


> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.



Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> So do explain the other "tribes" other than the Cohens who have distinctive DNA strands. This has been proven many times since the study you link to from 2007, a lot has happened in the last 9 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What DNA strands are you talking about?
> Do you really understand the matter?
> 
> Is Judaism not transferred via the maternal line?
> 
> Do you know what Mitochondrial DNA (*mtDNA) is?
> 
> 
> "The origins of Ashkenazi Jews remain highly controversial. Like Judaism, mitochondrial DNA is passed along the maternal line. Its variation in the Ashkenazim is highly distinctive, with four major and numerous minor founders. However, due to their rarity in the general population, these founders have been difficult to trace to a source. Here we show that all four major founders, ~40% of Ashkenazi mtDNA variation, have ancestry in prehistoric Europe, rather than the Near East or Caucasus. Furthermore, most of the remaining minor founders share a similar deep European ancestry.
> 
> Thus the great majority of Ashkenazi maternal lineages were not brought from the Levant, as commonly supposed, nor recruited in the Caucasus, as sometimes suggested, but assimilated within Europe.
> 
> These results point to a significant role for the conversion of women in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and provide the foundation for a detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history".
> 
> A substantial prehistoric European ancestry amongst Ashkenazi maternal lineages :  Nature Communications :  Nature Publishing Group
> *
> As we see, all founding mothers of European Jewish communities were European women, who converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages.
> 
> So how can somebody who did not inherit their maternal DNA from Sarah claim to return to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, some Ashkenazi Jews can trance their paternal DNA to the Middle East, but Middle East is a huge region. Palestine is a tiny spot on this map:
> *
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Haplogroup_J_(Y-DNA).PNG
> *
> So if some Ashkenazi males can trace his origin to the Middle East, then his ancestors may have lived in any of the areas with the high percentage of J-Haplogroups.
> 
> What is the explanation?
> 
> Well, in the Middle Ages many Semitic merchants traveled from Khazaria to Africa and Asia, some of them converted to Islam, others converted to Judaism, and these J-Haplogroups can be traced by a huge number of people on a huge territory, and most of the carriers of the J-Haplogroup have nothing to do with Judaism.
> 
> So if some Ashkenazi and Mizrahi have the same J-Haplogroups, how can this prove that they stem from Hebrews?
> 
> Are you kidding?
> 
> The conversion to Islam or Judaism does not change your genetic makeup, and the mentioned J-Haplogroup is older than any form of Monotheism.
Click to expand...







 And if your link was right the Jewish population would have died out because of in-breeding 1000 years ago. To state that the modern day Jews were descended from just 4 females is ludicrous in the extreme. To use a fictional people invented in the middle of the 20C is scratching in the dirt for any clue to support your claims. Find one mention of khazaria prior to the second world war in any history books.


----------



## Challenger

Art__Allm said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, BTW, thanks for admitting "Zionist Israel" IS a settler colonial project. How successful it is, is still to be determined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are they not "returning" to Israel after 2000 years of supposed "expulsion"?
> Do they not believe that they are the only legitimate owners, because their tribal god presumably told them that Palestine forever belongs to this self-defined and self-chosen group of people?
Click to expand...

Bravo!


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
Click to expand...


Often machine gunning or firing mortars at fleeing civillian refugees to "encourage" them on their way was very restrained.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> There would also be peace in the region if the Palestinians accepted the Jewish culture and integrated into Jewish society.



The Zionists won't let them. THAT's the problem.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group. Outsiders don't get a say.



Yet Zionists continually assert Palestinians are not a people and deny them self-determination. it works for everyone or no-one.



Shusha said:


> All you are doing here is trying to use science and technology as a way to legitimize a biological racism.



That's what Zionists do, don't they?


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?  

On a per capita basis I am not so sure.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid your typical ignorance of history is the cause of your befuddlement.

What lands have_ The Zionists*™*_ invaded and conquered?


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm afraid your typical ignorance of history is the cause of your befuddlement.
> 
> What lands have_ The Zionists*™*_ invaded and conquered?
Click to expand...


The land that they subsequently colonized and then created a Jewish state where once Christians and Muslims lived.  But you knew that.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm afraid your typical ignorance of history is the cause of your befuddlement.
> 
> What lands have_ The Zionists*™*_ invaded and conquered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land that they subsequently colonized and then created a Jewish state where once Christians and Muslims lived.  But you knew that.
Click to expand...


So obviously, when I corrected you on your continued befuddlement, you were not able to address my comments and thus spammed the thread.

But, we all knew that.


----------



## montelatici

Do you actually know what "befuddlement" means?  I think not.  Stick to the issues rather than attempting to insult other posters.  It doesn't work.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Do you actually know what "befuddlement" means?  I think not.  Stick to the issues rather than attempting to insult other posters.  It doesn't work.


Oh my. Your tender islamo-sensibilities are offended. 

You may recall (understanding your continued comatose state), that you were instructed to identify what nation was invaded by Jews. 

Are you still too befuddled to address your assigned task?


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.



One would have to do considerable research to come up with exact numbers, probably an amount of research that I'm unwilling to go into today.  But I can think of all sorts of population transfers which occurred between WWI and WWII and after, and one much later, in which extremely large numbers of people were displaced or expelled or traded:  the expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe; the expulsion of the Japanese from Korea and China; Poles, Estonians, Latvians from the Soviet Union; Ukraines from Poland; Bulgarians and Greeks and Turks and Hungarians, all switched into the "proper countries"; the massive population transfers between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh; more recently the exchange of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots.  And then there is the mess which created and then un-created Yugoslavia.  

My point being that it was a time of the dissolution of large empires into smaller groups based on ethnicity and national self-determination.  It happened a lot.  It wasn't yet considered a crime against humanity.  (And frankly, I'm not entirely convinced it should be, but that is a different topic).  

The concept was to create ethnically homogeneous nations as a way to end conflict and war between culturally distinct peoples. Israel was one which had government officials encouraging an ethnically diverse nation.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The land that they subsequently colonized and then created a Jewish state where once Christians and Muslims lived.  But you knew that.



Um.  Christians and Muslims still live there.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Often machine gunning or firing mortars at fleeing civillian refugees to "encourage" them on their way was very restrained.
Click to expand...







 And of course you have verifiable evidence of this taking place other than pallywood videos and islamonazi propaganda sources


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There would also be peace in the region if the Palestinians accepted the Jewish culture and integrated into Jewish society.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Zionists won't let them. THAT's the problem.
Click to expand...







 Strange that as I am a Zionist and I would welcome that happening, so once again destroying your racist claims


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group. Outsiders don't get a say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet Zionists continually assert Palestinians are not a people and deny them self-determination. it works for everyone or no-one.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> All you are doing here is trying to use science and technology as a way to legitimize a biological racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's what Zionists do, don't they?
Click to expand...






 No wrong again we assert that the Palestinians are the Jews who held the title for 1,900 years until the Russians told Arafat to find a name for his terrorist organisation to make it credible


No We use science and technology to destroy your false claims, which we seem to do quite regular going on the number of times you screech hasbara or zionism


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
Click to expand...






And the evidence shows that only 50,000 enemy militia were actually expelled under international law of the time. The rest have admitted they left freely


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And here we have another Nazi that uses Zionist out of context because they know any other term would show they were Jew Haters and want to rid the world of the Jews.    The European Jews expelled no one at all that was not an enemy of the state, and they only did what every other nation did around that time. To single out the Jews as you are is rabid racism that we are supposed to have eliminated from our world, and here it is still blooming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm afraid your typical ignorance of history is the cause of your befuddlement.
> 
> What lands have_ The Zionists*™*_ invaded and conquered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land that they subsequently colonized and then created a Jewish state where once Christians and Muslims lived.  But you knew that.
Click to expand...






 But it was theirs by international law, so when did the defeated arabs get to own this land


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would have to do considerable research to come up with exact numbers, probably an amount of research that I'm unwilling to go into today.  But I can think of all sorts of population transfers which occurred between WWI and WWII and after, and one much later, in which extremely large numbers of people were displaced or expelled or traded:  the expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe; the expulsion of the Japanese from Korea and China; Poles, Estonians, Latvians from the Soviet Union; Ukraines from Poland; Bulgarians and Greeks and Turks and Hungarians, all switched into the "proper countries"; the massive population transfers between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh; more recently the exchange of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots.  And then there is the mess which created and then un-created Yugoslavia.
> 
> My point being that it was a time of the dissolution of large empires into smaller groups based on ethnicity and national self-determination.  It happened a lot.  It wasn't yet considered a crime against humanity.  (And frankly, I'm not entirely convinced it should be, but that is a different topic).
> 
> The concept was to create ethnically homogeneous nations as a way to end conflict and war between culturally distinct peoples. Israel was one which had government officials encouraging an ethnically diverse nation.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately these population transfers we carried out as a result of agreements or treaties between the victorious powers or the governments concerned. Zionist Isreal carried out ethnic cleansing as part of it's military operations to create a Jewish majority state. There was never any intention to create an ethnically diverse nation, that has been the problem from the outset with Zionism.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the Zionists have expelled or force transferred fewer natives of territories that they invaded and conquered than the Nazis did with the natives of the territories they invaded and conquered?
> 
> On a per capita basis I am not so sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would have to do considerable research to come up with exact numbers, probably an amount of research that I'm unwilling to go into today.  But I can think of all sorts of population transfers which occurred between WWI and WWII and after, and one much later, in which extremely large numbers of people were displaced or expelled or traded:  the expulsion of the Germans from Central and Eastern Europe; the expulsion of the Japanese from Korea and China; Poles, Estonians, Latvians from the Soviet Union; Ukraines from Poland; Bulgarians and Greeks and Turks and Hungarians, all switched into the "proper countries"; the massive population transfers between India, Pakistan and Bangladesh; more recently the exchange of the Greek and Turkish Cypriots.  And then there is the mess which created and then un-created Yugoslavia.
> 
> My point being that it was a time of the dissolution of large empires into smaller groups based on ethnicity and national self-determination.  It happened a lot.  It wasn't yet considered a crime against humanity.  (And frankly, I'm not entirely convinced it should be, but that is a different topic).
> 
> The concept was to create ethnically homogeneous nations as a way to end conflict and war between culturally distinct peoples. Israel was one which had government officials encouraging an ethnically diverse nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Unfortunately these population transfers we carried out as a result of agreements or treaties between the victorious powers or the governments concerned. Zionist Isreal carried out ethnic cleansing as part of it's military operations to create a Jewish majority state. There was never any intention to create an ethnically diverse nation, that has been the problem from the outset with Zionism.
Click to expand...








 Once again rat boy shows he does not have a valid argument to counter the reality as he peppers his post with the term Zionist used out of context and in in the islamonazi racist manner.  The fact is the Israelis cleared enemy combatants out from behind the front line as allowed under international law then and now.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Unfortunately these population transfers we carried out as a result of agreements or treaties between the victorious powers or the governments concerned. Zionist Isreal carried out ethnic cleansing as part of it's military operations to create a Jewish majority state. There was never any intention to create an ethnically diverse nation, that has been the problem from the outset with Zionism.



Your point being, what?  That it was fine for all these other nations to exchange populations, but you assign evil intent to Israel for doing what the rest of them did?

ALL of those nations wanted ethnically homogeneous States.  Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?



No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
Click to expand...


You mean a treaty which outlined the population transfers or just general end-of-conflict treaties?


----------



## jillian

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
Click to expand...


what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?

shut up idiot.


----------



## fanger

In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or "ascension", the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.

Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of "the wildest anti-semitism", and calling on Jews to flee France.

"If I have to advise our brothers in France, I'll tell them one thing - move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it's a must and they have to move immediately."
*
Financial inducements*

Similarly, Israel has tried to exploit economic crises in countries with significant Jewish populations to encourage them to emigrate. In 2001, when the Argentinian financial system collapsed, Israel offered each Jew there a $20,000 cheque - should they make a new life in Israel.

That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.

The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel - including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism - were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel's relations with Argentina.
Netanyahu defies French pleas to push Zionist agenda

shut up idiot.


----------



## Challenger

jillian said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
Click to expand...


You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.


----------



## fanger

*Iran's Jews on life inside Israel's 'enemy state': 'We feel secure and happy'*
*"Benjamin Netanyahu and the anti-Semites need each other: they supply each other with what they need – intolerance and hatred." This is the vehemently held view of Ciamak Morsadegh, a newly elected Iranian parliamentarian. "It is an unspoken alliance which suits them, but it causes great harm to the rest of us." The MP is Jewish, representing the largest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel, one that is growing in size while those in almost all other Muslim countries in the region have shrunk severely or disappeared altogether – largely due to persecution.

Israel has long portrayed Iran as an implacable enemy, an existential threat, even. In recent years, Netanyahu's government mobilised its international backers in the US Congress and elsewhere to lobby fiercely against the nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers, with dire warnings about a dangerous regime acquiring weapons of mass destruction. The campaign failed. The nuclear agreement was signed. And the resultant easing of international sanctions – providing a road to recovery for the country's ailing economy – was a key factor in the sweeping gains by the reformists and their allies in the recent elections; a victory that should pave the way for great changes in Iranian politics and history.

Morsadegh, a 50-year-old hospital surgeon, is one of the candidates who benefited in the liberal swing to get re-elected. He is the only Jew in the Iranian parliament, the Majlis, winning the seat reserved for the Jewish community against two other candidates. "The fact is, Iran is a place where Jews feel secure and we are happy to be here," he says. "We are proud to be Iranian. I know this doesn't follow the Zionist script, but this is the reality."

But are his expressions of patriotism and castigation of Israel intended to ensure self-preservation in the Islamic Republic? "No one forces the Jews to stay here," says Morsadegh, a large figure, full of energy, at his office in the Sapir Medical Centre in Tehran. "The Israelis offer money to Jewish people to emigrate to Israel, but we choose to stay.
Iran's Jews on life inside Israel's 'enemy state'
*


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
Click to expand...






 No treaty with India, and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Yugoslavia and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Somalia and the muslims forced the issue.

 So rat boy how is it that muslims can force a population exchange when they want a muslim nation and you don't see any problems with that. Yet you see a problem when it is the Jews wanting to safeguard the citizens of Israel


----------



## Phoenall

fanger said:


> In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or "ascension", the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.
> 
> Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of "the wildest anti-semitism", and calling on Jews to flee France.
> 
> "If I have to advise our brothers in France, I'll tell them one thing - move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it's a must and they have to move immediately."
> *
> Financial inducements*
> 
> Similarly, Israel has tried to exploit economic crises in countries with significant Jewish populations to encourage them to emigrate. In 2001, when the Argentinian financial system collapsed, Israel offered each Jew there a $20,000 cheque - should they make a new life in Israel.
> 
> That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.
> 
> The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel - including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism - were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel's relations with Argentina.
> Netanyahu defies French pleas to push Zionist agenda
> 
> shut up idiot.









 Islamonazi propaganda is the best you can do.      Maybe you should think about practising what you preach


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.
Click to expand...






 Yes they imprisoned their Jews because so many had already been forced to leave by the regime. They could not afford the bad publicity that was a result of the forced emigration, so banned them from leaving. Look at the population prior to 1948 and then look at the declining population since 1948.


----------



## Phoenall

fanger said:


> *Iran's Jews on life inside Israel's 'enemy state': 'We feel secure and happy'*
> *"Benjamin Netanyahu and the anti-Semites need each other: they supply each other with what they need – intolerance and hatred." This is the vehemently held view of Ciamak Morsadegh, a newly elected Iranian parliamentarian. "It is an unspoken alliance which suits them, but it causes great harm to the rest of us." The MP is Jewish, representing the largest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel, one that is growing in size while those in almost all other Muslim countries in the region have shrunk severely or disappeared altogether – largely due to persecution.*
> 
> *Israel has long portrayed Iran as an implacable enemy, an existential threat, even. In recent years, Netanyahu's government mobilised its international backers in the US Congress and elsewhere to lobby fiercely against the nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers, with dire warnings about a dangerous regime acquiring weapons of mass destruction. The campaign failed. The nuclear agreement was signed. And the resultant easing of international sanctions – providing a road to recovery for the country's ailing economy – was a key factor in the sweeping gains by the reformists and their allies in the recent elections; a victory that should pave the way for great changes in Iranian politics and history.*
> 
> *Morsadegh, a 50-year-old hospital surgeon, is one of the candidates who benefited in the liberal swing to get re-elected. He is the only Jew in the Iranian parliament, the Majlis, winning the seat reserved for the Jewish community against two other candidates. "The fact is, Iran is a place where Jews feel secure and we are happy to be here," he says. "We are proud to be Iranian. I know this doesn't follow the Zionist script, but this is the reality."*
> 
> *But are his expressions of patriotism and castigation of Israel intended to ensure self-preservation in the Islamic Republic? "No one forces the Jews to stay here," says Morsadegh, a large figure, full of energy, at his office in the Sapir Medical Centre in Tehran. "The Israelis offer money to Jewish people to emigrate to Israel, but we choose to stay.*
> *Iran's Jews on life inside Israel's 'enemy state'*








 And you don't show his family with the guns to their heads round the back, which is what the Jews who manage to escape tell the world. The interviews are stunted and scripted as shown by the occasional trick question asked


----------



## Shusha

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty with India, and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Yugoslavia and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Somalia and the muslims forced the issue.
> 
> So rat boy how is it that muslims can force a population exchange when they want a muslim nation and you don't see any problems with that. Yet you see a problem when it is the Jews wanting to safeguard the citizens of Israel
Click to expand...


I know.  I wonder what kind of treaties he/she is reading.  There was a treaty to ethnically cleanse Korea of the Japanese?  And a treaty to remove all Jews from pretty much every Arab/Muslim country?  And treaties outlining the removal of 15 million Germans from Central and Eastern Europe?  There was a treaty to switch Greek and Turkish Cypriots?  

And Challenger isn't even brave enough to touch upon the CONCEPT I am bringing up -- which was that, in the context of the time, creating homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal and necessary in order to create peace.


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they imprisoned their Jews because so many had already been forced to leave by the regime. They could not afford the bad publicity that was a result of the forced emigration, so banned them from leaving. Look at the population prior to 1948 and then look at the declining population since 1948.
Click to expand...

Untrue STATEMENT


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty with India, and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Yugoslavia and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Somalia and the muslims forced the issue.
> 
> So rat boy how is it that muslims can force a population exchange when they want a muslim nation and you don't see any problems with that. Yet you see a problem when it is the Jews wanting to safeguard the citizens of Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know.  I wonder what kind of treaties he/she is reading.  There was a treaty to ethnically cleanse Korea of the Japanese?  And a treaty to remove all Jews from pretty much every Arab/Muslim country?  And treaties outlining the removal of 15 million Germans from Central and Eastern Europe?  There was a treaty to switch Greek and Turkish Cypriots?
> 
> And Challenger isn't even brave enough to touch upon the CONCEPT I am bringing up -- which was that, in the context of the time, creating homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal and necessary in order to create peace.
Click to expand...

You have Drawn a long and inaccurate Bow here Shusha......Prior to 1948 Thousands of Jewish folk lived and did business in Arab countries....many were forced out after the treatment given to the Palestinians but there are Jewish Communities still in Muslim Countries today.........after 1948 there was a push from the Israeli Government to encourage Jews in Arab Countries to come to Israel(Very noticeable in the huge Moroccan Jewish Community in Israel) so it wasn't that all Jews we kicked out of Muslim Countries.....The previous Iranian President Asabajinidan sic...was the son of a Jewish father and mother who migrated to Iran in the 40's.......How you can mutter the term ''Creating Homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal!!!!!!!where Israel are concerned,considering most Palestinians are a Semitic people whereas most Jews in Israel are clearly not'' your comment is debased because of this fact,I suggest you put your brain into gear before proceeding more.....Regards Shusha......steve


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> And Challenger isn't even brave enough to touch upon the CONCEPT I am bringing up -- which was that, in the context of the time, creating homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal and necessary in order to create peace.



Except it wasn't. Forced transfers of populations/ethnic cleansing became illegal in 1946. Prior to that, in most cases, they were carried out with the agreement of the governments concerned.


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they imprisoned their Jews because so many had already been forced to leave by the regime. They could not afford the bad publicity that was a result of the forced emigration, so banned them from leaving. Look at the population prior to 1948 and then look at the declining population since 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Untrue STATEMENT
Click to expand...








 Are you calling the people who escaped that regime and its bloodthirsty actions, as only an islamonazi apologist and propagandist could do


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why has it not been a problem for all those other States?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty with India, and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Yugoslavia and the muslims forced the issue. No treaty with Somalia and the muslims forced the issue.
> 
> So rat boy how is it that muslims can force a population exchange when they want a muslim nation and you don't see any problems with that. Yet you see a problem when it is the Jews wanting to safeguard the citizens of Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know.  I wonder what kind of treaties he/she is reading.  There was a treaty to ethnically cleanse Korea of the Japanese?  And a treaty to remove all Jews from pretty much every Arab/Muslim country?  And treaties outlining the removal of 15 million Germans from Central and Eastern Europe?  There was a treaty to switch Greek and Turkish Cypriots?
> 
> And Challenger isn't even brave enough to touch upon the CONCEPT I am bringing up -- which was that, in the context of the time, creating homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal and necessary in order to create peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have Drawn a long and inaccurate Bow here Shusha......Prior to 1948 Thousands of Jewish folk lived and did business in Arab countries....many were forced out after the treatment given to the Palestinians but there are Jewish Communities still in Muslim Countries today.........after 1948 there was a push from the Israeli Government to encourage Jews in Arab Countries to come to Israel(Very noticeable in the huge Moroccan Jewish Community in Israel) so it wasn't that all Jews we kicked out of Muslim Countries.....The previous Iranian President Asabajinidan sic...was the son of a Jewish father and mother who migrated to Iran in the 40's.......How you can mutter the term ''Creating Homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal!!!!!!!where Israel are concerned,considering most Palestinians are a Semitic people whereas most Jews in Israel are clearly not'' your comment is debased because of this fact,I suggest you put your brain into gear before proceeding more.....Regards Shusha......steve
Click to expand...








 Get it right the Jews tried to escape but couldn't as the muslims would not have any slaves to work the land/ And you claim that most Jews in Israel were not semitic is straight out of islamonazi propaganda history, as the vast majority of Jews were from the surrounding area. Even you admit this is the case when you stated they were evicted, illegally, in 1949


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Challenger isn't even brave enough to touch upon the CONCEPT I am bringing up -- which was that, in the context of the time, creating homogeneous States based on distinct cultures was seen as normal and necessary in order to create peace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except it wasn't. Forced transfers of populations/ethnic cleansing became illegal in 1946. Prior to that, in most cases, they were carried out with the agreement of the governments concerned.
Click to expand...








 Did it then how about a link to the international law saying this was the case ?

 Then show what the UN did when the muslims proceeded to force transfers of populations and ethnical cleansing in every nation they infested right up until just last year


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> If a Palestinian mother can't have children and her children are adopted, does that mean they have no claim to be "Palestinian"?  After all, the adopted children have no "Palestinian blood" or "ethnic markers".



What are you talking about?

Palestinian do not need silly excuses, they can prove that they themselves were expelled from their homeland, and that happened not 2000 years ago, but after 1948. But the very people that were expelled are not permitted to return to their homeland.

Zionists, who admit that they stem from converts, not from people who were presumably expelled from Palestine 2000 years ago, have the chutzpa and lunacy to say that they are "returning" to Palestine.




Shusha said:


> A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group.  Outsiders don't get a say.



Can Roman Catholics from South Korea (ethnic Koreans) "return" to Rome, and kick out the native Italians, whose ancestors lived there for hundreds of years, and who are not Catholics any more?

Is the self-identification of some Roman Catholics with a Korean ethnic background more important than the rights of non-religious native Italians to live in Rome?

Are you kidding?



Shusha said:


> Oh, and eyeroll at the Khazar conspiracy theory.  That has been widely and soundly debunked.



Show me any scientific article that debunks the finding of the Israeli scientist and expert in his filed Eran Elhaik.
*
“All Eurasian Jewish communities are closer to Caucasus populations,” he writes, with Central European Jews closer to Italian non-Jews as the exception. Not one of the eight evaluated Jewish populations were closer to Levant populations.*

Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking
The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses

Thank you.


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> To state that the modern day Jews were descended from just 4 females is ludicrous in the extreme.



No, it is hard science, bottle neck effects were common in human history.

The mentioned 4 females are not only the founding mothers of Ashkenazi communities, but also the ancestors of many, many different European ethnic groups.

Sorry, but it seems to me that you have no idea about human evolution and the science, called genetics.



Phoenall said:


> Find one mention of khazaria prior to the second world war in any history books.



Are you kidding, aren't you?

Any historian knew about Khazaria, even ancient historians, there is a big amount of historical documents, Khazaria is not a controversial topic any more.

ALL historians agree that the first Jewish communities in Poland were created by Khazars, it is accepted by ALL historians that the ruling elite of Khazaria converted to Judaism.

There are different opinions about the scope of conversion of the common population in Khazaria (some of Khazars converted to Islam) and about the number of Khazars and "German Jews" who moved to Poland.

Some historians believe that the number of "German Jews" was bigger, which is ridiculous, because only a tiny number of "German Jews" migrated to Poland, and scientists do not believe in "demographic miracles".

You have to explain the sky rocketing fertility rate of "German Jews" (that had a very low fertility in Germany) with a demographic "miracle", but "miracles" is something that works in fairy tales, hard science does not accept miracles.

The most simple explanation is that there was a big number of Khazars in Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine that could not have been counted, because they were semi-nomads.

After the Russian Tsars ordered the "pale of settlement", they could count all nomads and semi-nomads, and that explains the sudden demographic miracle of Ashkenazi Jews.

Solzhenitsyn writes about this phenomenon in his books "200 years together" and supports his claims with documents.

But, unfortunately, these very important books were never translated into English.


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.



Because of this "population transfer" (euphemism for ethnic cleansing) the international law was changed to be sure that ethnic cleansing never happen again.

But Israel ignored the international law and deliberately committed crimes.

You have to call a spade a spade, no linguistic acrobatic and no hasbara can deny the obvious facts.

You cannot justify actual crimes with something that happened in the past, before a crime became per definition in the law a crime.


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a Palestinian mother can't have children and her children are adopted, does that mean they have no claim to be "Palestinian"?  After all, the adopted children have no "Palestinian blood" or "ethnic markers".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> Palestinian do not need silly excuses, they can prove that they themselves were expelled from their homeland, and that happened not 2000 years ago, but after 1948. But the very people that were expelled are not permitted to return to their homeland.
> 
> Zionists, who admit that they stem from converts, not from people who were presumably expelled from Palestine 2000 years ago, have the chutzpa and lunacy to say that they are "returning" to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group.  Outsiders don't get a say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can Roman Catholics from South Korea (ethnic Koreans) "return" to Rome, and kick out the native Italians, whose ancestors lived there for hundreds of years, and who are not Catholics any more?
> 
> Is the self-identification of some Roman Catholics with a Korean ethnic background more important than the rights of non-religious native Italians to live in Rome?
> 
> Are you kidding?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and eyeroll at the Khazar conspiracy theory.  That has been widely and soundly debunked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me any scientific article that debunks the finding of the Israeli scientist and expert in his filed Eran Elhaik.
> *
> “All Eurasian Jewish communities are closer to Caucasus populations,” he writes, with Central European Jews closer to Italian non-Jews as the exception. Not one of the eight evaluated Jewish populations were closer to Levant populations.*
> 
> Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> Thank you.
Click to expand...



The Jewish people originated in Israel.  Trying to deny that is just foolish.  

The reason you are trying to deny it is to get around a little quandry that comes up with people like you.  And that is how to demand the right of return for the Palestinians while denying it to the Jewish people.  Most of you attempt to delegitimize the Jewish people by denying their origins (again, foolishness) or to claim that the Jewish people aren't really a people and thus have no rights to a nationality.  Its a tired game.  And it prolongs the conflict rather than working on a resolution for it.  

Khazar theory debunked.


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this "population transfer" (euphemism for ethnic cleansing) the international law was changed to be sure that ethnic cleansing never happen again.
> 
> But Israel ignored the international law and deliberately committed crimes.
> 
> You have to call a spade a spade, no linguistic acrobatic and no hasbara can deny the obvious facts.
> 
> You cannot justify actual crimes with something that happened in the past, before a crime became per definition in the law a crime.
Click to expand...


If Israel ignored international law and deliberately committed the crime of ethnic cleansing and you are attempting to put it "right", why are you not ALSO demanding that all the other ethnic cleansings which occurred around that time are corrected?  

Why are you not demanding that 15 million Germans be returned to their homelands in Eastern and Central Europe?  Why are you not demanding that the Latvians, the Estonians and Ukrainians be returned to the Soviet Union?  Why are you not demanding that the Japanese be returned to Korea?  And for the Turkish and Greek Cypriots be brought back to their homes?  Why are you not demanding that Pakistan and India and Bangladesh return all of those uprooted in the ethnic cleansings be returned to their original homes?  Along with all their descendants?  

Why are you claiming that Israel ignored international law and yet all of these other nations did not?


----------



## montelatici

“When comparing Jewish communities to their non-Jewish neighbors, Caucasus or Levant (Middle Eastern) populations—which is the closest to Jews? “All Eurasian Jewish communities are closer to Caucasus populations,” he writes, with Central European Jews closer to Italian non-Jews as the exception. Not one of the eight evaluated Jewish populations were closer to Levant populations................There is no Jewish genome and certainly no Jewish gene,” says the Israeli-born Elhaik. Instead, all humans are a mix of the same building blocks, built with slightly different architectures. “The confusion about European Jews results from their tragic history of persecutions and deportations, creating multiple links between ancestry and geography. By dismantling our notions of genetically distinct populations and understanding our kinship, we can better appreciate our common history, and more importantly, our shared future.“

Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking


----------



## Boston1

Odd how ole Monty keeps posting hasbara on these threads. The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history. 

As apposed to the Arab Muslims who first entered the scene in about the 6th century and didn't colonize Judea until about the 9th century


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people originated in Israel. Trying to deny that is just foolish.



Wrong. JUDAISM originated in monotheist cults in the Judean hills. From where the religion spread through proselytisation/conversion to the various ethnicities in the Levant and later along trade routes throughout the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Empires. There were Judean communities scattered throughout these empires, some of which adopted Judaism, others that did not.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel. Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. JUDAISM originated in monotheist cults in the Judean hills. From where the religion spread through proselytisation/conversion to the various ethnicities in the Levant and later along trade routes throughout the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Empires. There were Judean communities scattered throughout these empires, some of which adopted Judaism, others that did not.
Click to expand...


Yes, I know.  There is no such thing as a "Jewish people".  The Jewish people are the only people in the world who, by any definition of "people" or "culture" or whatever term you want to use, clearly qualify but somehow don't "count".  Though you can never come up with a reason for them "not counting".  You begin to bore me.


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> No treaty or agreement. That makes the Zionist actions crimes against humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they imprisoned their Jews because so many had already been forced to leave by the regime. They could not afford the bad publicity that was a result of the forced emigration, so banned them from leaving. Look at the population prior to 1948 and then look at the declining population since 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Untrue STATEMENT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you calling the people who escaped that regime and its bloodthirsty actions, as only an islamonazi apologist and propagandist could do
Click to expand...

Grow Up


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Though you can never come up with a reason for them "not counting".



I have, time after time, and throughout most of "Jewish history", Jewish people have agreed with me, that is, until the Zionists re-wrote the history books. Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity. There may be some tenuous genetic links with people from Afghanistan to Morocco, but that's like saying I'm a "Roman" because I follow Roman Catholicism and may have some genetic material common to people from Spain to Greece.


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel. Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. JUDAISM originated in monotheist cults in the Judean hills. From where the religion spread through proselytisation/conversion to the various ethnicities in the Levant and later along trade routes throughout the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Empires. There were Judean communities scattered throughout these empires, some of which adopted Judaism, others that did not.
Click to expand...


Man do you ever have one serious issue with hoof in mouth disease 

Quote 

God had a wife, *Asherah*, whom the Book of Kings suggests was worshiped alongside Yahweh in his temple in Israel, according to an Oxford scholar. In 1967, *Raphael Patai* was the first historian to mention that the ancient *Israelites* worshiped both Yahweh and *Asherah*.Nov 27, 2012

End Quote


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.



Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel. Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong. JUDAISM originated in monotheist cults in the Judean hills. From where the religion spread through proselytisation/conversion to the various ethnicities in the Levant and later along trade routes throughout the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Empires. There were Judean communities scattered throughout these empires, some of which adopted Judaism, others that did not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Man do you ever have one serious issue with hoof in mouth disease
> 
> Quote
> 
> God had a wife, *Asherah*, whom the Book of Kings suggests was worshiped alongside Yahweh in his temple in Israel, according to an Oxford scholar. In 1967, *Raphael Patai* was the first historian to mention that the ancient *Israelites* worshiped both Yahweh and *Asherah*.Nov 27, 2012
> 
> End Quote
Click to expand...


Does God have a wife in the Torah?


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a Palestinian mother can't have children and her children are adopted, does that mean they have no claim to be "Palestinian"?  After all, the adopted children have no "Palestinian blood" or "ethnic markers".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> Palestinian do not need silly excuses, they can prove that they themselves were expelled from their homeland, and that happened not 2000 years ago, but after 1948. But the very people that were expelled are not permitted to return to their homeland.
> 
> Zionists, who admit that they stem from converts, not from people who were presumably expelled from Palestine 2000 years ago, have the chutzpa and lunacy to say that they are "returning" to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> A guiding principle in the concept of self-determination is that the group self-identifies the members of the group.  Outsiders don't get a say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can Roman Catholics from South Korea (ethnic Koreans) "return" to Rome, and kick out the native Italians, whose ancestors lived there for hundreds of years, and who are not Catholics any more?
> 
> Is the self-identification of some Roman Catholics with a Korean ethnic background more important than the rights of non-religious native Italians to live in Rome?
> 
> Are you kidding?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and eyeroll at the Khazar conspiracy theory.  That has been widely and soundly debunked.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me any scientific article that debunks the finding of the Israeli scientist and expert in his filed Eran Elhaik.
> *
> “All Eurasian Jewish communities are closer to Caucasus populations,” he writes, with Central European Jews closer to Italian non-Jews as the exception. Not one of the eight evaluated Jewish populations were closer to Levant populations.*
> 
> Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking
> The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
> 
> Thank you.
Click to expand...






 Then why havent they done so in the international courts, They only need to produce the land title issued by the Ottomans or mandatory and they have won. Nothing issued after 1948 would be valid as they would be issued by Jordan.
 Then how about a link proving this stupid claim as 80% of the Jews in Israel are indigenous according to UN criteria.


Is that like how a Syrian deserter who had never set foot in Palestine could claim that he owns Tel Aviv because he
has lived in Ramallah for 2 years. Of course a Korean national cant claim Rome as he has no links to Rome.



 How about the novel written that first mentions Khazars from the mid 20C, no scientific evidence to pre date this or you would have produced it. As for your expert why has he been exposed as a LIAR and is using false data to get his name in the history books. So make a name for yourself and be the first to provide a scientific work that mentions the name Khazar written prior to 1920. Then show why the Jews did not die out from interbreeding 1000 year ago if as he claims they are descended from just 4 females. That would mean from age 12 to age 55 these females produced a child every 9 months and not one of them died. Then produce the secondary thesis by another eminent geneticist proving that his work was based on facts ( he has refused to release his evidence to the public domain because he knows the already small holes will become large holes if he does )


 So all you have is one persons work that happens to meet with your pov and nothing else, and you demand evidence to disprove your half baked ideas


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
Click to expand...







 So there were no Christians in Palestine after the 10C, is that what you are saying. So they have no claims to the land for any purpose at all. Are you saying that the muslims are LIARS when they talk of Jewish groups in Palestine right through the existence of islam in the M.E. ?

They were not called Palestinians until the 20C, before that they were Syrians and would kill anyone insulting them with the name Palestinian.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> To state that the modern day Jews were descended from just 4 females is ludicrous in the extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is hard science, bottle neck effects were common in human history.
> 
> The mentioned 4 females are not only the founding mothers of Ashkenazi communities, but also the ancestors of many, many different European ethnic groups.
> 
> Sorry, but it seems to me that you have no idea about human evolution and the science, called genetics.
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Find one mention of khazaria prior to the second world war in any history books.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you kidding, aren't you?
> 
> Any historian knew about Khazaria, even ancient historians, there is a big amount of historical documents, Khazaria is not a controversial topic any more.
> 
> ALL historians agree that the first Jewish communities in Poland were created by Khazars, it is accepted by ALL historians that the ruling elite of Khazaria converted to Judaism.
> 
> There are different opinions about the scope of conversion of the common population in Khazaria (some of Khazars converted to Islam) and about the number of Khazars and "German Jews" who moved to Poland.
> 
> Some historians believe that the number of "German Jews" was bigger, which is ridiculous, because only a tiny number of "German Jews" migrated to Poland, and scientists do not believe in "demographic miracles".
> 
> You have to explain the sky rocketing fertility rate of "German Jews" (that had a very low fertility in Germany) with a demographic "miracle", but "miracles" is something that works in fairy tales, hard science does not accept miracles.
> 
> The most simple explanation is that there was a big number of Khazars in Poland/Lithuania/Ukraine that could not have been counted, because they were semi-nomads.
> 
> After the Russian Tsars ordered the "pale of settlement", they could count all nomads and semi-nomads, and that explains the sudden demographic miracle of Ashkenazi Jews.
> 
> Solzhenitsyn writes about this phenomenon in his books "200 years together" and supports his claims with documents.
> 
> But, unfortunately, these very important books were never translated into English.
Click to expand...







 It seems that when faced with evidence you will grasp at any straws. The study says the whole of the Jewsish race is descended from just 4 females. Now you are saying that 100 million people are descended from just these same 4 women. So do explain the DNA studies carried out that shows segregated groups show a distinct lack of outside DNA. As is the case with the Jews who have the same genome map as all the Jewish groups. That is European, Asian, African and Palestinian groups showing they are all the same people. No admixture from outside the group was found that was dominant.


 Seems I have a better grasp than you as I bred animals, and I know not to breed family to family.

So you cant find just one mention and you are now back pedaling. Why do you idiots always stop dead when asked to provide this evidence, and then realise that your claims are based on a work of fiction . So produce one scientific work prior to the novel being published  that mentions the Khazars ?

And then we get the get out of Jail card that you hope will get you out of jail.     Why not post the book and I will translate it for you on here and we can all see just how stupid you are.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel actually showed considerable restraint compared to most after WWII when it came to forced population transfers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because of this "population transfer" (euphemism for ethnic cleansing) the international law was changed to be sure that ethnic cleansing never happen again.
> 
> But Israel ignored the international law and deliberately committed crimes.
> 
> You have to call a spade a spade, no linguistic acrobatic and no hasbara can deny the obvious facts.
> 
> You cannot justify actual crimes with something that happened in the past, before a crime became per definition in the law a crime.
Click to expand...







 So when was this law enacted, and don't forget UN resolutions are not law.
 Then explain why muslims are still ethnically cleansing any of the lands they want to populate, which is why the Christians in Palestine are down by 90% in just 7 years.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Though you can never come up with a reason for them "not counting".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have, time after time, and throughout most of "Jewish history", Jewish people have agreed with me, that is, until the Zionists re-wrote the history books. Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity. There may be some tenuous genetic links with people from Afghanistan to Morocco, but that's like saying I'm a "Roman" because I follow Roman Catholicism and may have some genetic material common to people from Spain to Greece.
Click to expand...


Still can't come up with a reason for the Jewish people not counting as a people or a culture or a nationality or an ethnic group or whatever word you want to use, can you?  Yawn.  

Still waiting for you to come up with some definitive criteria for why people (Kurds, Palestinians, Catalans, Basques, Cypriots - both the Turkish and Greek varieties, Tibetans, Koreans, Iroquois, Cherokee, Mayan, Coast Salish, Jordanians, Syrians, Ukraines, Poles, Germans, Icelanders, Serbians, Pakistanis, Indians, Japanese, Persians etc, etc, etc) have the right to national self-determination and the Jewish people do not.


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> what treaty or agreement moved jews out of iran? out of Russia? out of Belarus?
> 
> shut up idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You tell me, I thought they all voluntarily emigrated to the "Zionist Paradise" because the USSR was "anti-Israel" at the time. Iran never expelled her Jewish population, quite the opposite as I recall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they imprisoned their Jews because so many had already been forced to leave by the regime. They could not afford the bad publicity that was a result of the forced emigration, so banned them from leaving. Look at the population prior to 1948 and then look at the declining population since 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Untrue STATEMENT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you calling the people who escaped that regime and its bloodthirsty actions, as only an islamonazi apologist and propagandist could do
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Grow Up
Click to expand...







 Hit a raw nerve have I.    Whats wrong being shown an as islamonazi apologist too much to bear ?


----------



## Phoenall

And yet the Jews I know have stated that they are a race as well as a religion and culture. Most of the worlds civilised nations say that the Jews are a race, and so does their Judiciary. And we are expected to agree with some jumped up Nazi trained Jew hater that he knows better and that we should believe him.


----------



## Hollie

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
Click to expand...

Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Though you can never come up with a reason for them "not counting".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have, time after time, and throughout most of "Jewish history", Jewish people have agreed with me, that is, until the Zionists re-wrote the history books. Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity. There may be some tenuous genetic links with people from Afghanistan to Morocco, but that's like saying I'm a "Roman" because I follow Roman Catholicism and may have some genetic material common to people from Spain to Greece.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still can't come up with a reason for the Jewish people not counting as a people or a culture or a nationality or an ethnic group or whatever word you want to use, can you?  Yawn.
> 
> Still waiting for you to come up with some definitive criteria for why people (Kurds, Palestinians, Catalans, Basques, Cypriots - both the Turkish and Greek varieties, Tibetans, Koreans, Iroquois, Cherokee, Mayan, Coast Salish, Jordanians, Syrians, Ukraines, Poles, Germans, Icelanders, Serbians, Pakistanis, Indians, Japanese, Persians etc, etc, etc) have the right to national self-determination and the Jewish people do not.
Click to expand...


Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
Click to expand...

Typical Israeli bullshit.
------------------------
The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Though you can never come up with a reason for them "not counting".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have, time after time, and throughout most of "Jewish history", Jewish people have agreed with me, that is, until the Zionists re-wrote the history books. Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity. There may be some tenuous genetic links with people from Afghanistan to Morocco, but that's like saying I'm a "Roman" because I follow Roman Catholicism and may have some genetic material common to people from Spain to Greece.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still can't come up with a reason for the Jewish people not counting as a people or a culture or a nationality or an ethnic group or whatever word you want to use, can you?  Yawn.
> 
> Still waiting for you to come up with some definitive criteria for why people (Kurds, Palestinians, Catalans, Basques, Cypriots - both the Turkish and Greek varieties, Tibetans, Koreans, Iroquois, Cherokee, Mayan, Coast Salish, Jordanians, Syrians, Ukraines, Poles, Germans, Icelanders, Serbians, Pakistanis, Indians, Japanese, Persians etc, etc, etc) have the right to national self-determination and the Jewish people do not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.
Click to expand...







 I bet you would not argue that in a court and win...................................


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
Click to expand...







 You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.



But you have no reasonable definition of any of the terms which includes most groups while excluding the Jewish people.  

Its like saying blue is not a color; Rottweilers are not dogs; pizza is not a food; Star Wars is not a movie.


----------



## montelatici

An Inuit can convert to Judaism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam etc.  It doesn't change his ethnicity.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
Click to expand...

Typical islamo-whining. That has been addressed for you, in detail, on many previous occasions.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> An Inuit can convert to Judaism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam etc.  It doesn't change his ethnicity.



A Jew can convert to Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, etc.  It doesn't change her ethnicity.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS
Click to expand...

Then post the real version.

I await your response.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then post the real version.
> 
> I await your response.
Click to expand...

Look for it. You know where to find it.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then post the real version.
> 
> I await your response.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look for it. You know where to find it.
Click to expand...

IOW, you are just shoveling shit.


----------



## Boston1

The only people shoveling shit are the ones blithering on about how the Judaic people didn't develop in Judea ;--) Or the Arabic people not being from Arabia ;--) 

but do go on ;--)


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> An Inuit can convert to Judaism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam etc.  It doesn't change his ethnicity.








 Correct and a racial Jew can convert to any other religion, but they are still racial Jews. And as you have stated many times Russian Jews who killed millions were still Jews even though they had given up their religion


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The simple fact is that Judaic people developed in Judea and have remained their for all of written history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, the Judeans (and other ethnic groups) living in Palestine gradually converted to Islam by the 10th century. They're called *Palestinians* today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then post the real version.
> 
> I await your response.
Click to expand...






 Whiich one ?


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, no. The people called "Palestinians" today have only existed since the late 1960's when Yassir "where's my welfare check" Arafat coined the slogan to falsely label a national identity to Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters.
> 
> 
> 
> Typical Israeli bullshit.
> ------------------------
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the islamonazi version of the order don't you, the one that bears no resemblance to what was really written. We have all seen your source for this, and we have proven it to be islamonazi LIES and BLOOD LIBELS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then post the real version.
> 
> I await your response.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look for it. You know where to find it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IOW, you are just shoveling shit.
Click to expand...








 That would be you as yiou have been called out again


----------



## Boston1

I wonder if these people droning on about race might be referred to as "racists"


----------



## Phoenall

Boston1 said:


> I wonder if these people droning on about race might be referred to as "racists"







 That is it they are trying to find new terms for racist words and terms so they don't sound and look racist. They fail every time and we should be telling them they have failed


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> The only people shoveling shit are the ones blithering on about how the Judaic people didn't develop in Judea



...says the forum's biggest bullshitter


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> I wonder if these people droning on about race might be referred to as "racists"



Don't know you'd need to talk to the biggest racists on the planet, Zionists.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if these people droning on about race might be referred to as "racists"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know you'd need to talk to the biggest racists on the planet, Zionists.
Click to expand...









 EVIDENCE of this alleged racism ?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> An Inuit can convert to Judaism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam etc.  It doesn't change his ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Jew can convert to Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, etc.  It doesn't change her ethnicity.
Click to expand...


Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you have no reasonable definition of any of the terms which includes most groups while excluding the Jewish people.
> 
> Its like saying blue is not a color; Rottweilers are not dogs; pizza is not a food; Star Wars is not a movie.
Click to expand...


No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?


----------



## Boston1

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you have no reasonable definition of any of the terms which includes most groups while excluding the Jewish people.
> 
> Its like saying blue is not a color; Rottweilers are not dogs; pizza is not a food; Star Wars is not a movie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
Click to expand...


Use your noodle Spiffy. If Mormons had been in Utah for the last 10,000 years, just like the Judaic people have been in the Canaan area, then yes, they likely would be considered an ethnic group. ;--)

you really might want to think things through before you make more wild claims ;--)


----------



## montelatici

The Zionist Jews that colonized Palestine were Europeans that lived in Europe for several millenia.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> An Inuit can convert to Judaism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam etc.  It doesn't change his ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Jew can convert to Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, etc.  It doesn't change her ethnicity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.
Click to expand...







 No he will still be Jewish as French is not a race or ethnicity, it is a nationallity


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you have no reasonable definition of any of the terms which includes most groups while excluding the Jewish people.
> 
> Its like saying blue is not a color; Rottweilers are not dogs; pizza is not a food; Star Wars is not a movie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
Click to expand...







 No because they don't have distinctive DNA that sets them apart, that is the deciding factor.


 Was Stalin a Russian or a Jew ?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The Zionist Jews that colonized Palestine were Europeans that lived in Europe for several millenia.







 Including the 1 million that were evicted from the surrounding nations ?


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.



And he remains Jewish.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?



That would depend on what qualities they had which might make them an ethnic group, a distinct culture or a "people".  Certainly, as Boston already said, an association with a specific territory for a long period of time is one of the best markers of a people.  Its one of the strongest arguments made by those who see the Palestinians as a people.  

Having a religion does not include or exclude people from being a people, its one of the factors, but not the only one.


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people originated in Israel.  Trying to deny that is just foolish.



You are confusing a religious group with a people. BTW, Christians also originated in Palestine, Jesus Christ was the first Christian Palestinian.

Does this mean that any Christian in any part of the world has the right to "return" to Palestine?


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> The Zionist Jews that colonized Palestine were Europeans that lived in Europe for several millenia.



You lie

Some of the returnees were from Europe, You're constantly cherrypicking just a few years in which Judiac returnees happened to be largely returning from Europe to their native homeland; Israel. But you psychotically ignore all those other years and all those other returnees as well as ignore natural growth. 

The majority of returnees came from the middle east area with some significant amounts, say 35% ish who came from Europe.

You seem to be suffering from cognitive dissonance as you've been informed of this multiple times. ;--)

Lets try and pull it together over there Monty ole been.


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> If Israel ignored international law and deliberately committed the crime of ethnic cleansing and you are attempting to put it "right", why are you not ALSO demanding that all the other ethnic cleansings which occurred around that time are corrected?



What do you mean with "around the same time"?



Shusha said:


> Why are you not demanding that 15 million Germans be returned to their homelands in Eastern and Central Europe?



Well, this happened before the law was changed, and many German refugees still fight for their right to return to their homes. Who wanted already returned. Most of them do not want to return to Poland, etc., they just want compensations for the stolen property.

Your arguments are silly.

Imagine you steal somebody's property and refuse to return it, because in the past other guys did the same.



Shusha said:


> Why are you not demanding that the Latvians, the Estonians and Ukrainians be returned to the Soviet Union?



Do they want to return? If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.
It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to Ukraine, Estonia or Latvia has already done this.



Shusha said:


> Why are you not demanding that the Japanese be returned to Korea?  And for the Turkish and Greek Cypriots be brought back to their homes?  Why are you not demanding that Pakistan and India and Bangladesh return all of those uprooted in the ethnic cleansings be returned to their original homes?  Along with all their descendants?




If there are people who want to return to their homes, I am supporting them.
The question ist: Do they want?



Shusha said:


> If Israel ignored international law and deliberately committed the crime of ethnic cleansing and you are attempting to put it "right", why are you not ALSO demanding that all the other ethnic cleansings which occurred around that time are corrected?



What do you mean with "around the same time"?



Shusha said:


> Why are you not demanding that 15 million Germans be returned to their homelands in Eastern and Central Europe?



Well, this happened before the law was changed, and German refugees still fight for their right to return to their homes.

You arguments are silly.

Imagine you steal somebody's property and refuse to return it, because in the past other guys did the same.



Shusha said:


> Why are you not demanding that the Latvians, the Estonians and Ukrainians be returned to the Soviet Union?



Do they want to return? If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.
It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to Ukraine, Estonia or Latvia has already done this.



Shusha said:


> Why are you claiming that Israel ignored international law and yet all of these other nations did not?



Well, I am repeating it again.

If there are people who want to return to their homes, I am supporting them.

Do they want to return?

If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.

It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to the mentioned countries has already done this. There are no laws that prohibit that.


----------



## Boston1

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel.  Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing a religious group with a people. BTW, Christians also originated in Palestine, Jesus Christ was the first Christian Palestinian.
> 
> Does this mean that any Christian in any part of the world has the right to "return" to Palestine?
Click to expand...


Wrong again. WOW is the anti Israeli diatribe really so heavily dependent on half truths and outright lies ?

We don't know who the first pauline christian was in palestaena as the Romans wouldn't adopt the term palestaena for about another 100 years after Pauls time and by then there were hundreds of the little vermin scurrying about town.

And what makes you think Jesus was the first christian ? Are you suggesting he invented pauline christianity ? Paul the myth maker anyone ? Jesus was Jewish and at no time advocated abandoning Judaism. Paul, originally a Hellenistic pagan invented christianity as a conglomeration of pagan belief systems as a twisted kind of cult pyramid scheme.

In any case indigenous people are defined in a number of different ways but are generally considered to be the first peoples, not the second or the third or the twentieth. FIRST PEOPLES


----------



## Shusha

Actually, the more I think about it, one could make a very strong argument for the Quakers and the Amish as distinct cultures or peoples.  Culturally specific forms of dress, codified laws and rituals, a specific territory, probably dialect or language markers, special foods.  I'm sure there is more.


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would depend on what qualities they had which might make them an ethnic group, a distinct culture or a "people".  Certainly, as Boston already said, an association with a specific territory for a long period of time is one of the best markers of a people.  Its one of the strongest arguments made by those who see the Palestinians as a people.
> 
> Having a religion does not include or exclude people from being a people, its one of the factors, but not the only one.
Click to expand...


Its actually a very weak argument in terms of its application to the Arab Muslims living in Israel as they virtually all arrived in the second Arab Muslim colonization period in the early to mid 20th century.


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> Actually, the more I think about it, one could make a very strong argument for the Quakers and the Amish as distinct cultures or peoples.  Culturally specific forms of dress, codified laws and rituals, a specific territory, probably dialect or language markers, special foods.  I'm there is more.



You could but you'd not be able to argue they are the native peoples of that land or that they are indigenous or a first nations people.

IE while its true that a culture can develop over time the Arab Muslims in Israel havne't had nearly enough time to develop anything more than a bad attitude. Its also true culture can develop in an area that was colonized by those of the new culture.

For instance the Arab Muslims in Israel have a culture of hatred and racism where they venerate terrorists and tend to believe that blowing up bus loads of school kids or strapping bombs on 10 year olds is morally acceptable. Its a horrific culture but its a form of culture none the less.

However that doesn't make them the native or indigenous people, it just makes them the sick bastards they are.


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> Well, this happened before the law was changed...



Really?  Would you outline for me exactly when the law changed, and what instrument changed it?


----------



## Shusha

Boston1 said:


> You could but you'd not be able to argue they are the native peoples of that land or that they are indigenous or a first nations people.



We agree.  There is a distinction between being indigenous and being a culture or ethnic group.  The former speaks to the place of origin of a people or cultural group.  

But in 5,000 or 10,000 years, I can see people arguing that the Quakers or the Amish DID develop their distinct culture on that territory.  Its not an impossible argument.


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You could but you'd not be able to argue they are the native peoples of that land or that they are indigenous or a first nations people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We agree.  There is a distinction between being indigenous and being a culture or ethnic group.  The former speaks to the place of origin of a people or cultural group.
> 
> But in 5,000 or 10,000 years, I can see people arguing that the Quakers or the Amish DID develop their distinct culture on that territory.  Its not an impossible argument.
Click to expand...


No but it still doesn't make them a first nations people or indigenous. They're still colonists from Europe and still not native to the land. 

Culture can develop within a colonist environment but indigenous or native status is only something obtained long ago in the beginning of human history.


----------



## foggedinn

Many similar threads on this board. All of them end the same. Pro Israel, anti palistinian/pro palistinian, anti Israel arguments.
The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?


----------



## Shusha

foggedinn said:


> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?



Indigeneity is not based on length of time in a place.  It is based on origins - where a culture developed and came into being.


----------



## Art__Allm

Shusha said:


> Really?  Would you outline for me exactly when the law changed, and what instrument changed it?




Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention was adopted in 1949.

BTW, you have ignored the most important arguments in my post.


----------



## Boston1

Shusha said:


> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indigeneity is not based on length of time in a place.  It is based on origins - where a culture developed and came into being.
Click to expand...


Not entirely, culture isn't a prime consideration in determining if someone is an indigenous person.

For instance, we have an Arab Muslim culture, its predominant in the region but only native/indigenous to Arabia.


----------



## Art__Allm

foggedinn said:


> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?



I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.

What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.


----------



## Boston1

Art__Allm said:


> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.
> 
> What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.
Click to expand...


You have it exactly backwards.

The vast majority of Arab Muslims in Israel colonized the area in the early to mid 20th century.







Whereas the vast majority of Israeli's are of Judaic origins and are simply returning to their ancestral homelands.


----------



## Shusha

Art__Allm said:


> Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention was adopted in 1949.
> 
> BTW, you have ignored the most important arguments in my post.



So, according to you, any population transfers which happened prior to 1949 were legal and all those which happened after are illegal, yes?

And that return (or compensation) for those ILLEGALLY transferred is based on what people want, yes?


----------



## Boston1

Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says

UNR 194

Quote

_Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;

End Qute

This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.

First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.

The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't. 

The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?

The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.

Quote

The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:

"*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:


In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
"Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]


In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:

"We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]

The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.

This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.


End Quote

Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end

In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned

BOOM


----------



## P F Tinmore

Boston1 said:


> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM


MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.
> 
> What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have it exactly backwards.
> 
> The vast majority of Arab Muslims in Israel colonized the area in the early to mid 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas the vast majority of Israeli's are of Judaic origins and are simply returning to their ancestral homelands.
Click to expand...


The vast majority of the Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.  The Palestinians,  Muslims and Christians and a tiny minority consisting of the native Arab Jews,are the indigenous people.  Changing religion doesn't change the people.  Nothing ancestral in Palestine for Europeans.

*UNITED*
*NATIONS
A*






*General Assembly*













 A/364
3 September 1947
*OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF *
*THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*

(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

16. *The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.* Indeed, the natural rate of increase of Moslem Arabs in Palestine is the highest in recorded statistics,1 a phenomenon explained by very high fertility rates coupled with a marked decline in death rates as a result of improved conditions of life and public health, The natural rate of increase of Jews is also relatively high, but is conditioned by a favorable age distribution of the population due to the high rate of immigration.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3


----------



## Shusha

Here is a good summary of what I mean.  

Just a few clips from the essay:

_The expulsion of Palestinian Arabs by Israel is today portrayed as some sort of especially wicked and unique evil in history. One gets the impression that Israel, in making the decision during the war to expel Palestinian Arabs, crossed a line that nations should never cross. But when analyzing the expulsions in their historic setting rather than superimposing onto them present-day norms, it becomes immediately apparent that Israel was taking their lead for solving ethnic conflict from the rest of the world. Population transfers and expulsions had been taking place for decades all over the globe before Israel resorted to the same tactic as a last resort in war._
_
"The purpose of a population transfer is not to remove a high percentage of a minority group from the country of its residence, but to remove a minority problem, to eliminate a threat to the future. There are only two alternatives. In countries where there is reasonable hope for a peaceable life for minority groups within the state-nation and where a transfer is not absolutely essential, maximum security and rights must be guaranteed to the minorities. But if population transfer is deemed unavoidable, there must be no trace of the collective minority existence left, no stuff for the resurgence of the minority problem. There is no third solution."

_


----------



## Boston1

More lies from Monty. But notice that he/she is only able to find support for that nonsense in just one small segment of Israeli history.

IE by cherrypicking certain years of data. Classic cognitive dissonance 

Lets take a broader look at the same data and notice that only about 35% of returnees came from Europe ;--)

And since Numbnutts is constantly using Wiki I guess that leaves me free to as well.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwivnZu2lPHLAhXotoMKHUkhBkwQFggoMAA&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel&usg=AFQjCNGHoJKzaVHxwW1a6jTRlNSMkLShSw&sig2=Ts9l2pimYsJ6GrshsB1iSw&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

LOL

Once again there Monty ole been you are exposed on the hasbara you run up that flag pole.


----------



## montelatici

Just facts Boston, you just post propaganda.  I never post Wiki links as you well know.

About 95% of the Zionist invaders came from Europe or North America.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Just facts Boston, you just post propaganda.  I never post Wiki links as you well know.
> 
> About 95% of the Zionist invaders came from Europe or North America.


You're still befuddled about the mechanisms that preceded the Jewish return to what became the state of Israel. It was not an invasion. It was a process that was established after the collapse of another failed Islamist caliphate which, as was typical, just another oppressive, Islamist apartheid dictatorship.

The collapse of the Ottoman Empire was a long overdue end to the invasion and colonial project so typical for Arab-Moslem dictatorships.

Really, sweetie. You should take some take to peel back the layers of ignorance and self-hate that cause you to repeat your tired, silly slogans.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> Just facts Boston, you just post propaganda.  I never post Wiki links as you well know.
> 
> About 95% of the Zionist invaders came from Europe or North America.



Facts my ass.

95% of returnees in one very specific year. Add all years to present and the story is completely different.

IE you are cherrypicking a specific year or couple of years so you can try and delegitimize returnees as all being from Europe. 

The truth is only about 35% returned from Europe. Most returned from ME countries when they were expelled by the Arab Muslims and forced to leave everything they owned behind. 

I wonder if you even know what cognitive dissonance means ?


----------



## montelatici

The fact is 95% of the Zionist invaders of Palestine were from Europe or the Americas. That Arab Jews from Muslim nations after the establishment of Israel is another matter.

Using terms you learned from and don't quite understand, just makes you appear foolish, punk.


----------



## Boston1

montelatici said:


> The fact is 95% of the Zionist invaders of Palestine were from Europe or the Americas. That Arab Jews from Muslim nations after the establishment of Israel is another matter.
> 
> Using terms you learned from and don't quite understand, just makes you appear foolish, punk.



You are lying.

The fact is that only 35% of returnees were from Europe.

From
Statistical Abstract of Israel, 2009, CBS. "Table 2.24 – Jews, by country of origin and age" (PDF). Retrieved 22 March 2010.

*Jewish Population of Israel by paternal country of origin*[24]

*TOTAL*

*5,523,700 ................         100%*

*From Europe, America and Oceania by own or paternal country of origin:*

*1,939,400.............          35.11%

Today 70% of Israeli's were born in Israel *


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel.  Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing a religious group with a people. BTW, Christians also originated in Palestine, Jesus Christ was the first Christian Palestinian.
> 
> Does this mean that any Christian in any part of the world has the right to "return" to Palestine?
Click to expand...








 WRONG he was a Jewish Rabbi who taught the Torah. He was never a Christian while he was alive, the first Christians surfaced in the 4C C.E. and they originated in Rome. If they can show a tie to the land and having once lived there as indigenous population then yes they can. Unlike the arab muslims who had never even seen Palestine and claimed the new build in Tel aviv was their home and the toilet window was their bedroom.


 The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble


----------



## Shusha

Phoenall said:


> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble



Yes, and remember those international laws specifically state that they grant rights to the Jewish people based on their pre-existing claim as indigenous peoples whose place of origin is on those territories.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel ignored international law and deliberately committed the crime of ethnic cleansing and you are attempting to put it "right", why are you not ALSO demanding that all the other ethnic cleansings which occurred around that time are corrected?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean with "around the same time"?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you not demanding that 15 million Germans be returned to their homelands in Eastern and Central Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, this happened before the law was changed, and many German refugees still fight for their right to return to their homes. Who wanted already returned. Most of them do not want to return to Poland, etc., they just want compensations for the stolen property.
> 
> Your arguments are silly.
> 
> Imagine you steal somebody's property and refuse to return it, because in the past other guys did the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you not demanding that the Latvians, the Estonians and Ukrainians be returned to the Soviet Union?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do they want to return? If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.
> It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to Ukraine, Estonia or Latvia has already done this.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you not demanding that the Japanese be returned to Korea?  And for the Turkish and Greek Cypriots be brought back to their homes?  Why are you not demanding that Pakistan and India and Bangladesh return all of those uprooted in the ethnic cleansings be returned to their original homes?  Along with all their descendants?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If there are people who want to return to their homes, I am supporting them.
> The question ist: Do they want?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel ignored international law and deliberately committed the crime of ethnic cleansing and you are attempting to put it "right", why are you not ALSO demanding that all the other ethnic cleansings which occurred around that time are corrected?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What do you mean with "around the same time"?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you not demanding that 15 million Germans be returned to their homelands in Eastern and Central Europe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, this happened before the law was changed, and German refugees still fight for their right to return to their homes.
> 
> You arguments are silly.
> 
> Imagine you steal somebody's property and refuse to return it, because in the past other guys did the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you not demanding that the Latvians, the Estonians and Ukrainians be returned to the Soviet Union?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do they want to return? If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.
> It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to Ukraine, Estonia or Latvia has already done this.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you claiming that Israel ignored international law and yet all of these other nations did not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I am repeating it again.
> 
> If there are people who want to return to their homes, I am supporting them.
> 
> Do they want to return?
> 
> If the person that was robbed or expelled does not sue the perpetrator, then there will be no legal procedure.
> 
> It is obvious that anybody who wanted to return to the mentioned countries has already done this. There are no laws that prohibit that.
Click to expand...







 When was the law changed as islamonazi's are still ethnically cleansing whole swathes of land of its indigenous populations.  And a proper law as well not your usual UN resolution.

The only people you are for moving "back" to their lands happen to be islamonazi terrorists that were evicted under International law and the Geneva conventions as being enemy combatants. Now about these fictional khazars any chance of a scientific link to them prior to the mid 20C ?


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Would you outline for me exactly when the law changed, and what instrument changed it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention was adopted in 1949.
> 
> BTW, you have ignored the most important arguments in my post.
Click to expand...






And what does that say when taken in context with the rest of the Geneva conventions ?



 And your cherry picked article only deals with civilians, and does not deal with armed militia, soldiers or any other armed person.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.
> 
> What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.
Click to expand...







 So they lived in the region for 22 years if you look at your history, the Jews have been there much longer giving them the greater claim.      Your rules to abide by them............................


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM
> 
> 
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.
Click to expand...






 So you are now saying that the UN is a propaganda site, meaning that everything monte pastes is propaganda ?


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.
> 
> What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.
Click to expand...






Define Zionist in your own terms, and see that they have one common trait. Not all Zionists are Jews, and not all Jews are Zionists. So your use of the term out of context and as a racial insult is illegal in the civilised world


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM
> 
> 
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are now saying that the UN is a propaganda site, meaning that everything monte pastes is propaganda ?
Click to expand...

No.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foggedinn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that started the thread wasn't specifically political in nature.
> How long do your ancestors have to live in an area to be concidered indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the ancestors of Palestinians lived long enough in Palestine to be called indigenous population.
> 
> What to Zionists, most of them were not born in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have it exactly backwards.
> 
> The vast majority of Arab Muslims in Israel colonized the area in the early to mid 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas the vast majority of Israeli's are of Judaic origins and are simply returning to their ancestral homelands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The vast majority of the Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.  The Palestinians,  Muslims and Christians and a tiny minority consisting of the native Arab Jews,are the indigenous people.  Changing religion doesn't change the people.  Nothing ancestral in Palestine for Europeans.
> 
> *UNITED
> NATIONS
> A*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *General Assembly*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/364
> 3 September 1947
> *OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY*
> 
> (b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE
> 
> 15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. *The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. *From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.
> 
> 16. *The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths.* Indeed, the natural rate of increase of Moslem Arabs in Palestine is the highest in recorded statistics,1 a phenomenon explained by very high fertility rates coupled with a marked decline in death rates as a result of improved conditions of life and public health, The natural rate of increase of Jews is also relatively high, but is conditioned by a favorable age distribution of the population due to the high rate of immigration.
> 
> A/364 of 3 September 1947
Click to expand...







 Cherry picking one small point in history from an islamonazi sourced report shows that you are  not looking at all the evidence. Shame on you for being an islamocatholic nazi


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM
> 
> 
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are now saying that the UN is a propaganda site, meaning that everything monte pastes is propaganda ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
Click to expand...






 You must be as this is a UN sourced document, and you have claimed it is an Israeli propaganda site. Or have you lost your marbles completely now


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Just facts Boston, you just post propaganda.  I never post Wiki links as you well know.
> 
> About 95% of the Zionist invaders came from Europe or North America.







 For one day in the life of Israel, the rest of the time they came from other parts of the M.E.


 Just as 95% of the Palestinians are immigrants with less than 2 years residency in Palestine which is why the UN had to create their own agency to look after them. They could not return home as they had deserted and lost face


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and remember those international laws specifically state that they grant rights to the Jewish people based on their pre-existing claim as indigenous peoples whose place of origin is on those territories.
Click to expand...

The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.

There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM
> 
> 
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are now saying that the UN is a propaganda site, meaning that everything monte pastes is propaganda ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be as this is a UN sourced document, and you have claimed it is an Israeli propaganda site. Or have you lost your marbles completely now
Click to expand...

MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site. It is not the UN.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and remember those international laws specifically state that they grant rights to the Jewish people based on their pre-existing claim as indigenous peoples whose place of origin is on those territories.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
Click to expand...







 Jewish NATIONal home is mentioned many times, which is the Jewish state. Just as Jordan was not mentioned yet you still have the state of Jordan.     Selective reading again because you don't want to see the truth.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets just all read this so we can see what it actually says
> 
> UNR 194
> 
> Quote
> 
> _Resolves_ that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; _Instructs_ the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;
> 
> End Qute
> 
> This is actually one of my favorite resolutions.
> 
> First its non binding, but the Arab Muslims are constantly singing and dancing about this right of return nonsense so lets just assume it is binding for the sake of argument.
> 
> The area highlighted in blue clearly indicates that this resolution applies to those willing to "live in peace" with their neighbors. Something the Arab Muslims are clearly not willing to do. Ergo this resolution does not apply to ANY Arab Muslims until a termination can be made as to which ones are willing to live in peace and which aren't.
> 
> The first area in red clearly states "at the earliest practicable date". A beautifully ambiguous caveat that essentially means never. When will it ever be practicable to insert millions of hostile Arab Muslims into Israel ?
> 
> The second caveat outlined in red clearly states that compensation should be paid by the responsible parties. Another beautifully ambiguous requirement. So Who is responsible for the Arab Israeli war ? Maybe we should consider who declared war against who ? The Arab League openly declared war against the fledgling Israeli state and ignores all international appeals to end the violence to this day.
> 
> Quote
> 
> The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, was less diplomatic and far more candid. With no patience for polite or veiled language, on the same day Israel declared its independence on May 14 1948, at a Cairo press conference reported the next day in _The New York Times, _Pasha repeated the Arabs' "intervention to restore law and order" revealing:
> 
> "*This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre *which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." The League of Arab States continued to oppose peace after Israel's 1948 War of Independence:
> 
> 
> In July 15 1948, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 54 calling on Arab aggression to stop:
> "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine; that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine."[10]
> 
> 
> In October 1949, the Arab League declared that negotiation with Israel by any Arab state would be in violation of Article 18 of the Arab League.[11]
> In April 1950, it called for severance of relations with any Arab state which engaged in relations or contacts with Israel and prohibited Member states from negotiating unilateral peace with Israel.[12]
> In March 1979, it suspended Egypt's membership in the League (retroactively) from the date of its signing a peace treaty with Israel.[13]
> More recently, in the Beirut Declaration of March 27-28, 2002, adopted at the height of Palestinian suicide attacks in Israel, the Arab League declared:
> 
> "We, the kings, presidents, and emirs of the Arab states meeting in the Council of the Arab League Summit in Beirut, capital of Lebanon ... have conducted a thorough assessment of the developments and challenges ... relating to the Arab region and, more specifically, to the occupied Palestinian territory. With great pride, we followed the Palestinian people's intifada and valiant resistance. ... We address a greeting of pride and honour to the Palestinian people's steadfastness and valiant intifada against the Israeli occupation and its destructive war machine. We greet with honour and pride the valiant martyrs of the intifada."[14]
> 
> The Arab League, which has systematically opposed and blocked peace efforts for nearly 67 years, and *is in a declared state-of-war with Israel*, is now deemed by the U.S. States Department an organization that can contribute to peace in the Middle East.
> 
> This document uses extensive links via the Internet. If you experience a broken link, please note the 5 digit number (xxxxx) at the end of the URL and use it as a Keyword in the Search Box atwww.MEfacts.com.
> 
> 
> End Quote
> 
> Which makes the Arab League 100% responsible for the entire refugee problem from beginning to end
> 
> In which case it is the Arab League who owe reparations to all concerned
> 
> BOOM
> 
> 
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are now saying that the UN is a propaganda site, meaning that everything monte pastes is propaganda ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must be as this is a UN sourced document, and you have claimed it is an Israeli propaganda site. Or have you lost your marbles completely now
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MEfacts is an Israeli propaganda site. It is not the UN.
Click to expand...






 The source is the UN, and you have a problem in understanding this  simple concept

 If I make a statement then I am the source
 If you repeat my statement I am still the source

 In this case the statement was made by the UN and repeated by MEfacts, making the source the UN. So you are just stirring up more hatred for the Jews and inciting more violence.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and remember those international laws specifically state that they grant rights to the Jewish people based on their pre-existing claim as indigenous peoples whose place of origin is on those territories.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish NATIONal home is mentioned many times, which is the Jewish state. Just as Jordan was not mentioned yet you still have the state of Jordan.     Selective reading again because you don't want to see the truth.
Click to expand...

That does not refute my post.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and remember those international laws specifically state that they grant rights to the Jewish people based on their pre-existing claim as indigenous peoples whose place of origin is on those territories.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish NATIONal home is mentioned many times, which is the Jewish state. Just as Jordan was not mentioned yet you still have the state of Jordan.     Selective reading again because you don't want to see the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That does not refute my post.
Click to expand...








 Yes it does, it is just that you don't want to see it that way. The LoN set aside the land for a Jewish state and in treaties called it the Jewish National home


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.



Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.  

So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?


----------



## montelatici

The big deal is that the British conspired with the Zionists to colonize Palestine at the expense of the native inhabitants.  There was no way to transfer tens of thousands Europeans with the intent of establishing a state for said Europeans without harming the native inhabitants and impeding their right to self-determination. As the current situation demonstrates.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> The big deal is that the British conspired with the Zionists to colonize Palestine at the expense of the native inhabitants.  There was no way to transfer tens of thousands Europeans with the intent of establishing a state for said Europeans without harming the native inhabitants and impeding their right to self-determination. As the current situation demonstrates.



But you are doing the same thing -- assuming that only ONE group of the two has a right to self-determination.  

The sooner we get over that, the sooner we will end the conflict.


----------



## montelatici

Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.

*"ARTICLE 22.*
To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
Click to expand...

Giving what to both of them?


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."




I get it.  But part of self-determination is the ability to control immigration.  And part of the Mandate was to encourage immigration of the Jewish people back to their homeland.  The fact is, whatever date in that time period you pick for deciding who the inhabitants were -- there are ALWAYS two groups.  ALWAYS two people seeking self-determination on that particular territory.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
Click to expand...


National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.


----------



## Challenger

Boston1 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is a *religion*, *not* an ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you have no reasonable definition of any of the terms which includes most groups while excluding the Jewish people.
> 
> Its like saying blue is not a color; Rottweilers are not dogs; pizza is not a food; Star Wars is not a movie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Use your noodle Spiffy. If Mormons had been in Utah for the last 10,000 years, just like the Judaic people have been in the Canaan area, then yes, they likely would be considered an ethnic group. ;--)
> 
> you really might want to think things through before you make more wild claims ;--)
Click to expand...


You mean wild claims like "the (made up by BoSton1)Judaic people have been in the Canaan area (looks like he finally dropped his assertion about his made up "Canaan valley" at last) for 10,000 years" posted without a shred of corroboration? Yes, you really ought to read a few good books on archaeology anthropology and history, before creating your BS but hey, don't let mundane facts interfere with your little fantasy world.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And he remains Jewish.
Click to expand...


Just because a rabbi says so? He may still be considered "Jewish" because of some religous dogma, but if his ancestors were ethnically French, he remains French.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would depend on what qualities they had which might make them an ethnic group, a distinct culture or a "people".  Certainly, as Boston already said, an association with a specific territory for a long period of time is one of the best markers of a people.  Its one of the strongest arguments made by those who see the Palestinians as a people.
> 
> Having a religion does not include or exclude people from being a people, its one of the factors, but not the only one.
Click to expand...


Mormons, Quakers, etc. are considered and consider themselves religious groups, just like Jewish people did throughout their history until the advent of Zionism, which as a nationalist irridentist ideology created the dogma that "Jewish People" were an ancient ethnicity exiled from their "homeland" and destined to return there; a perversion of Jewish religious belief. Turanism is another such pseudo-scientific ideology. Turanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> But you are doing the same thing -- assuming that only ONE group of the two has a right to self-determination.



Religious cults have a "right to self-determination"? So you'll be happy to move aside when the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster declares Israel is the birthright of all Pastafarians and their self determination as a people? How to Become a Pastafarian


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
Click to expand...

OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.

OK, your turn.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
Click to expand...


After World War 1, when the Arab people were given huge tracts of land on the globe, which just happened to have oil and other natural resources as well, it was decided that less than 1% of that land-mass would be given to the Jews, both because of their historical and ancestral connection to that particular piece of land, and because they needed a refuge from persecution after 2000 years.  The Arab people have begrudged this concession.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After World War 1, when the Arab people were given huge tracts of land on the globe, which just happened to have oil and other natural resources as well, it was decided that less than 1% of that land-mass would be given to the Jews, both because of their historical and ancestral connection to that particular piece of land, and because they needed a refuge from persecution after 2000 years.  The Arab people have begrudged this concession.
Click to expand...


----------



## montelatici

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After World War 1, when the Arab people were given huge tracts of land on the globe, which just happened to have oil and other natural resources as well, it was decided that less than 1% of that land-mass would be given to the Jews, both because of their historical and ancestral connection to that particular piece of land, and because they needed a refuge from persecution after 2000 years.  The Arab people have begrudged this concession.
Click to expand...


The inhabitants of the former colonial territories of Turkey were not given anything.  They were the inhabitants of the area, it was their land.  Europeans of whatever religion had no right to re-colonize the territories.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> The big deal is that the British conspired with the Zionists to colonize Palestine at the expense of the native inhabitants.  There was no way to transfer tens of thousands Europeans with the intent of establishing a state for said Europeans without harming the native inhabitants and impeding their right to self-determination. As the current situation demonstrates.









Say this all you want but without ant evidence you are just spreading islamomazi propaganda and Lies


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."








That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
Click to expand...






To develop their own governments and nations free from outside influence. You always bang on about the arab muslims rights yet ignore the rights of the Jews to their free determination and a nation of their own.

 The big deal is the arab muslims can not be trusted to act fairly in such matters and would have wiped out the Jewish portion of Palestine by now.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> 
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After World War 1, when the Arab people were given huge tracts of land on the globe, which just happened to have oil and other natural resources as well, it was decided that less than 1% of that land-mass would be given to the Jews, both because of their historical and ancestral connection to that particular piece of land, and because they needed a refuge from persecution after 2000 years.  The Arab people have begrudged this concession.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...








 The minutes of the LoN meetings that show the arab muslims wanted to rule it all


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
Click to expand...


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> 
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After World War 1, when the Arab people were given huge tracts of land on the globe, which just happened to have oil and other natural resources as well, it was decided that less than 1% of that land-mass would be given to the Jews, both because of their historical and ancestral connection to that particular piece of land, and because they needed a refuge from persecution after 2000 years.  The Arab people have begrudged this concession.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The inhabitants of the former colonial territories of Turkey were not given anything.  They were the inhabitants of the area, it was their land.  Europeans of whatever religion had no right to re-colonize the territories.
Click to expand...








 International laws of 1917 say you are wrong and that you don't have a clue what you are talking about


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...






 The treaty of Sevres and the treaty of Lausanne that you have been given thousands of times in the past. Don't you bother to read them, is that why you stupidly ask for them all the time


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And he remains Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because a rabbi says so? He may still be considered "Jewish" because of some religous dogma, but if his ancestors were ethnically French, he remains French.
Click to expand...







 Not according to the other members of team Palestine that claim Stalin was a Jew, even though he gave up his religion


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To develop their own governments and nations free from outside influence. You always bang on about the arab muslims rights yet ignore the rights of the Jews to their free determination and a nation of their own.
> 
> The big deal is the arab muslims can not be trusted to act fairly in such matters and would have wiped out the Jewish portion of Palestine by now.
Click to expand...

A very small number of Jews lived there with their Muslim and Christian neighbors for hundreds of years. If they wanted to wipe out the Jews it would have been cake.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The treaty of Sevres and the treaty of Lausanne that you have been given thousands of times in the past. Don't you bother to read them, is that why you stupidly ask for them all the time
Click to expand...

I have. they just don't say what you think.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn't. Would you consider Mormons an ethnic group, or Quakers for that matter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would depend on what qualities they had which might make them an ethnic group, a distinct culture or a "people".  Certainly, as Boston already said, an association with a specific territory for a long period of time is one of the best markers of a people.  Its one of the strongest arguments made by those who see the Palestinians as a people.
> 
> Having a religion does not include or exclude people from being a people, its one of the factors, but not the only one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mormons, Quakers, etc. are considered and consider themselves religious groups, just like Jewish people did throughout their history until the advent of Zionism, which as a nationalist irridentist ideology created the dogma that "Jewish People" were an ancient ethnicity exiled from their "homeland" and destined to return there; a perversion of Jewish religious belief. Turanism is another such pseudo-scientific ideology. Turanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...








 And you forget that the world full of Jew haters saw them as a race as far back as the time of the Roman conquest. It is only now that the neo Marxists are trying to take this away from the Jews because it is the last  border to be brought down.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
Click to expand...







 WRONG as it was not mentioned in the treaty of Lausanne, in fact it was not mentioned other than as an area in which the Jewish national home was to be built.  The arab muslim refused to be part of this and as such lost the right to live in Jewish Palestine. The Jews now have a defined nationality under International law, within defined borders and have the right to self determination without external influence.

 WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO WIPE OUT THE JEWS, DESTROY THEIR NATION AND REMOVE THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINATION AS DEFINED BY THE U.N. CHARTER WHICH IS INTERNATIONAL LAW.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG as it was not mentioned in the treaty of Lausanne, in fact it was not mentioned other than as an area in which the Jewish national home was to be built.  The arab muslim refused to be part of this and as such lost the right to live in Jewish Palestine. The Jews now have a defined nationality under International law, within defined borders and have the right to self determination without external influence.
> 
> WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO WIPE OUT THE JEWS, DESTROY THEIR NATION AND REMOVE THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINATION AS DEFINED BY THE U.N. CHARTER WHICH IS INTERNATIONAL LAW.
Click to expand...

Of course you can't prove any of that.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were to live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.
> 
> There was nothing about Israel, Jewish state, or exclusive rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To develop their own governments and nations free from outside influence. You always bang on about the arab muslims rights yet ignore the rights of the Jews to their free determination and a nation of their own.
> 
> The big deal is the arab muslims can not be trusted to act fairly in such matters and would have wiped out the Jewish portion of Palestine by now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A very small number of Jews lived there with their Muslim and Christian neighbors for hundreds of years. If they wanted to wipe out the Jews it would have been cake.
Click to expand...







 Not according to history or the muslims own accounts. You have heard of the Pact of Umar and the Dhimmi laws that set out the terms of the Jews and Christians slavery in the Islamic lands. How literally thousands of Jews and Christians were forced to convert or die to swell the ranks of the islamonazi armies. If they wanted to live in peace then the Jews would have numbered in their 100's of 1,000,000's and had lands of their own. Lands where they could worship their God openly, build temples in his honour, ride white stallions and live without fear.

 SO WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE JEWS LEFT AFTER THE CONQUEST BY THE ROMAN LEGIONS ?


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The treaty of Sevres and the treaty of Lausanne that you have been given thousands of times in the past. Don't you bother to read them, is that why you stupidly ask for them all the time
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have. they just don't say what you think.
Click to expand...







 Actually it is you that has the problem understanding what they say, I read them and see that the Ottomans and their allies lost the war and had to give up large parts of the empire as reparations. The treaty then set in stone the Balfour declaration and stated that the mandatory ( Britain) would be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.



 SO WHY DO YOU DENY THE FACTS AND CLAIM NO SUCH TERMS WERE AGREED


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even if this is true (and its obviously not), as you continually point out -- the INTENT of the Mandate was to allow the inhabitants to develop their own governments and their own independence.  That includes ALL the inhabitants.  Even if the intent was for the Jewish people and the Palestinian people to co-govern a bi-national state, that's not the way it fell out.  Each group wants its own self-determination.  The two are essentially incompatible.
> 
> So what's the big deal about giving it to both of them?
> 
> 
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG as it was not mentioned in the treaty of Lausanne, in fact it was not mentioned other than as an area in which the Jewish national home was to be built.  The arab muslim refused to be part of this and as such lost the right to live in Jewish Palestine. The Jews now have a defined nationality under International law, within defined borders and have the right to self determination without external influence.
> 
> WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO WIPE OUT THE JEWS, DESTROY THEIR NATION AND REMOVE THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINATION AS DEFINED BY THE U.N. CHARTER WHICH IS INTERNATIONAL LAW.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course you can't prove any of that.
Click to expand...







 But I can and have by posting the treaty of Lausanne in full that does not mention Palestine once. And the same treaty states that the ottomans and their allies ( arab muslims under the Grand Mufti ) lost the war and as such lost the right to own the land. All there in the full treaties that you ignore when they work in the Jews favour


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, only one group had the right to self-determination.  The inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the signing of the Covenant of the League of Nations pursuant to Article 22. Not people living in Europe.
> 
> *"ARTICLE 22.*
> To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The treaty of Sevres and the treaty of Lausanne that you have been given thousands of times in the past. Don't you bother to read them, is that why you stupidly ask for them all the time
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have. they just don't say what you think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually it is you that has the problem understanding what they say, I read them and see that the Ottomans and their allies lost the war and had to give up large parts of the empire as reparations. The treaty then set in stone the Balfour declaration and stated that the mandatory ( Britain) would be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> SO WHY DO YOU DENY THE FACTS AND CLAIM NO SUCH TERMS WERE AGREED
Click to expand...

stated that the mandatory ( Britain) would be responsible for putting into effect the declaration

And they failed. What is your point?​


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Giving what to both of them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG as it was not mentioned in the treaty of Lausanne, in fact it was not mentioned other than as an area in which the Jewish national home was to be built.  The arab muslim refused to be part of this and as such lost the right to live in Jewish Palestine. The Jews now have a defined nationality under International law, within defined borders and have the right to self determination without external influence.
> 
> WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO WIPE OUT THE JEWS, DESTROY THEIR NATION AND REMOVE THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINATION AS DEFINED BY THE U.N. CHARTER WHICH IS INTERNATIONAL LAW.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course you can't prove any of that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I can and have by posting the treaty of Lausanne in full that does not mention Palestine once. And the same treaty states that the ottomans and their allies ( arab muslims under the Grand Mufti ) lost the war and as such lost the right to own the land. All there in the full treaties that you ignore when they work in the Jews favour
Click to expand...

And the same treaty states that the ottomans and their allies ( arab muslims under the Grand Mufti ) lost the war and as such lost the right to own the land.​
Where does it say that?


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And he remains Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because a rabbi says so? He may still be considered "Jewish" because of some religous dogma, but if his ancestors were ethnically French, he remains French.
Click to expand...


And if his ancestors were ethnically Jewish, he remains Jewish.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> That did not include those  that had taken part in the war on the side of the Ottomans, as they lost any rights they had to any lands they had
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The treaty of Sevres and the treaty of Lausanne that you have been given thousands of times in the past. Don't you bother to read them, is that why you stupidly ask for them all the time
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have. they just don't say what you think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually it is you that has the problem understanding what they say, I read them and see that the Ottomans and their allies lost the war and had to give up large parts of the empire as reparations. The treaty then set in stone the Balfour declaration and stated that the mandatory ( Britain) would be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> SO WHY DO YOU DENY THE FACTS AND CLAIM NO SUCH TERMS WERE AGREED
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> stated that the mandatory ( Britain) would be responsible for putting into effect the declaration
> 
> And they failed. What is your point?​
Click to expand...








 They did not fail they succeeded in putting in place the declaration of November 2 1917, and the Jewish National home was brought into existence on May 15 1948 


 Or are you now denying the existence of the Jewish national home ?


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Mormons, Quakers, etc. are considered and consider themselves religious groups, just like Jewish people did throughout their history until the advent of Zionism, which as a nationalist irridentist ideology created the dogma that "Jewish People" were an ancient ethnicity exiled from their "homeland" and destined to return there; a perversion of Jewish religious belief...



If Quakers and the Amish don't consider themselves national groups at this time, nor an ethnicity, then they are missing one of the key markers for being a people or ethnic group, which is self-identification.  

Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.  Its existed in various and changing forms for thousands of years.  We've been over this before.  Still boring.  

You have yet to provide a criteria for determining which groups are peoples or ethnic groups and which must be excluded from that designation.  

Palestine gets by on self-identification, a slightly different pronunciation of a single letter of the alphabet, and slight regional variations in embroidery patterns on female garments.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> National self-determination.  A nation for each of them.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG as it was not mentioned in the treaty of Lausanne, in fact it was not mentioned other than as an area in which the Jewish national home was to be built.  The arab muslim refused to be part of this and as such lost the right to live in Jewish Palestine. The Jews now have a defined nationality under International law, within defined borders and have the right to self determination without external influence.
> 
> WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO WIPE OUT THE JEWS, DESTROY THEIR NATION AND REMOVE THEIR INALIENABLE RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINATION AS DEFINED BY THE U.N. CHARTER WHICH IS INTERNATIONAL LAW.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course you can't prove any of that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I can and have by posting the treaty of Lausanne in full that does not mention Palestine once. And the same treaty states that the ottomans and their allies ( arab muslims under the Grand Mufti ) lost the war and as such lost the right to own the land. All there in the full treaties that you ignore when they work in the Jews favour
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And the same treaty states that the ottomans and their allies ( arab muslims under the Grand Mufti ) lost the war and as such lost the right to own the land.​
> Where does it say that?
Click to expand...







Treaty of Sevres, 1920




2. With Syria:
From a point to be chosen on the eastern bank of the outlet of the Hassan Dede, about 3 kilometres north-west of Karatash Bu- run, north-eastwards to a point to be chosen on the Djaihun Irmak about 1 kilometre north of Babeli, a line to be fixed on the ground passing north of Karatash; thence to Kesik Kale, the course of the Djaihun Irmak upstream;
thence north-eastwards to a point to be chosen on the Djaihun Irmak about 15 kilometres east-southeast of Karsbazar, a line to be fixed on the ground passing north of Kara Tepe;
thence to the bend in the Djaihun Irmak situated west of Duldul Dagh, the course of the Djaihun Irmak upstream;
thence in a general south-easterly direction to a point to be chosen on Emir Musi Dagh about 15 kilometres south-south-west of Giaour Geul a line to be fixed on the ground at a distance of about 18 kilometres from the railway, and leaving Duldul Dagh to Syria;
thence eastwards to a point to be chosen about 5 kilometres north of Urfa a generally straight line from west to east to be hxed on the ground passing north of the roads connecting the towns of Bagh- che, Aintab, Biridjik, and Urfa and leaving the last three named towns to Syria;
thence eastwards to the south-western extremity of the bend in the Tigris about 6 kilometres north of Azekh (27 kilometres west of Djezire-ibn-Omar), a generally straight line from west to east to be fixed on the ground leaving the town of Mardin to Syria;
thence to a point to be chosen on the Tigris between the point of confluence of the Khabur Su with the Tigris and the bend in the Tigris situated about 10 kilometres north of this point,
the course of the Tigris downstream, leaving the island on which is situated the town of Djezire-ibn-Omar to Syria.

3. With Mesopotamia:
Thence in a general easterly direction to a point to be chosen on the northern boundary of the vilayet of Mosul,
a line to be fixed on the ground;
thence eastwards to the point where it meets the frontier between Turkey and Persia,
the northern boundary of the vilayet of Mosul, modified, however, so as to pass south of Amadia.
4. On the East and the North East:
From the point above defined to the Black Sea, the existing frontier between


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.



There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.  

Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.  

What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.



Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
Click to expand...


There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews. 

Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. A Jewish Frenchman can convert to Catholicism and he remains a Frenchman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And he remains Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because a rabbi says so? He may still be considered "Jewish" because of some religous dogma, but if his ancestors were ethnically French, he remains French.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And if his ancestors were ethnically Jewish, he remains Jewish.
Click to expand...


..except there's no such thing as a "Jewish ethnicity"outside of Zionist dogma, although I'd be prepared accept "Judean" if he could prove his ancestors came from the Judean hills (which would make him a Palestinian), as opposed to the Massif Centrale, or the Voges.


----------



## Challenger

montelatici said:


> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.



It's a Protestant belief based on the Bible. Most British politicians in the late 19th early 20th century were men of religion and believed the Bible was a historical document. That, and the fact they were "racists" The Races of Men: 19th century racial theory.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
Click to expand...

How do you fit that into my post?


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
Click to expand...






 What about the version that was around in 70C.E. then, or don't you want to go back that far. Would your prefer the version that was around in 635 C.E. that mo'mad spouted greatly.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
Click to expand...






 And a bigger group were non arab Jews that had lived there for 4,500 years. If they were arab then they were recent arrivals


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
Click to expand...

Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you fit that into my post?
Click to expand...






 Very easily as you never mention the rights of the Jews to self determination with no outside influence. You see the Jews being ruled by the muslims with no self determination and ruled by outside influence


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you fit that into my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very easily as you never mention the rights of the Jews to self determination with no outside influence. You see the Jews being ruled by the muslims with no self determination and ruled by outside influence
Click to expand...

Very easily as you never mention the rights of the Jews to self determination with no outside influence.​
Do you have a UN resolution to affirm that talking point?


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
Click to expand...



You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
Click to expand...


You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> How do you fit that into my post?



Are you telling me you are arguing FOR the rights of the Jewish people to self-determination and the reconstitution of their national homeland?


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
Click to expand...


Oh please.  Like it never occurred to the Jewish people to go back to their homeland?  Give me a break.  Yawn.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
Click to expand...




montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
Click to expand...

Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> ..except there's no such thing as a "Jewish ethnicity"outside of Zionist dogma, although I'd be prepared accept "Judean" if he could prove his ancestors came from the Judean hills (which would make him a Palestinian), as opposed to the Massif Centrale, or the Voges.



So, if I labelled them the Israelites and the Judeans, or possible the Hebrew people, you'd suddenly be okay with it?


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> 
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.
Click to expand...


Oh, you mean providing source documentation. LOL


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, you mean providing source documentation. LOL
Click to expand...

What source documentation? LOL.


----------



## montelatici

Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, you mean providing source documentation. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What source documentation? LOL.
Click to expand...


The documentation from official historical archives that you haven't a clue how to access.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, you mean providing source documentation. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What source documentation? LOL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The documentation from official historical archives that you haven't a clue how to access.
Click to expand...

Your cluelessness regarding your self-proclaimed "official historical archives" is a hoot. LOL.


----------



## montelatici

Not self-proclaimed at all. That's what they are, source documents from academic and governmental archives.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so we have Palestine, a successor state broken from Turkish rule by the treaty of Lausanne and international borders were defined by post war treaties. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, international and domestic law, the Palestinians obtained the nationality of Palestinian and became citizens of that defined territory. As citizens of Palestine they have the right to self determination without external interference, etc, as affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.
> 
> OK, your turn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you fit that into my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very easily as you never mention the rights of the Jews to self determination with no outside influence. You see the Jews being ruled by the muslims with no self determination and ruled by outside influence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Very easily as you never mention the rights of the Jews to self determination with no outside influence.​
> Do you have a UN resolution to affirm that talking point?
Click to expand...







 Try the ones you use when you make the claims for the arab muslims, as they cover all the people of the world.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were two distinct groups of citizens living in the Mandate territory.  One of those groups was granted explicit right to reconstitute their national home there based on recognition of a pre-existing historical right to it.  That would be the Jewish people, explicitly mentioned in all sorts of documents of the era.
> 
> Now, I'm arguing for BOTH peoples rights.
> 
> What is your reason for excluding the rights of the Jewish people, especially in light of the explicit documentation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were not two distinct groups.  There was one group entitled to self-determination, the native inhabitants, that practiced several religions. A tiny minority were Arab Jews.
> 
> Europeans, regardless of adopted religion, did not have any "pre-existing" rights to Palestine, where do you get that idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
Click to expand...






 Don't see yours flocking to your rescue these days, could it be they are so embarrassed being associated with you these days ?


----------



## Phoenall

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you fit that into my post?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you telling me you are arguing FOR the rights of the Jewish people to self-determination and the reconstitution of their national homeland?
Click to expand...







 He has just said that they have no rights to self determination and/or a homeland a few posts back


----------



## Phoenall

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Like it never occurred to the Jewish people to go back to their homeland?  Give me a break.  Yawn.
Click to expand...






 Like all neo Marxists/Nazi's.islamonazi's he ignores anything that works in Israel's favour. So any inkling of Zionism shown by Jews as far back as the time of Jesus is to be denied and only those episodes that show even a slight link to it being other than Jewish have to be forcibly forced down peoples throats.


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other than to calm an emotional requirement that furthers your insensate Jooooooo hatreds, there's no reason to accept that the Turk invaders / colonists and later the Egyptian, Lebanese and Syrian squatters / occupiers had exclusive rights to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You should try to read up on the history of the region before posting nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You shouldn't let your ignorance of the history surrounding the area cause you to stutter and mumble about things you know nothing of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You have demonstrated your ignorance, even your buddies won't comment on your ridiculous assertions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't let your embarrassment at being continually corrected cause you such angst. You should be accustomed to being corrected for your silly cutting and pasting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, you mean providing source documentation. LOL
Click to expand...







 Like an edited and published pamphlet that you pass of as being the work of people who spent less that 3 months in Palestine. So because I rip your links to pieces and show that you cherry pick the parts that suit your POV


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Not self-proclaimed at all. That's what they are, source documents from academic and governmental archives.








 No they are not source documents at all, they are edited published pieces of fiction stored in the comedy section of the UN archives


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Not self-proclaimed at all. That's what they are, source documents from academic and governmental archives.


Oh, that's funny. The same two cut and paste articles that you cut and paste endlessly across multiple threads? That's what they are; two selected articles that you spam across multiple threads because they appeal to your biases and self-loathing. LOL.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Like it never occurred to the Jewish people to go back to their homeland?  Give me a break.  Yawn.
Click to expand...


You make an interesting point. With the exception of the Crusades and short periods of Muslim "persecution" there has never been any restrictions on Jewish people travelling and settling in the Levant/Holy land/Palestine over the last 1000 years or so. Why then did so few ever bother to make the trip? The answer is because they were already in their respective homelands: England, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Russia, Morocco, Yemen, etc, etc. following their religion in their native homelands.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..except there's no such thing as a "Jewish ethnicity"outside of Zionist dogma, although I'd be prepared accept "Judean" if he could prove his ancestors came from the Judean hills (which would make him a Palestinian), as opposed to the Massif Centrale, or the Voges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, if I labelled them the Israelites and the Judeans, or possible the Hebrew people, you'd suddenly be okay with it?
Click to expand...


I'd be okay if you called the indigenous people, Palestinians, which is who they are now.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Like it never occurred to the Jewish people to go back to their homeland?  Give me a break.  Yawn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make an interesting point. With the exception of the Crusades and short periods of Muslim "persecution" there has never been any restrictions on Jewish people travelling and settling in the Levant/Holy land/Palestine over the last 1000 years or so. Why then did so few ever bother to make the trip? The answer is because they were already in their respective homelands: England, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Russia, Morocco, Yemen, etc, etc. following their religion in their native homelands.
Click to expand...


Going to live in, or visit, the Promised Land in past generations was not like hopping on an El-Al flight today.  It would mean selling all your earthly goods to make the arduous journey by sea.  Heck, alot of posters on this Board in this day and age, like Tinmore, have never even visited Israel/Palestine!


----------



## montelatici

They are 


Hollie said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not self-proclaimed at all. That's what they are, source documents from academic and governmental archives.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, that's funny. The same two cut and paste articles that you cut and paste endlessly across multiple threads? That's what they are; two selected articles that you spam across multiple threads because they appeal to your biases and self-loathing. LOL.
Click to expand...


I am not sure what "articles" you are speaking of.  Either they are source (contemporaneous) news articles, excerpts of official reports by the Mandatory as archived by the League of Nations and subsequently the UN, excerpts of peace treaties and international agreements such as the Covenant of the League of Nations archived by the UN and academic institutions, UN resolutions available from academic institution libraries as well as the UN itself or excerpts from the Anglo-American Committee's Survey of Palestine commissioned by the British Foreign office and the U.S. Department of State.

What of the above are you referring to?


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..except there's no such thing as a "Jewish ethnicity"outside of Zionist dogma, although I'd be prepared accept "Judean" if he could prove his ancestors came from the Judean hills (which would make him a Palestinian), as opposed to the Massif Centrale, or the Voges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, if I labelled them the Israelites and the Judeans, or possible the Hebrew people, you'd suddenly be okay with it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd be okay if you called the indigenous people, Palestinians, which is who they are now.
Click to expand...







 As in Palestinian Jews which is what they were from 70 C.E. until 1960 when Arafat stole the name. Have you noticed that the muslims steal everything and then claim it as their own starting with God ?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> They are
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not self-proclaimed at all. That's what they are, source documents from academic and governmental archives.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, that's funny. The same two cut and paste articles that you cut and paste endlessly across multiple threads? That's what they are; two selected articles that you spam across multiple threads because they appeal to your biases and self-loathing. LOL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not sure what "articles" you are speaking of.  Either they are source (contemporaneous) news articles, excerpts of official reports by the Mandatory as archived by the League of Nations and subsequently the UN, excerpts of peace treaties and international agreements such as the Covenant of the League of Nations archived by the UN and academic institutions, UN resolutions available from academic institution libraries as well as the UN itself or excerpts from the Anglo-American Committee's Survey of Palestine commissioned by the British Foreign office and the U.S. Department of State.
> 
> What of the above are you referring to?
Click to expand...








 How about the ones you cherry pick and manipulate to meet your POV, and when pulled on it put the other person on ignore as if that will cause them to stop posting


----------



## Challenger

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism did not pop up out of the blue in the late 1800's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, it didn't. It was invented by English Protestant religious fanatics in the 17th century called Puritans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Like it never occurred to the Jewish people to go back to their homeland?  Give me a break.  Yawn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make an interesting point. With the exception of the Crusades and short periods of Muslim "persecution" there has never been any restrictions on Jewish people travelling and settling in the Levant/Holy land/Palestine over the last 1000 years or so. Why then did so few ever bother to make the trip? The answer is because they were already in their respective homelands: England, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Russia, Morocco, Yemen, etc, etc. following their religion in their native homelands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Going to live in, or visit, the Promised Land in past generations was not like hopping on an El-Al flight today.  It would mean selling all your earthly goods to make the arduous journey by sea.  Heck, alot of posters on this Board in this day and age, like Tinmore, have never even visited Israel/Palestine!
Click to expand...


It wasn't as arduous as you make out; the level of riverine and Mediterranean shipping and trade was in some cases higher in antiquity and medieval times than it is today and cheaper in real terms. The various banking systems throughout history made travel safer as well since if you sold up you didn't need to carry large amounts of cash about with you.


----------



## Art__Allm

Challenger said:


> Why then did so few ever bother to make the trip? The answer is because they were already in their respective homelands: England, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Russia, Morocco, Yemen, etc, etc. following their religion in their native homelands.



That was already the case 2000 years ago.
How could so many merchants and money lenders survive in Palestine?

The ancient Israelite society was an agricultural society.
Palestina could never feed more than about 300 000 people.

In the Roman Empire there were a couple of million Jews, most of them lived in the ancient Megacities, like Alexandria, Rome, etc.

And Jews who lived outside of Palestine were not expelled from Palestine, we are talking about ancient converts to Judaism. So Alexandrian Jews were Native Alexandrians. Persian Jews were native Persians. Roman Jews were native Romans.

Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.

Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.

The Romans did not expel any Jews, with the exception of a few Zealots, speak ancient terrorists.

Diaspora was a logic consequence of Judaism. Jews were selling things, lending money, etc,,  and leading a semi-nomadic lifestyle already 2000 years ago, and that continued till the 20th century.


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why then did so few ever bother to make the trip? The answer is because they were already in their respective homelands: England, France, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Russia, Morocco, Yemen, etc, etc. following their religion in their native homelands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was already the case 2000 years ago.
> How could so many merchants and money lenders survive in Palestine?
> 
> The ancient Israelite society was an agricultural society.
> Palestina could never feed more than about 300 000 people.
> 
> In the Roman Empire there were a couple of million Jews, most of them lived in the ancient Megacities, like Alexandria, Rome, etc.
> 
> And Jews who lived outside of Palestine were not expelled from Palestine, we are talking about ancient converts to Judaism. So Alexandrian Jews were Native Alexandrians. Persian Jews were native Persians. Roman Jews were native Romans.
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> The Romans did not expel any Jews, with the exception of a few Zealots, speak ancient terrorists.
> 
> Diaspora was a logic consequence of Judaism. Jews were selling things, lending money, etc,,  and leading a semi-nomadic lifestyle already 2000 years ago, and that continued till the 20th century.
Click to expand...







 Palestine yes, ancient Israel could feed many more. See what happens when you remove the best farmers from the land, people suffer starvation. Proven when the Ottomans asked the Jews to migrate in the 18C and farm the lands of Palestine, the land gave better yields under Jewish methods and created more wealth for the poor arab soil grubbers.

Make your mind were they agricultural or were they merchants, or could there have been both but to admit that would mean that you are wrong.  The Romans took many 100's of 1,000's of Jewish slaves back to their homes in Europe, what is now Italy, Germany, Austria, Czech republic, former Yugoslavia, Poland and Russia.


 Seems that in your case if you cant find any support for your claims make the LIES disjointed and as hard to believe as possible


----------



## Challenger

Art__Allm said:


> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.





Art__Allm said:


> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.



I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.

It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job

"Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea

The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
Click to expand...





Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
Click to expand...

He said NO such thing


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He said NO such thing
Click to expand...







 Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He said NO such thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week
Click to expand...

Don't be Foolish


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism rejected agriculture as something that Jews should never do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews did not have any peasants 2000 years ago, they could feed themselves only via selling things and lending money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He said NO such thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't be Foolish
Click to expand...






 You just cant stand seeing the truth can you. Your game is up and now you are trying to change it to anti religion and opposed to anti race


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you're confusing "Jews" (the religious group) with ordinary Judeans, many of whom were also Jewish (followed the religion) or followed local pagan traditions. Jewish people in Antiquity had their own social stratas which included peasants, only the fact that Christians forbade them to own land, turned them into primarily traders and financiers.
> 
> It's also interesting theat Josephus mentions that the siege of Jerusalem was so destructive of the Jewish (religion) people, because the Romans arrived during a major Jewish religious festival that had attracted the majority of the Jewish population to their cult centre, thus trapping them. There may be a case to bemade that the siege virtually wiped out Judaism in the Roman province of Judea and the subsequent Bar Kokhba rebellion finished the job
> 
> "Up until this date the Bar Kokhba documents indicate that towns, villages and ports where Jews lived were busy with industry and activity. Afterwards there is an eerie silence, and the archaeological record testifies to little Jewish presence until the Byzantine era, in En Gedi. This picture coheres with what we have already determined in Part I of this study, that the crucial date for what can only be described as genocide, and the devastation of Jews and Judaism within central Judea, was 135 CE and not, as usually assumed, 70 CE, despite the siege of Jerusalem and the Temple's destruction" The Essenes, the Scrolls, and the Dead Sea
> 
> The religion therefore must have survived outside of Judea/Palestine amongst the expatriate community and converts to Judaism before the ultimate triumph of Christianity in the 4th Century which resulted in suppression of Judaism throughout the Roman Empire reducing it to small scattered die-hard communities of converts and maybe some surviving Judeans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He said NO such thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't be Foolish
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Changing your stance from one of racial hatred to religious hatred does not alter the facts that you are posting hatred against one specific group. It is still illegal in the U.K. unless you are posting based on facts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He said NO such thing
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, ignore Phoney, he's just trolling as usual. He wouldn't know a fact if it walked up and introduced itself, responding to him just encourages the idiot.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't even know what a troll is, so how would you be able to spot one. Your posts are the epitome of the U.K. governments definition of a troll, I wonder when you will get the call ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again STOP being Foolish
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, got it, you just like pulling his chain. That can be fun at times, I admit, but boredom soon sets in as he's never got anything substantial, original or worthwhile to contribute to any discussion.
Click to expand...






 Do you the number of times you are pulled up short and proven to be wrong


----------



## Tientei

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. No, the Jews, more properly called Hebrews, invaded Canaan from elsewhere.  This is not only a secular archeological fact, it is what the bible states. Plus, these Hebrews fell later to the Neo-Assyrians in 900 BC or so.
> 
> 2. Of course there is a cultural connection between the Palestinians and the Canaanites.  Here are a few excerpts from secular historical treatises on the subject.  Note: I have chosen a few in which the historian is Jewish.
> 
> _‘Palestinians are the descendants of all the indigenous peoples who lived in Palestine over the centuries; since the seventh century, they have been predominantly Muslim in religion and almost completely Arab in language and culture.’
> 
> Dowty, Alan (2008). Israel/Palestine. London, UK: Polity. p. 221.
> 
> ‘Palestinians are an indigenous people who either live in, or originate from, historical Palestine. Although the Muslims guaranteed security and allowed religious freedom to all inhabitants of the region, the majority converted to Islam and adopte
> 
> d Arab culture.’ Bassam Abu-Libdeh, Peter D. Turnpenny, and Ahmed Teebi, ‘Genetic Disease in Palestine and Palestinians,’ in Dhavendra Kuma (ed.) Genomics and Health in the Developing World, OUP 2012 pp.700-711, p.700.
> 
> “[being of] Canaanite origin, Palestinians have priority; their descendants have continued to live there, which gives them continuity; and (except for the 800,000 dispossessed refugees of 1948 – as determined by Israeli officials at the time, not including the hundreds of thousands subsequently expelled), they are still living there, which gives them present possession. Thus we see that on purely statistical grounds they have a proven legal right to their land.”
> 
> Prof. Ilene Beatty, highly renowned historian/anthropologist and specialist on the “Holy Land” in Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan, 1957.
> 
> The Arab population of Palestin_e _was native in all the senses of the word, and their roots in Palestine can be traced back at least 40 centuries.
> 
> Professor Maxime Rodinson, Professor of law at the Sorbonne University in Paris, Israel and the Arabs, 1968.
> 
> As neither the Byzantines nor the Muslims carried out any large-scale population resettlement projects, the Christians were the offspring of the Jewish and Samaritan farmers who converted to Christianity in the Byzantine period; while the Muslim fellaheen in Palestine in modern times are descendants of those Christians who were the descendants of Jews*, and had turned to Islam before the Crusaders’ conquest.
> 
> Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, Cambridge University Press. pp 634-1099.
> _
> 3. The Palestinians have lived continuously in the area from before the arrival of the Jews.  That they practiced the Canaanite or other religions does not change the people's DNA.
Click to expand...




Surely a more relevant or a question important to ask after we come to a consensus on who is indigenous to Palestine is whether this means that they have a greater right to the land? No one can reverse the establishment of the state of Israel but the real controversy is whether Palestine can exist in the current political climate.


----------



## Challenger

Tientei said:


> No one can reverse the establishment of the state of Israel



Dream on. 

Countries rise and fall, come into existance and disappear. Just look at  the historical perspective of the last 1000 years


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Tientei said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one can reverse the establishment of the state of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dream on.
> 
> Countries rise and fall, come into existance and disappear. Just look at  the historical perspective of the last 1000 years
Click to expand...






 And your dream is to have 12 million bodies around the world that will be the last of the Jews. This will have completed your forebears wishes and eliminated the least threat to your world conquest. Israel is entrenched in international law and can not be destroyed that simply. Even if the arab league does attack and rids the M.E. of the Jews and takes over Israel then the land is still Israel as decreed in the UN charter. So the whole object of your hatred is foiled by International law, and you are left like a fish out of water.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

Stop talking about each other


----------



## Boston1

Phoenall said:


> Art__Allm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people originated in Israel.  Trying to deny that is just foolish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing a religious group with a people. BTW, Christians also originated in Palestine, Jesus Christ was the first Christian Palestinian.
> 
> Does this mean that any Christian in any part of the world has the right to "return" to Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG he was a Jewish Rabbi who taught the Torah. He was never a Christian while he was alive, the first Christians surfaced in the 4C C.E. and they originated in Rome. If they can show a tie to the land and having once lived there as indigenous population then yes they can. Unlike the arab muslims who had never even seen Palestine and claimed the new build in Tel aviv was their home and the toilet window was their bedroom.
> 
> 
> The Jews have the right because international laws of 1917, 1923, 1924 and 1949 gave them that right, something you seem to deny exists because it would burst your bubble
Click to expand...


Yeah, this is all about native rights. its got nothing to do with religion. 

Although that being said you are right and Arty is way wrong. 

The character we know today as Jesus was 100% a rabbi. Of the very little we know about him what we do know of him says he was a rabbi all the way. 

It was Paul who invented christianity, not Jesus


----------



## montelatici

If you mean rabbi as "teacher", "sage" or "master"you would be correct.  Jesus lived before the rabbinic period which started in 70 AD.  

Can we call Jesus “Rabbi”?


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> If you mean rabbi as "teacher", "sage" or "master"you would be correct.  Jesus lived before the rabbinic period which started in 70 AD.
> 
> Can we call Jesus “Rabbi”?








 Back pedalling again freddy because you know you have been proven wrong again. Jesus was a Jewish rabbi that taught the Torah and as such was 100% Jewish.   So explain again why you hate the Jews so much that you worship one as God ?


----------



## Art__Allm

Phoenall said:


> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week



People who constantly wine about "hate" and "hatred" usually hate the truth.


----------



## Challenger

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People who constantly wine about "hate" and "hatred" usually hate the truth.
Click to expand...


"Truth sounds like hate to those who hate the truth"- anon


----------



## Phoenall

Art__Allm said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he didn't, to admit he did would show that you know that he is inciting religious and racial hatred that he hopes will result in Jews being hurt, seriously injured or even murdered.     The same thing you are hoping for with your racial/religious hatred you spout every day of the week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People who constantly wine about "hate" and "hatred" usually hate the truth.
Click to expand...








 Which is why team Palestine are so loud when it comes to hate and hatred. Are you denying that team Palestine are promoting hatred towards the Jews, and then trying to pass it of as free speech ?


----------



## Art__Allm

Challenger said:


> "Truth sounds like hate to those who hate the truth"- anon



Yes, this mental condition is called "projection".

Liars usually hate the truth, and if you tell the truth they will call it "hate speech", because they hate a truthful speech.


----------



## Challenger

Interesting article.

"New research suggests that the majority of the world's modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey, rather than predominantly from elsewhere in the Middle East.

The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe - normally known as Ashkenazic Jews - are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world's largest Jewish communities.

According to research carried out by the geneticist, Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield, over 90 per cent of Ashkenazic ancestors come from that converted partially Greek-originating ancient community in north-east Turkey."

Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz


----------



## theliq

montelatici said:


> If you mean rabbi as "teacher", "sage" or "master"you would be correct.  Jesus lived before the rabbinic period which started in 70 AD.
> 
> Can we call Jesus “Rabbi”?


Beautiful Monte,it's like those that call Palestinians who have been in Palestine for 3000 years,as always .Muslims?Islamists?,considering Mohammed was born well after 1100 odd years later,makes them look what they are.........


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Interesting article.
> 
> "New research suggests that the majority of the world's modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey, rather than predominantly from elsewhere in the Middle East.
> 
> The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe - normally known as Ashkenazic Jews - are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world's largest Jewish communities.
> 
> According to research carried out by the geneticist, Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield, over 90 per cent of Ashkenazic ancestors come from that converted partially Greek-originating ancient community in north-east Turkey."
> 
> Localizing Ashkenazic Jews to primeval villages in the ancient Iranian lands of Ashkenaz









 Just more islamonazi propaganda with no actual evidence to support the subject


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you mean rabbi as "teacher", "sage" or "master"you would be correct.  Jesus lived before the rabbinic period which started in 70 AD.
> 
> Can we call Jesus “Rabbi”?
> 
> 
> 
> Beautiful Monte,it's like those that call Palestinians who have been in Palestine for 3000 years,as always .Muslims?Islamists?,considering Mohammed was born well after 1100 odd years later,makes them look what they are.........
Click to expand...







 WRONG again   as no muslims existed prior to 625 C.E. when mo'mad invented them. He did not call himself a Palestinian but an arab muslim. The only Palestinians around from 70 C.E. till the late 19C were the Jews, and the term was used much as you use Zionist today. It was derogatory and defamatory in the extreme and was insulting to the arab muslim invaders to call them Palestinians, they called themselves south Syrians.


----------



## Challenger

You can always tell when Phoney never bothers to read an article, he posts drivel like this, "Just more islamonazi propaganda with no actual evidence to support the subject"

The article published in a respected academic journal was written by four academics and scientists including: Paul Wexler, (Israeli) Professor Emeritus of linguistics at Tel Aviv University, Dr. Mehdi Pirooznia, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Ranajit Das from University of Sheffield and our old friend Dr. Eran Elhaik who caused a Zionist firestorm of hate a few years ago by suggesting Ashkenazis may not have come from the Middle East 

Ohh those Jewish Islamonazis, they get everwhere (according to Phoney)


----------



## TheGreatKing

If you people keep accepting lies of the devil and keep seeking solution to this or any other problem, then no proper solution could be found. Where is the snake of the Genesis who was cursed? Where are her children, who were supposed to be the enemies of the children of Eve? The snake has produced many children and they are occupying YOUR planet, given to you by your Father, God. Claim back your planet, your heritage from the devils. The devils are not humans and they are not even those animals who were allowed by God to live on earth with our permission, in order to serve us. They have come to the earth with ONE AND ONLY ONE AGENDA and that is to create problems for us, their enemies. All the Arabs, Egyptians, Philistines and all their colored sisters are the children of the devil. They have no right whatsoever on the planet earth or anywhere in the universe. They belong only to the fire of hell. The time has come to repay them for all their sins by annihilating them and sending them to hell. All the problems of the world like Israel's territory controversy, holocaust, 9/11, Immorality in western culture, etc. are the works of the invisible devil and her visible children. Say the truth and say it boldly and your problems will be solved. Your God is with you. The time has come. The devils will call TRUTH as Lies and LIES as Truths. Don't accept that. Say the truth and stick to it. Israel should claim all the land from Nile to Euphrates that God gave them in the Bible and should not compromise at all. #Israel


----------



## Fishlore

Of the six million or so Jews in Israel, one million are Russians. These folks speak Russian at home, although their kids are bilingual, often speak Hebrew badly if at all, and eat pork, shellfish and other trafe. They are a major voting bloc in the Likud coalition and home to a large Russian organized crime presence which is active in money laundering and cyber-crime world-wide. Most of them came from the great post-Soviet aliyah of the 1990s. Nobody, certainly no sabra Israelis, think them indigenous.

Most of the Christian Right knows nothing about the reality of Israel today. They haven't been there, although AIPAC does run some super-guided tours for GOP politicians, they know only the propaganda fed to them and view the entire issue through the fuzzy lens of dimly remembered Sundays-school stories.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> You can always tell when Phoney never bothers to read an article, he posts drivel like this, "Just more islamonazi propaganda with no actual evidence to support the subject"
> 
> The article published in a respected academic journal was written by four academics and scientists including: Paul Wexler, (Israeli) Professor Emeritus of linguistics at Tel Aviv University, Dr. Mehdi Pirooznia, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Ranajit Das from University of Sheffield and our old friend Dr. Eran Elhaik who caused a Zionist firestorm of hate a few years ago by suggesting Ashkenazis may not have come from the Middle East
> 
> Ohh those Jewish Islamonazis, they get everwhere (according to Phoney)







 And have you proven that this was true, or are you just running with it because it supports your POV.

 To me and many others it is just LIES spouted by neo Nazis, white supremacists and islamonazi's to racially abuse the Jews.


----------



## Phoenall

Fishlore said:


> Of the six million or so Jews in Israel, one million are Russians. These folks speak Russian at home, although their kids are bilingual, often speak Hebrew badly if at all, and eat pork, shellfish and other trafe. They are a major voting bloc in the Likud coalition and home to a large Russian organized crime presence which is active in money laundering and cyber-crime world-wide. Most of them came from the great post-Soviet aliyah of the 1990s. Nobody, certainly no sabra Israelis, think them indigenous.
> 
> Most of the Christian Right knows nothing about the reality of Israel today. They haven't been there, although AIPAC does run some super-guided tours for GOP politicians, they know only the propaganda fed to them and view the entire issue through the fuzzy lens of dimly remembered Sundays-school stories.








 And you can of course prove this from an unbiased and non partisan source ?


----------



## TheGreatKing

> And have you proven that this was true, or are you just running with it because it supports your POV.
> To me and many others it is just LIES spouted by neo Nazis, white supremacists and islamonazi's to racially abuse the Jews.


LIES indeed! And how are Jews not considered Whites? Are Europeans and Jews not brothers, sons of Adam and Eve? #insanity.


----------



## montelatici

TheGreatKing said:


> If you people keep accepting lies of the devil and keep seeking solution to this or any other problem, then no proper solution could be found. Where is the snake of the Genesis who was cursed? Where are her children, who were supposed to be the enemies of the children of Eve? The snake has produced many children and they are occupying YOUR planet, given to you by your Father, God. Claim back your planet, your heritage from the devils. The devils are not humans and they are not even those animals who were allowed by God to live on earth with our permission, in order to serve us. They have come to the earth with ONE AND ONLY ONE AGENDA and that is to create problems for us, their enemies. All the Arabs, Egyptians, Philistines and all their colored sisters are the children of the devil. They have no right whatsoever on the planet earth or anywhere in the universe. They belong only to the fire of hell. The time has come to repay them for all their sins by annihilating them and sending them to hell. All the problems of the world like Israel's territory controversy, holocaust, 9/11, Immorality in western culture, etc. are the works of the invisible devil and her visible children. Say the truth and say it boldly and your problems will be solved. Your God is with you. The time has come. The devils will call TRUTH as Lies and LIES as Truths. Don't accept that. Say the truth and stick to it. Israel should claim all the land from Nile to Euphrates that God gave them in the Bible and should not compromise at all. #Israel


----------



## Fishlore

We've had 84 pages of debate on who is indigenous to Palestine but the question raises a non-issue. Israel's legitimacy does not derive from the indigenous character of its citizens. Zionism is not a movement of return of indigenous peoples but to the descendants of the original Hebrew settlers, who were by their own account not indigenous to the area. According to Torah, the Hebrews were successful invaders under Joshua. Moses was born in Egypt, not Palestine.

Even before the diaspora in 72 C.E. there were already more Jews living outside of Judea-Samaria (or Palestine if you prefer) than within it. Jewish culture was as dynamic and creative in Egypt and Syria as in Palestine. The significance of Judea derives from the ascendancy of the House of David and the priestly decree that only the Jerusalem Temple could offer the animal sacrifice central to the religion of the Hebrew people.

Zionism is a creationof the shtetel and Western persecution. Jews from Aleppo or Alexandria had no need to raise a glass "to next year in Jerusalem" because they were able to go there if they wished. Many did -- as pious tourists -- but they returned 'home" again to their lives and families.

I courl be argued that the Zionism which drove Western establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was an illegitimate act of colonialsim, more akin to Gibralta and Hong Kong than a "return" to land in which no ancestor had dwelt in well over a thousand years. It' a good argument but it is too late now. There are three generations of indigenous Israeli Jews. Deal with it


----------



## TheGreatKing

Fishlore said:


> I courl be argued that the Zionism which drove Western establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was an illegitimate act of colonialsim, more akin to Gibralta and Hong Kong than a "return" to land in which no ancestor had dwelt in well over a thousand years. It' a good argument but it is too late now. There are three generations of indigenous Israeli Jews. Deal with it



You intentionally lie. The land of Israel belongs to the Jews, given to them by God. Jews were persecuted and hence driven out from their own homeland. Then malicious Arabs came and settled in the land of the Jews. They must be evacuated. It is not a matter of who is indigenous, but a matter of the will of God. If you don't accept God's words then there is no arguing with you. We will take back all our land no matter what. Just wait and watch. And it will be very soon.


----------



## Fishlore

TheGreatKing said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I courl be argued that the Zionism which drove Western establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was an illegitimate act of colonialsim, more akin to Gibralta and Hong Kong than a "return" to land in which no ancestor had dwelt in well over a thousand years. It' a good argument but it is too late now. There are three generations of indigenous Israeli Jews. Deal with it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You intentionally lie. The land of Israel belongs to the Jews, given to them by God. Jews were persecuted and hence driven out from their own homeland. Then malicious Arabs came and settled in the land of the Jews. They must be evacuated. It is not a matter of who is indigenous, but a matter of the will of God. If you don't accept God's words then there is no arguing with you. We will take back all our land no matter what. Just wait and watch. And it will be very soon.
Click to expand...

God gave the land to the Jews. Then he took it away when they broke his laws. Nebuchadnezzar whas the agent of God in that arrangement. 

The Jews came back, rebuilt the Temple and reformed their practices. Five centuries later, they were up to their old tricks again. This time God was really pissed. He cancelled the covenant with Abraham and sent the Roman legions in to level the temple and drive the naughty Jews into permanent exile. 

When the Romans perverted the teachings of rabbi Jesus into the blasphemy called Chistianity, God pulled the plug on them too. He sent in the Arabs, who keep halal and pray in the proper manner. The Arabs are now God's Chosen People and Islam is the only true faith.

It's been two thousand years since God backed the Jews. No sooner had his Divine Son sacrificed His life through the meneuvering of the Jewish Sanhedrin than God pulled the plug on the Jews.  You can say I intentionally lie as a way of demonstrating your ignorance and belief in false Gods. Jesus has your number, and when he comes back, you are going to roast like a ballpark frank. Hold the mustard


----------



## TheGreatKing

Fishlore said:


> God gave the land to the Jews. Then he took it away when they broke his laws. Nebuchadnezzar whas the agent of God in that arrangement.
> 
> The Jews came back, rebuilt the Temple and reformed their practices. Five centuries later, they were up to their old tricks again. This time God was really pissed. He cancelled the covenant with Abraham and sent the Roman legions in to level the temple and drive the naughty Jews into permanent exile.
> 
> When the Romans perverted the teachings of rabbi Jesus into the blasphemy called Chistianity, God pulled the plug on them too. He sent in the Arabs, who keep halal and pray in the proper manner. The Arabs are now God's Chosen People and Islam is the only true faith.
> 
> It's been two thousand years since God backed the Jews. No sooner had his Divine Son sacrificed His life through the meneuvering of the Jewish Sanhedrin than God pulled the plug on the Jews.  You can say I intentionally lie as a way of demonstrating your ignorance and belief in false Gods. Jesus has your number, and when he comes back, you are going to roast like a ballpark frank. Hold the mustard



It seems you think Jesus is True and Christians are wrong. And Muslims don't think that He is the Divine son of God. And you also think that the Muslims are the true people of God. And I am ignorant! 

Jesus has already come and He is talking to you through my mouth and He is pitying you that you are so coerced by the Devil that you are supporting Him and not yourself. But He also assures you that He will set His house in order and then you will not say lies that are harmful to you and you will be happy.

All the religions of the Colored people are fake religions created by the devil and they are children of the devil and they know that their religions are fake, but being devils that is what they want. They have intentionally created a fake story of Mohammad in Jerusalem right at the sight of our temple and built a mosque there just to humiliate and persecute us. So tell them to throw their halal and worship to a fake God in the dust bin and also themselves into it since they are shit of the universe and the shit is thrown into the pit. That is where they will go.


----------



## TheGreatKing

And BTW when Jews sinned, God created a way for the devils to attack them, but never commanded them to. And hence what the devils did was sin and God will punish them for that. God chastises us, but He still loves us and hence when we repent and cry to Him, He helps us and punishes the devil who has persecuted us taking advantage of His anger. That is why the nation of Israel has been formed and now things will only improve for Israelis. You will see!


----------



## Fishlore

TheGreatKing said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> God gave the land to the Jews. Then he took it away when they broke his laws. Nebuchadnezzar whas the agent of God in that arrangement.
> 
> The Jews came back, rebuilt the Temple and reformed their practices. Five centuries later, they were up to their old tricks again. This time God was really pissed. He cancelled the covenant with Abraham and sent the Roman legions in to level the temple and drive the naughty Jews into permanent exile.
> 
> When the Romans perverted the teachings of rabbi Jesus into the blasphemy called Chistianity, God pulled the plug on them too. He sent in the Arabs, who keep halal and pray in the proper manner. The Arabs are now God's Chosen People and Islam is the only true faith.
> 
> It's been two thousand years since God backed the Jews. No sooner had his Divine Son sacrificed His life through the meneuvering of the Jewish Sanhedrin than God pulled the plug on the Jews.  You can say I intentionally lie as a way of demonstrating your ignorance and belief in false Gods. Jesus has your number, and when he comes back, you are going to roast like a ballpark frank. Hold the mustard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems you think Jesus is True and Christians are wrong. And Muslims don't think that He is the Divine son of God. And you also think that the Muslims are the true people of God. And I am ignorant!
> 
> Jesus has already come and He is talking to you through my mouth and He is pitying you that you are so coerced by the Devil that you are supporting Him and not yourself. But He also assures you that He will set His house in order and then you will not say lies that are harmful to you and you will be happy.
> 
> All the religions of the Colored people are fake religions created by the devil and they are children of the devil and they know that their religions are fake, but being devils that is what they want. They have intentionally created a fake story of Mohammad in Jerusalem right at the sight of our temple and built a mosque there just to humiliate and persecute us. So tell them to throw their halal and worship to a fake God in the dust bin and also themselves into it since they are shit of the universe and the shit is thrown into the pit. That is where they will go.
Click to expand...

I love your trolling for Jesus! Keep up the good work! 

It would seem from your latest revelation that you think Jesus was a Christian. Surely you are too wise a prophet to fall for that obvious historical blooper. Could you clarify the message God is sending you as regards that fact? 

If rabbi Jesus came back today, do you think any whites-only country club would let him in? Just curious.


----------



## TheGreatKing

Fishlore said:


> I love your trolling for Jesus! Keep up the good work!
> 
> It would seem from your latest revelation that you think Jesus was a Christian. Surely you are too wise a prophet to fall for that obvious historical blooper. Could you clarify the message God is sending you as regards that fact?
> 
> If rabbi Jesus came back today, do you think any whites-only country club would let him in? Just curious.



If u keep feigning ignorance about the most obvious truths like Christianity then I have to repeat myself again and again. That does not entitle u to label me a "Troll" for your mistakes.

Jesus is not just a "rabbi", He is the "Son of God". What utter nonsensical lie are u uttering? He said it openly many a times that He is the son of God and told His disciples to spread this message through out the world. How can u say Christianity is wrong and a historical blooper when u accept Jesus as true? Do u not accept the Gospels? Obviously not. U will not accept the testimony of the contemporaries of Jesus and will make up your own lies sitting two thousand years apart from that time. Now that is nonsense. If u come up with some historian's testimony belying my Holy Church then I will not accept that lie also.

Jesus has already come and He is suffering alone anonymously for His sheep since about five hundred years, but He is ruling the world also and everybody including u knows this, but they are coerced by the devil to not recognize and honor Him. But Jesus is God and soon He will remove all obstacles and will become the Lord of this world sitting on the Golden throne of the Great Germany. And He will make every Human and every Demon a Catholic Christian and then He will kill all the demons and all the humans who rejected Him and the millennial kingdom would begin. But even before He occupies his visible throne He rules the world and soon Israel will remove every Arabs from all their lands from Nile to Euphrates and break the abomination of the Muslims on the temple and rebuild the temple. It is going to happen within days now. Just watch and then I might ask u who is trolling and who is feigning ignorance of the most obvious truths.


----------



## Fishlore

TheGreatKing said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I love your trolling for Jesus! Keep up the good work!
> 
> It would seem from your latest revelation that you think Jesus was a Christian. Surely you are too wise a prophet to fall for that obvious historical blooper. Could you clarify the message God is sending you as regards that fact?
> 
> If rabbi Jesus came back today, do you think any whites-only country club would let him in? Just curious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If u keep feigning ignorance about the most obvious truths like Christianity then I have to repeat myself again and again. That does not entitle u to label me a "Troll" for your mistakes.
> 
> Jesus is not just a "rabbi", He is the "Son of God". What utter nonsensical lie are u uttering? He said it openly many a times that He is the son of God and told His disciples to spread this message through out the world. How can u say Christianity is wrong and a historical blooper when u accept Jesus as true? Do u not accept the Gospels? Obviously not. U will not accept the testimony of the contemporaries of Jesus and will make up your own lies sitting two thousand years apart from that time. Now that is nonsense. If u come up with some historian's testimony belying my Holy Church then I will not accept that lie also.
> 
> Jesus has already come and He is suffering alone anonymously for His sheep since about five hundred years, but He is ruling the world also and everybody including u knows this, but they are coerced by the devil to not recognize and honor Him. But Jesus is God and soon He will remove all obstacles and will become the Lord of this world sitting on the Golden throne of the Great Germany. And He will make every Human and every Demon a Catholic Christian and then He will kill all the demons and all the humans who rejected Him and the millennial kingdom would begin. But even before He occupies his visible throne He rules the world and soon Israel will remove every Arabs from all their lands from Nile to Euphrates and break the abomination of the Muslims on the temple and rebuild the temple. It is going to happen within days now. Just watch and then I might ask u who is trolling and who is feigning ignorance of the most obvious truths.
Click to expand...

The word for "son of" in Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew ("bin" "ben") has a much broader denotation in those languages than the simple patronymic the English translation implies. For example, when automobiles first appeared in the Middle East, they were spoken of as "son of the bicycle." 

The phrase "Son of God" in English denotes a direct biological connection and connotes, at the least, a shared identity with the implication of succession. That is not what original listeners to rabbi Jesus would have understood, although for later Greek listeners the biological denotation (like English) would have played comfortably into a religious mythology in which gods were sexually active with human women, their offspring being the common genealogy of mythic heroes.

In the Semitic languages, "son of god," like "son of the bicycle" suggests a much wider, diffuse and analogous relationship. A son of god would be a man of supreme righteousness, a human hero watched over benevolently by his protector much as Aeneas was watched over by Venus. The idea of an obstetric connection, while acceptable to Greek and Roman audiences, would have been an obscene blasphemy for any practicing Jew or "son of Torah."

I notice in your posts in this thread a rather presumptuous arrogance and claim to superior wisdom and understanding. I have been a theologian far too long to engage in such a childish claim to credentials. I will let your post and mine be judged by our shared readership; let them decide who speaks from a basis of knowledge and understanding. God bless


----------



## TheGreatKing

Fishlore said:


> The word for "son of" in Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew ("bin" "ben") has a much broader denotation in those languages than the simple patronymic the English translation implies. For example, when automobiles first appeared in the Middle East, they were spoken of as "son of the bicycle."
> 
> The phrase "Son of God" in English denotes a direct biological connection and connotes, at the least, a shared identity with the implication of succession. That is not what original listeners to rabbi Jesus would have understood, although for later Greek listeners the biological denotation (like English) would have played comfortably into a religious mythology in which gods were sexually active with human women, their offspring being the common genealogy of mythic heroes.
> 
> In the Semitic languages, "son of god," like "son of the bicycle" suggests a much wider, diffuse and analogous relationship. A son of god would be a man of supreme righteousness, a human hero watched over benevolently by his protector much as Aeneas was watched over by Venus. The idea of an obstetric connection, while acceptable to Greek and Roman audiences, would have been an obscene blasphemy for any practicing Jew or "son of Torah."
> 
> I notice in your posts in this thread a rather presumptuous arrogance and claim to superior wisdom and understanding. I have been a theologian far too long to engage in such a childish claim to credentials. I will let your post and mine be judged by our shared readership; let them decide who speaks from a basis of knowledge and understanding. God bless



Jesus said to His disciple who asked Him to show the Father: "What, I have been so long with you and you still don't understand? If you have seen me, you have seen my Father". In John 17:5 "And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee". 

It is clear that He is the one and only Son of God, since He was before the world was and was with the Father and to see Him is equal to see the Father. They are con-substantial and co-eternal.

You might be a great theologian, but on this point you say the stupidest things, thankfully intentionally. For if you are a Human, you can not be so stupid as to deny the Lord Jesus after two thousand years of His first coming. Even Charles Darwin was a great scientist, but he said the most stupid things like this complicated universe, where everything is at the right place to help Man survive, was made by chance and that Man is the son of Monkey. People, the most intelligent also say such nonsense because of the pressure of the devil. I am not laughing at their intelligence or credentials. But certainly I will not accept such nonsense of the devil coming from their mouths to be true. The world will fall apart if I do so. And I have no such intention. And my credentials you already know, but will keep on pretending to be ignorant of. I will wait for God to give me the glory which He has allotted to me.


----------



## Fishlore

TheGreatKing said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The word for "son of" in Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew ("bin" "ben") has a much broader denotation in those languages than the simple patronymic the English translation implies. For example, when automobiles first appeared in the Middle East, they were spoken of as "son of the bicycle."
> 
> The phrase "Son of God" in English denotes a direct biological connection and connotes, at the least, a shared identity with the implication of succession. That is not what original listeners to rabbi Jesus would have understood, although for later Greek listeners the biological denotation (like English) would have played comfortably into a religious mythology in which gods were sexually active with human women, their offspring being the common genealogy of mythic heroes.
> 
> In the Semitic languages, "son of god," like "son of the bicycle" suggests a much wider, diffuse and analogous relationship. A son of god would be a man of supreme righteousness, a human hero watched over benevolently by his protector much as Aeneas was watched over by Venus. The idea of an obstetric connection, while acceptable to Greek and Roman audiences, would have been an obscene blasphemy for any practicing Jew or "son of Torah."
> 
> I notice in your posts in this thread a rather presumptuous arrogance and claim to superior wisdom and understanding. I have been a theologian far too long to engage in such a childish claim to credentials. I will let your post and mine be judged by our shared readership; let them decide who speaks from a basis of knowledge and understanding. God bless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus said to His disciple who asked Him to show the Father: "What, I have been so long with you and you still don't understand? If you have seen me, you have seen my Father". In John 17:5 "And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee".
> 
> It is clear that He is the one and only Son of God, since He was before the world was and was with the Father and to see Him is equal to see the Father. They are con-substantial and co-eternal.
> 
> You might be a great theologian, but on this point you say the stupidest things, thankfully intentionally. For if you are a Human, you can not be so stupid as to deny the Lord Jesus after two thousand years of His first coming. Even Charles Darwin was a great scientist, but he said the most stupid things like this complicated universe, where everything is at the right place to help Man survive, was made by chance and that Man is the son of Monkey. People, the most intelligent also say such nonsense because of the pressure of the devil. I am not laughing at their intelligence or credentials. But certainly I will not accept such nonsense of the devil coming from their mouths to be true. The world will fall apart if I do so. And I have no such intention. And my credentials you already know, but will keep on pretending to be ignorant of. I will wait for God to give me the glory which He has allotted to me.
Click to expand...

As you are doubtless aware, the notion of Christ as consubstantial with the Father is a direct quote from the Nicene creed, an effort to clarify the nature of Christ over the issue of whether he was the same as the Father (Homousion) or merely like the Father (Homoiusion). The fact that, even today, the issue is expressed in Greek shows how alien the entire issue is to the life of rabbi Jesus as recorded in the synoptic Gospels. 

As I have said before, I am not posting to proselytize you. I don't care at all one way or the other what you believe. My interest is in the origin of the Christian church and its relationship to the radical Jewish rabbi whose life is recorded in the Gospels. Your faith may bridge the broad cultural and historic divide between Jesus and Christ but arrogant and discourteous proclamation of what you believe does not constitute and argument that what you believe is true.


----------



## montelatici

Just to be precise, at the time of Christ, rabbi did not mean the same thing as it does today.  The term rabbi was an informal title of honor and esteem used by a student (disciple) addressing his teacher.  It wasn't a formal title associated with the current ordination of rabbis by a religious hierarchy, that came in about 600 AD.  There were no rabbis in that sense in Jesus's day.


----------



## Fishlore

montelatici said:


> Just to be precise, at the time of Christ, rabbi did not mean the same thing as it does today.  The term rabbi was an informal title of honor and esteem used by a student (disciple) addressing his teacher.  It wasn't a formal title associated with the current ordination of rabbis by a religious hierarchy, that came in about 600 AD.  There were no rabbis in that sense in Jesus's day.


Your precision is appreciated.


----------



## TheGreatKing

A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!


----------



## Challenger

TheGreatKing said:


> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!



Bye.


----------



## Fishlore

TheGreatKing said:


> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!


“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
 Gird up your loins like a man,
I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone
when the morning stars sang together
and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?

I'll await your answer...


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Fishlore said:


> TheGreatKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
> Gird up your loins like a man,
> I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
> “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
> Tell me, if you have understanding.
> Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
> Or who stretched the line upon it?
> On what were its bases sunk,
> or who laid its cornerstone
> when the morning stars sang together
> and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?
> 
> I'll await your answer...
Click to expand...


G-d was basically telling Job here that he has no right to question G-d's justice, since Job was not present when the world was created.


----------



## Fishlore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheGreatKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
> Gird up your loins like a man,
> I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
> “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
> Tell me, if you have understanding.
> Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
> Or who stretched the line upon it?
> On what were its bases sunk,
> or who laid its cornerstone
> when the morning stars sang together
> and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?
> 
> I'll await your answer...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> G-d was basically telling Job here that he has no right to question G-d's justice, since Job was not present when the world was created.
Click to expand...

Good answer. I'm waiting for TheGreatKing to give us his unique exegesis.


----------



## TheGreatKing

Fishlore said:


> TheGreatKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
> Gird up your loins like a man,
> I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
> “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
> Tell me, if you have understanding.
> Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
> Or who stretched the line upon it?
> On what were its bases sunk,
> or who laid its cornerstone
> when the morning stars sang together
> and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?
> 
> I'll await your answer...
Click to expand...


The creature cannot question God, his creator, since the latter is his creator and much much more than him. As u can see, God is asking Job Science questions also (if u continue his dialogue later) like where are winds stored, etc. At that time Job and all humans had no way of answering such science questions, but now they can. What does that mean? 

Man was disobedient and impure and hence God did not reveal secrets about Himself and about His universe to him. God plays hide and seek with Man. He wants Man to seek Him through all his heart. Remember David telling his son Solomon, "If you seek the Lord, He will let you find Him, but if you do not seek Him, then ultimately He will abandon you". As Man matured and sought God with more perseverance, God was pleased to reveal Himself to him through Jesus Christ, His son. As the Lord said, "No man has seen the Father except the son, and you can see Him only through me", Jesus is the only way to knowledge of God and also about His universe. The more the world became followers of our Lord, the more they advanced in the knowledge of God like the concept of Trinity, for instance and also in the knowledge of His universe. We have discovered many secrets of the universe through Science, we have also discovered new political systems like Communism, Democracy and revolutions have happened in all the fields like arts, poetry, music, etc.

An interesting observation is that Jews who reject the Lord and Turks, Syrians, who also reject Him have also contributed immensely to the knowledge of Man. How is that? If they reject the Lord, then how can they be recipients of His knowledge? That is why I say that Jews and others who reject the Lord are feigning ignorance because of the devil's pressure. In their hearts all humans are Roman Catholics and hence knowledge has come through all humans. Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, etc. are examples of people who outwardly reject the Lord, but inwardly accept Him.

Another interesting point is that the devil forces people to say that Science is antagonistic to religion. My words above establish that Science is the product of religion and hence all those who claim that Religion is antagonistic to Science are simply cooperating with the devil under pressure, although they know it is not true. In this war between the devil and Man, sometimes even the Church has given way to the devil. The whole episode of the Church reprimanding Galileo for His discovery was just a drama under the pressure of the devil.


----------



## P F Tinmore

TheGreatKing said:


> Fishlore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheGreatKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
> Gird up your loins like a man,
> I will question you, and you shall declare to me.
> “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
> Tell me, if you have understanding.
> Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
> Or who stretched the line upon it?
> On what were its bases sunk,
> or who laid its cornerstone
> when the morning stars sang together
> and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy?
> 
> I'll await your answer...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The creature cannot question God, his creator, since the latter is his creator and much much more than him. As u can see, God is asking Job Science questions also (if u continue his dialogue later) like where are winds stored, etc. At that time Job and all humans had no way of answering such science questions, but now they can. What does that mean?
> 
> Man was disobedient and impure and hence God did not reveal secrets about Himself and about His universe to him. God plays hide and seek with Man. He wants Man to seek Him through all his heart. Remember David telling his son Solomon, "If you seek the Lord, He will let you find Him, but if you do not seek Him, then ultimately He will abandon you". As Man matured and sought God with more perseverance, God was pleased to reveal Himself to him through Jesus Christ, His son. As the Lord said, "No man has seen the Father except the son, and you can see Him only through me", Jesus is the only way to knowledge of God and also about His universe. The more the world became followers of our Lord, the more they advanced in the knowledge of God like the concept of Trinity, for instance and also in the knowledge of His universe. We have discovered many secrets of the universe through Science, we have also discovered new political systems like Communism, Democracy and revolutions have happened in all the fields like arts, poetry, music, etc.
> 
> An interesting observation is that Jews who reject the Lord and Turks, Syrians, who also reject Him have also contributed immensely to the knowledge of Man. How is that? If they reject the Lord, then how can they be recipients of His knowledge? That is why I say that Jews and others who reject the Lord are feigning ignorance because of the devil's pressure. In their hearts all humans are Roman Catholics and hence knowledge has come through all humans. Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, etc. are examples of people who outwardly reject the Lord, but inwardly accept Him.
> 
> Another interesting point is that the devil forces people to say that Science is antagonistic to religion. My words above establish that Science is the product of religion and hence all those who claim that Religion is antagonistic to Science are simply cooperating with the devil under pressure, although they know it is not true. In this war between the devil and Man, sometimes even the Church has given way to the devil. The whole episode of the Church reprimanding Galileo for His discovery was just a drama under the pressure of the devil.
Click to expand...

Here

Religion and Ethics


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.






Is that why there are so many cases of attacks on the Jewish and Christian inhabitants over the years. Why the dhimmi laws and pact of Umar were enforced. The muslims ruled with fear and terror those who refused to convert, killing individuals and families on a whim. Stealing their lands once they had done the hard work of getting it fertile and productive. All documented and provable to anyone that bothers to look


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> _
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
Click to expand...






 Wrong as they hit the criteria

 So where did the arab muslims live to become arabs before invading Palestine ?

 Which happen to be the Jews as the arabs and Christians did not exist before 70 C.E.

Nope as the covenant did not name them, it was specific on such matters.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3. The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.​
> Not the ones out of Europe.
Click to expand...






 IRRELEVANT    the Jews who lived in Palestine for 4.500 years lived in Palestine for 4,500 years. What don't you understand about that. And when they created Israel they had the right to invite other Jews to migrate there and settle. Just as the arab muslims granted land under the same international treaty ( international law ) also had the right to invite of ban those they wanted to live in their nation. I don't see you or any other of the team Palestine members complaining about the way the arabs treated the Jews between 1917 and 1947 with forced evictions and deportations, beatings and murders.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> TheGreatKing said:
> 
> 
> 
> A plant that was crushed even in its roots and budded boldly against persecutions of the devil and ultimately became the King of the world in 300 AD and prospered continuously and today is the religion of the Kings and Queens of the world, is being denied by some people. The proof of the tree is in its fruits. The truth is more obvious than the sun in the sky. So no point in wasting our time in arguing. Anyway I have already won my victory. Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bye.
Click to expand...







 Are you going to the jackanory board because you are ridiculed so much on here


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why there are so many cases of attacks on the Jewish and Christian inhabitants over the years. Why the dhimmi laws and pact of Umar were enforced. The muslims ruled with fear and terror those who refused to convert, killing individuals and families on a whim. Stealing their lands once they had done the hard work of getting it fertile and productive. All documented and provable to anyone that bothers to look
Click to expand...

All your deflection is meaningless. My post is still true.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why there are so many cases of attacks on the Jewish and Christian inhabitants over the years. Why the dhimmi laws and pact of Umar were enforced. The muslims ruled with fear and terror those who refused to convert, killing individuals and families on a whim. Stealing their lands once they had done the hard work of getting it fertile and productive. All documented and provable to anyone that bothers to look
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All your deflection is meaningless. My post is still true.
Click to expand...







 What deflection the evidence is there for all to see, all you have is islamonazi propaganda and lies. There have been attacks on the Jews in living memory and you deny these you are so stuck in your ways.


 Prove me wrong with unbiased links showing that the Jews and Christians were treated better than the Jews now treat the arab muslims in Israel


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why there are so many cases of attacks on the Jewish and Christian inhabitants over the years. Why the dhimmi laws and pact of Umar were enforced. The muslims ruled with fear and terror those who refused to convert, killing individuals and families on a whim. Stealing their lands once they had done the hard work of getting it fertile and productive. All documented and provable to anyone that bothers to look
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All your deflection is meaningless. My post is still true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What deflection the evidence is there for all to see, all you have is islamonazi propaganda and lies. There have been attacks on the Jews in living memory and you deny these you are so stuck in your ways.
> 
> 
> Prove me wrong with unbiased links showing that the Jews and Christians were treated better than the Jews now treat the arab muslims in Israel
Click to expand...

How about you list the attacks against the Jews before the Zionist invasion.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that why there are so many cases of attacks on the Jewish and Christian inhabitants over the years. Why the dhimmi laws and pact of Umar were enforced. The muslims ruled with fear and terror those who refused to convert, killing individuals and families on a whim. Stealing their lands once they had done the hard work of getting it fertile and productive. All documented and provable to anyone that bothers to look
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All your deflection is meaningless. My post is still true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What deflection the evidence is there for all to see, all you have is islamonazi propaganda and lies. There have been attacks on the Jews in living memory and you deny these you are so stuck in your ways.
> 
> 
> Prove me wrong with unbiased links showing that the Jews and Christians were treated better than the Jews now treat the arab muslims in Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How about you list the attacks against the Jews before the Zionist invasion.
Click to expand...






 What Zionist invasion, what year did that take place, what was the beachhead and how many fatalities on both sides on that day ?


----------



## Vigilante




----------



## P F Tinmore

Vigilante said:


>


Nice joke, but this one if funnier.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
Click to expand...

The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
Click to expand...







 And who do you see as the invaders ?


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
Click to expand...

Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
Click to expand...






 Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
Click to expand...

lol,no Palestinian.
*Palestine*


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> lol,no Palestinian.
> *Palestine*



You are going to have to be much more clear if you wish to engage with these ideas on this thread.

Define "Palestine".  Define "Palestinian".  Define your parameters for the term "indigenous" -- how do you KNOW this person is indigenous and that person is not?  What criteria do you USE to define that.  

I'll help you out by providing mine (though you can see this clearly enough in the early posts on this thread):

Indigeneity is a term used to describe the oldest, surviving culture which originated in a particular territory prior to invading and colonizing cultures.  The purpose of defining indigeneity is to preserve and protect these older, surviving cultures from the invading and colonizing cultures, especially in instances where the older culture is a minority.  I am a strong proponent of self-determination and even sovereignty over territory for ALL indigenous cultures.  

'Palestine' is the word in common usage to describe the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, the sovereignty over which is currently disputed and the source of conflict.  

'Palestinian' is the word in common usage to describe the Arab Muslim population of Israel and the disputed territories remaining from the Mandate for Palestine following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI.  It describes an Arab Muslim culture which was transplanted to the territories with the Arab Muslim conquests in the seventh century.


----------



## gt1085

Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned anyone else are terrorist.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
Click to expand...

The Jew-ish which is a none people.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...



Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
Click to expand...

don`t really have too that`s already known.


----------



## JakeStarkey

The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.

There have always been Jews in Palestine.


----------



## gt1085

JakeStarkey said:


> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.


those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.


----------



## JakeStarkey

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
Click to expand...

Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.


----------



## gt1085

JakeStarkey said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
Click to expand...

No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.


----------



## gt1085

JakeStarkey said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
Click to expand...

These are the real 
*  Palestinian*


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> 
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol,no Palestinian.
> *Palestine*
Click to expand...







 Yes the area of the M.E that has Jewish and arab nations ruled over by the indigenous people. There are parts of Jewish Palestine that the arab muslim illegals are trying to claim are theirs and have been since the time of Moses. Forgetting that they did not exist until the 7C when a mentally disabled thief invented them.


 OR ARE YOU ANOTHER OF THESE NAZI'S THAT DOES NOT WANT THE RIGHTS YOU DEMAND FOR FORIEGN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO APPLY TO THE JEWS ?


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned anyone else are terrorist.








 We do know what a Palestinian is and where Palestine is, you it seems do not and seem to think that only arrab muslims are Palestinians and can live in Palestine. Not that long ago you and your ilk were demanding the Jews return to where they came from, now you are demanding they leave.

Are you aware that not all arab muslims are dark skinned, and the true arab muslims look down on anyone with a skin tone darker than olive.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> 
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
Click to expand...






LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?


----------



## Phoenall

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
Click to expand...







 Of course it is an old member banned and back under a new name. They are very racist like all islamonazi scum, and proof if any were needed that islamionazi's have no place in modern society


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> don`t really have too that`s already known.
Click to expand...






 Yep just your common or garden Nazi scum with a streak of Jew hatred.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
Click to expand...







 Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.


 A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
Click to expand...






TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?
Click to expand...

Thank You but you can`t put words in this mouth.See that ya`ll problem you know to much and dont know shit.You and yur people are delusional,Really.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.
> 
> 
> A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.
Click to expand...

khazarians,do exist whether you no it or not does`nt matter,And christian have nothing at all to support their claim.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> don`t really have too that`s already known.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep just your common or garden Nazi scum with a streak of Jew hatred.
Click to expand...

Well it better than being just plain scum.These are true Jews.And the people of  Jerusalem, Please don`t answer sick of dumb delusional people white at that.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is an old member banned and back under a new name. They are very racist like all islamonazi scum, and proof if any were needed that islamionazi's have no place in modern society
Click to expand...

You catholic christians had no place and are racist scum.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The invaders are NOT indigenous to that land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
Click to expand...

It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned anyone else are terrorist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do know what a Palestinian is and where Palestine is, you it seems do not and seem to think that only arrab muslims are Palestinians and can live in Palestine. Not that long ago you and your ilk were demanding the Jews return to where they came from, now you are demanding they leave.
> 
> Are you aware that not all arab muslims are dark skinned, and the true arab muslims look down on anyone with a skin tone darker than olive.
Click to expand...

There you go putting word in people mouth.You got confuse on the conversation about Jews.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These are the real
> *  Palestinian*
Click to expand...







 So what about Shirley Temper then, is she a real palestinian ?   





Or this boy





Or this family ?








Some very light skinned people in Palestine that cant be arab muslims according to you


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> And who do you see as the invaders ?
> 
> 
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
Click to expand...






 Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well lets think,I don`t think it could be the indigenous people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
Click to expand...

Because white are the biggest racist their is.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These are the real
> *  Palestinian*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn`t anything about race mixing they are *Palestinian,only by mixing their blood with the true people of the land and their no white people.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what about Shirley Temper then, is she a real palestinian ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or this boy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or this family ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some very light skinned people in Palestine that cant be arab muslims according to you
Click to expand...


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned anyone else are terrorist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We do know what a Palestinian is and where Palestine is, you it seems do not and seem to think that only arrab muslims are Palestinians and can live in Palestine. Not that long ago you and your ilk were demanding the Jews return to where they came from, now you are demanding they leave.
> 
> Are you aware that not all arab muslims are dark skinned, and the true arab muslims look down on anyone with a skin tone darker than olive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There you go putting word in people mouth.You got confuse on the conversation about Jews.
Click to expand...






 WRONG you have been found wanting and don't like being shown as a RABID RACIST JEW HATER.

 You have a conception that only arab muslims can be Palestinians when they did not exist prior to 635 C.E., and Jews are from another planet and so should be shot on sight. I have given you pictures of light skinned fair haired people who are palestinan arab muslims. It is you that is confused because you wont open your eyes and look at the reality


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then that is the Jews out of the equation then, so it must be the Roman Christians, Greek Christians and arab muslims
> 
> 
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
Click to expand...






 Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank You but you can`t put words in this mouth.See that ya`ll problem you know to much and dont know shit.You and yur people are delusional,Really.
Click to expand...







 I know more than you ever will, which is why I call you a LIAR as soon as you bring up khazars. A fictitious people to fill a void in the islamonazi propaganda history of the Jews. Ranked alongside the protocols as the biggest LIE in history, peddled by Jew haters, neo Nazi's and white supremacists.


 You don't even know who my people are so you cant say that can you


----------



## JakeStarkey

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
Click to expand...

Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.

Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.

If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.

Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.
> 
> 
> A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> khazarians,do exist whether you no it or not does`nt matter,And christian have nothing at all to support their claim.
Click to expand...








 Then produce the evidence, be the first to provide a link to a mention of khazars prior to the mid 20C when they were invented along with the elders of zion. Not one person who has relied on the khazar fantasy has been able to produce the evidence of their actual existence other than very recent inclusions in scientific theories. One of which claims that the Jews of today are all descended from just 4 Turkish females.

And what claim do Christians make that cant be supported ?


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> don`t really have too that`s already known.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep just your common or garden Nazi scum with a streak of Jew hatred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it better than being just plain scum.These are true Jews.And the people of  Jerusalem, Please don`t answer sick of dumb delusional people white at that.
Click to expand...







 You are basing your claims on skin colour alone, and disregarding DNA and historical records.


 THIS MAKES YOU A RACIST


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is an old member banned and back under a new name. They are very racist like all islamonazi scum, and proof if any were needed that islamionazi's have no place in modern society
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You catholic christians had no place and are racist scum.
Click to expand...






 See you know nothing, and I agree the Catholics are scum as they sided with the muslims and the Nazi's to wipe out the Jews.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.
> 
> 
> A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> khazarians,do exist whether you no it or not does`nt matter,And christian have nothing at all to support their claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then produce the evidence, be the first to provide a link to a mention of khazars prior to the mid 20C when they were invented along with the elders of zion. Not one person who has relied on the khazar fantasy has been able to produce the evidence of their actual existence other than very recent inclusions in scientific theories. One of which claims that the Jews of today are all descended from just 4 Turkish females.
> 
> And what claim do Christians make that cant be supported ?
Click to expand...

Im not getting back to a dead discussion about khazars yes they exist to this day.The Turkish had nothing to do with Jews.the real Jews.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it is an old member banned and back under a new name. They are very racist like all islamonazi scum, and proof if any were needed that islamionazi's have no place in modern society
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You catholic christians had no place and are racist scum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well your getting educated.
> 
> 
> 
> See you know nothing, and I agree the Catholics are scum as they sided with the muslims and the Nazi's to wipe out the Jews.
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "Palestine". Define "Palestinian". How Their both the same.Are you not familiar that all that land and people are dark skinned ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah.  Sovereignty should be based on skin color.  So standard old-fashioned racism then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> don`t really have too that`s already known.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep just your common or garden Nazi scum with a streak of Jew hatred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it better than being just plain scum.These are true Jews.And the people of  Jerusalem, Please don`t answer sick of dumb delusional people white at that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well it is about exactly that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are basing your claims on skin colour alone, and disregarding DNA and historical records.
> 
> 
> THIS MAKES YOU A RACIST
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

JakeStarkey said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.
> 
> Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.
> 
> If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.
> 
> Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.
Click to expand...

Less move on any way you are being misled,there were some gentiles that were Jews,These are True Jews and Palestine


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> 
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank You but you can`t put words in this mouth.See that ya`ll problem you know to much and dont know shit.You and yur people are delusional,Really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more than you ever will, which is why I call you a LIAR as soon as you bring up khazars. A fictitious people to fill a void in the islamonazi propaganda history of the Jews. Ranked alongside the protocols as the biggest LIE in history, peddled by Jew haters, neo Nazi's and white supremacists.
> 
> 
> You don't even know who my people are so you cant say that can you
Click to expand...

Like i said you are Delusional it okay most of you are deceived.


----------



## JakeStarkey

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.
> 
> Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.
> 
> If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.
> 
> Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Less move on any way you are being misled,there were some gentiles that were Jews,These are True Jews and Palestine
Click to expand...

The misleading statements are to suggest that the Jewish ancestors (1) did not arise in the fertile crescent and (2) have not lived in Palestine for 3,500 year


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jew-ish which is a none people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
Click to expand...

Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.


----------



## gt1085

JakeStarkey said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> 
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.
> 
> Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.
> 
> If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.
> 
> Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Less move on any way you are being misled,there were some gentiles that were Jews,These are True Jews and Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The misleading statements are to suggest that the Jewish ancestors (1) did not arise in the fertile crescent and (2) have not lived in Palestine for 3,500 year
Click to expand...

Thats right jew-ish is not a people.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.
> 
> 
> A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> khazarians,do exist whether you no it or not does`nt matter,And christian have nothing at all to support their claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then produce the evidence, be the first to provide a link to a mention of khazars prior to the mid 20C when they were invented along with the elders of zion. Not one person who has relied on the khazar fantasy has been able to produce the evidence of their actual existence other than very recent inclusions in scientific theories. One of which claims that the Jews of today are all descended from just 4 Turkish females.
> 
> And what claim do Christians make that cant be supported ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Im not getting back to a dead discussion about khazars yes they exist to this day.The Turkish had nothing to do with Jews.the real Jews.
Click to expand...






Then provide the historical data to support your claims, if you do you will be the first person ever to do so.

 Now what claims do Christians make that cant be supported again ?


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> LINK to prove your RACIST CLAIMS ?
> 
> 
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
Click to expand...







 Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.
> 
> Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.
> 
> If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.
> 
> Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Less move on any way you are being misled,there were some gentiles that were Jews,These are True Jews and Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The misleading statements are to suggest that the Jewish ancestors (1) did not arise in the fertile crescent and (2) have not lived in Palestine for 3,500 year
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats right jew-ish is not a people.
Click to expand...






 Correct as Jew is the correct word for the people of Judea and Samaria. Jewish is a description of the people who are Jews


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews and their ancestors have been in the Holy Land for almost 3,500 years.
> 
> There have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since you are not an authority to define what is a "true Jew", we will ignore that and move on.
> 
> Jews have always lived in Palestine for the last 3500 years.
> 
> If this is an argument about the original "Jews", they originated in the Golden Crescent.
> 
> Anyone who talks about Eastern Europe as the original 'homeland' of the Jews is automatically disqualified of any respect in the discussion of the original people of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Less move on any way you are being misled,there were some gentiles that were Jews,These are True Jews and Palestine
Click to expand...






 Yes they converted to the religion, but they are not racial Jews like the ones in Israel today.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Before and during and after the Great Khazaar conversion, there have always been Jews in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank You but you can`t put words in this mouth.See that ya`ll problem you know to much and dont know shit.You and yur people are delusional,Really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more than you ever will, which is why I call you a LIAR as soon as you bring up khazars. A fictitious people to fill a void in the islamonazi propaganda history of the Jews. Ranked alongside the protocols as the biggest LIE in history, peddled by Jew haters, neo Nazi's and white supremacists.
> 
> 
> You don't even know who my people are so you cant say that can you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like i said you are Delusional it okay most of you are deceived.
Click to expand...







 You are the one who is delusional as you make sweeping claims and cant even support them in any way or form. We have destroyed most of your arguments in the past when other brainwashed idiots have presented them as facts. And in the end could only say " Because I say so" when asked for proof


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No that incorrect,Sir, khazarians have no ties to the true Jews at all, they are only khazrs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE as they are a figment of your imagination based on your brainwashing over the years. You claim that the 12 million Jews in existence all come from the same 4 women some time in the middle ages. WOW they must have been very fertile ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank You but you can`t put words in this mouth.See that ya`ll problem you know to much and dont know shit.You and yur people are delusional,Really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well you dumb ass as shit and you don`t have`nt reseached either just hear say .I Back All I Say,Documents,Writing in the on the wall.you have not gotten a clue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more than you ever will, which is why I call you a LIAR as soon as you bring up khazars. A fictitious people to fill a void in the islamonazi propaganda history of the Jews. Ranked alongside the protocols as the biggest LIE in history, peddled by Jew haters, neo Nazi's and white supremacists.
> 
> 
> You don't even know who my people are so you cant say that can you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like i said you are Delusional it okay most of you are deceived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the one who is delusional as you make sweeping claims and cant even support them in any way or form. We have destroyed most of your arguments in the past when other brainwashed idiots have presented them as facts. And in the end could only say " Because I say so" when asked for proof
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only one people who are racist that is caucasians.C`mon everyone on the planet knows this.lol,except you.haha.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
Click to expand...

In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> those there now are jew-ish fake Jew,Those scums there are khazarians,Which again is not a people.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope just the first time it slaps you in the face.Like I Said I Prove All I say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they never existed and are based around an epic poem and a novel. No evidence of their existence prior to the mid 20C in any books what so ever.
> 
> 
> A made up story jumped on by islamonazi's because they have nothing else to support their claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> khazarians,do exist whether you no it or not does`nt matter,And christian have nothing at all to support their claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then produce the evidence, be the first to provide a link to a mention of khazars prior to the mid 20C when they were invented along with the elders of zion. Not one person who has relied on the khazar fantasy has been able to produce the evidence of their actual existence other than very recent inclusions in scientific theories. One of which claims that the Jews of today are all descended from just 4 Turkish females.
> 
> And what claim do Christians make that cant be supported ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Im not getting back to a dead discussion about khazars yes they exist to this day.The Turkish had nothing to do with Jews.the real Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then provide the historical data to support your claims, if you do you will be the first person ever to do so.
> 
> Now what claims do Christians make that cant be supported again ?
Click to expand...


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Strange that as the blacks are the second most racist after the arab muslims. And only RACIST's like yourself cant see this.
> 
> 
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
Click to expand...






 No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
Click to expand...

No,That`s a lie.christians have killed 100 Million,which is 1 Billion murdered innocent people,No worries That Record Will Not Be Beat By Anyone.Point Blank.Sorry.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because white are the biggest racist their is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
Click to expand...

Sorry,But Facts or Facts,Over 400 yrs Caucasians have killed more than a Billion people.Facts.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
Click to expand...


European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DNA is NOT the basis for being indigenous.  Culture is.  Invading and colonizing cultures are specifically excluded from the definition of indigenous.
Click to expand...


Which "culture" is that? Sehpardic? Yiddish?


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.
Click to expand...

That is`nt true all were not exterminated,As for as rome goes they are black as in Moors,and Europe belong the true Eurpeaans which are dark skin as in Moors.


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DNA is NOT the basis for being indigenous.  Culture is.  Invading and colonizing cultures are specifically excluded from the definition of indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which "culture" is that? Sehpardic? Yiddish?
Click to expand...

If that is your answer.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.
Click to expand...



I'm not sure what your point is as it relates to the question of indigeneity.  

That the Jewish people were largely destroyed in Roman times, rather than expelled or displaced?  So that means, what?  That montelatici is wrong that the Palestinians (modern day, common usage) are descendants of the Jewish people, since the Jewish people in Israel/Judea/Samaria/Jerusalem were destroyed?  That the only surviving Jewish people are those who are descended from the people living in the Diasopora?  Doesn't that support my premise, rather than argue against it?


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what your point is as it relates to the question of indigeneity.
> 
> That the Jewish people were largely destroyed in Roman times, rather than expelled or displaced?  So that means, what?  That montelatici is wrong that the Palestinians (modern day, common usage) are descendants of the Jewish people, since the Jewish people in Israel/Judea/Samaria/Jerusalem were destroyed?  That the only surviving Jewish people are those who are descended from the people living in the Diasopora?  Doesn't that support my premise, rather than argue against it?
Click to expand...

Again they killed some,Jews still exist today.So we drop it,You cannot understand what obviously what is truth.It good to research instead of speaking on impulse.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> Jews still exist today.



Thank you, Captain Obvious.  

Did you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or shall I ignore you like an excited puppy who suddenly realized that the world exists beyond its mother's teat?


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews still exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Captain Obvious.
> 
> Did you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or shall I ignore you like an excited puppy who suddenly realized that the world exists beyond its mother's teat?
Click to expand...

Lol, well, that can be said for both of us.You should know far to well about being a pup you were one obviously.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews still exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Captain Obvious.
> 
> Did you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or shall I ignore you like an excited puppy who suddenly realized that the world exists beyond its mother's teat?
Click to expand...

True Palestinian....


----------



## gt1085

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews still exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Captain Obvious.
> 
> Did you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or shall I ignore you like an excited puppy who suddenly realized that the world exists beyond its mother's teat?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lol, well, that can be said for both of us.You should know far to well about being a pup you were one obviously.
Click to expand...

Fake Palestinian...


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews still exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Captain Obvious.
> 
> Did you actually have anything to contribute to this thread, or shall I ignore you like an excited puppy who suddenly realized that the world exists beyond its mother's teat?
Click to expand...

Like said said you should study first.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what your point is as it relates to the question of indigeneity.
> 
> That the Jewish people were largely destroyed in Roman times, rather than expelled or displaced?  So that means, what?  That montelatici is wrong that the Palestinians (modern day, common usage) are descendants of the Jewish people, since the Jewish people in Israel/Judea/Samaria/Jerusalem were destroyed?  That the only surviving Jewish people are those who are descended from the people living in the Diasopora?  Doesn't that support my premise, rather than argue against it?
Click to expand...



"Judeans" (and others) were indigenous to "Judea."
Some Judeans followed the monotheistic cult we now call Judaism.
Those Judeans that rebelled against Rome (who followed Judaism) were by and large wiped out according to the historians Flavius Josephus and Cassius Dio (supported in part by later Midrashic literature).
The remaining surviving non-Jewish (and a few Jewish survivors), Judeans in Judea/Palestina carried on and eventually converted first to Christianity and then eventually Islam.
There were also Judean expatriates living throughout the Roman and Persian empires, some of whom practiced Judaism and some of whom proselytised widely. Judaism competed fiercely for converts with Christianity until Constantine was converted and made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Subsequent Christian persecution of the followers of Judaism drastically reduced the numbers of followers either by re-conversion or flight elsewhere (the Persian Empire took in many Jewish fugitives, regardless of where they came from). What remained were the religious "die hard" fanatics who eventually formed isolated communities across the Empire and beyond. By then, the only connection they had with Judea/Palestina was their religion. 
In the mid 19th century Europe was convulsed by the emergence of "nationalism" after the Napoleonic wars and while western European nations by and large sucessfully assimilated their Jewish religionists, in eastern Europe, there was much less tolerance of non-Christians. This phenomenon led to the invention of "the Jewish people" as an "ethnicity" that originated from Palestine; the political irridentist ideology called Zionism. Zionists invented "the Jewish people" and the "land of Israel". Any connection between modern Jewish Europeans and the so called children of Israel is, at the very best, tenuous compared with the connection of the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine they dispossessed by force.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No,That`s a lie.christians have killed 100 Million,which is 1 Billion murdered innocent people,No worries That Record Will Not Be Beat By Anyone.Point Blank.Sorry.
Click to expand...







 Maybe over the last 10 millennia. but in recorded history of the last 100 years the list of murderers starts with the muslims, then the communists/Marxists, the Africans, the Catholics and finally the rest of humanity


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to the evidence available, and just look at the US since civil rights became the thing, more black on white racism that there was ever white on black. Same with South Africa, Rhodesia, Uganda and most muslim nations.
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry,But Facts or Facts,Over 400 yrs Caucasians have killed more than a Billion people.Facts.
Click to expand...







 EVIDENCE as your word alone is not good enough


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European adhereants to Judaism were not expelled. This is a myth. There were Judeans living throughout the Roman Empire, either as individuals or in groups; some of these Judeans may well have practiced Monotheism. if anything Judaism in Judea itself was all but exterminated by the Romans as Josephus mentions most of the Jewish (religious) population of Judea had come to Jerusalem for a festival when the Romans besieged the city. The inhabitants either starved, were slaughtered or sold off as slaves when the city fell. Whatever recovery the Jewish (religious) population might have made was snuffed out after the Bar Kokhba revolt when the Romans went on a systematic campaign of extermination in Judea. Those who survived were non-Jewish Judeans; Judaism only survived as a religious cult because so many Judeans lived outside Judea and obtained converts from North africa and Europe.
Click to expand...







 Then explain what happened to the Jews taken by the Romans as slaves back to Europe, as that is where most of the European Jews came from.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not the ones out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you seem to fail to grasp the concept that you are supporting here, and, worse, failing to apply it universally.  You are, in effect, saying that if an invading and colonizing force successfully expels or displaces part of a people then that part of the people are excluded from rights to return, to self-determine and to be considered part of the same group which avoided expulsion.
> 
> And that puts some of your other arguments in serious jeopardy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Especially if the allegedly expelled part of the people have little or no familial connection to the said expelled part of the people.  Converting to a religion does not change one's DNA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> DNA is NOT the basis for being indigenous.  Culture is.  Invading and colonizing cultures are specifically excluded from the definition of indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which "culture" is that? Sehpardic? Yiddish?
Click to expand...






 Arab muslim and neo marxist


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No,That`s a lie.christians have killed 100 Million,which is 1 Billion murdered innocent people,No worries That Record Will Not Be Beat By Anyone.Point Blank.Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe over the last 10 millennia. but in recorded history of the last 100 years the list of murderers starts with the muslims, then the communists/Marxists, the Africans, the Catholics and finally the rest of humanity
Click to expand...

you can who,if you want,fact is still states statistically,remains that the caucaians hold that record Bar None That Is.Claiming christians,lol and a bunch of shit,But keep Tinkering.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking on racism caucasians cannot be beat with all the people on the planet.You know better than i should hope so.Every where you go have gone you take your racism with you.Fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racism is endemic in all races and cultures as mankind always has to be the best. Now telling the truth is seen as racism when it tells the truth about a group. For example saying that muslims are semi literate evil mass murderers is not racist as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Your Statement here Remove Muslims.Put In christian, that Belong There.evil mass murderers , racist,rapist, as it is based on proven evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No as it would be racism based on LIES.    The evidence shows that muslims have always been semu literate evil mass murderers with a tally close to 50 million murdered innocent in the last century +/- 15 years
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry,But Facts or Facts,Over 400 yrs Caucasians have killed more than a Billion people.Facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EVIDENCE as your word alone is not good enough
Click to expand...

That`s okay you feel that way,You are unlearned about the hold of the subject with only hear say.You dont have to answer back,i fully understand your condition.


----------



## Challenger

Interesting Christian take on who is indigenous, 

"The number one biblical verse used by Zionist Jews and Zionist Christians alike to justify dispossessing the Palestinians of their land is this one:

_“On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates….” Genesis 15:18_

By descendants God definitely meant the same biological bloodline, the same DNA, actual grandchildren of Abram/Abraham. Not spiritual progeny. As even a cursory study would show, those today who are known as Jews are not remotely bloodline descendants of Abraham."   Are Jews the Israelites of the Bible?


----------



## abu afak

Challenger said:


> Interesting Christian take on who is indigenous,....
> Are Jews the Israelites of the Bible?


'BiblicismInstitute' is a Raging anti-semitic website.
No surprise used by Your *ill*k.
As always, one should just go to the home page:
Biblicism Institute

"Headline: Jewish Deception"

"Kosher Food=Scam"

etc, More FILTH, etc.​
Of course, that could easily have been discerned without even going to the home page.
You're one of THEE worst/most thinly veiled 'anti-cough-zionists' I've ever seen.
*Only SCUM would use a website like this.*
`


----------



## Shusha

There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.


----------



## gt1085

abu afak said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting Christian take on who is indigenous,....
> Are Jews the Israelites of the Bible?
> 
> 
> 
> 'BiblicismInstitute' is a Raging anti-semitic website.
> No surprise used by Your *ill*k.
> As always, one should just go to the home page:
> Biblicism Institute
> 
> "Headline: Jewish Deception"
> 
> "Kosher Food=Scam"
> 
> etc, More FILTH, etc.​
> Of course, that could easily have been discerned without even going to the home page.
> You're one of THEE worst/most thinly veiled 'anti-cough-zionists' I've ever seen.
> *Only SCUM would use a website like this.*
> `
Click to expand...

No such thing as a white Jew.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.



Bullshit.


----------



## gt1085

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
Click to expand...

i have a strong determination No doubt and do know all people are not the same and i have a say so.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
Click to expand...


Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
Click to expand...

Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers


----------



## Hossfly

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
Click to expand...

The latest news is that Satan is hiding out and designing clothes for Melanin Apparel and wants you to give him a raise.  He's been working his tail off for you.


----------



## gt1085

Hossfly said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The latest news is that Satan is hiding out and designing clothes for Melanin Apparel and wants you to give him a raise.  He's been working his tail off for you.
Click to expand...

But you got your raise.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> ....,but the synagogue of satan worshipers



Seriously, you would think after all these thousands of years humanity would have gotten over accusing people of being "satan worshippers" and taking that literally.  So much more work to do....


----------



## Hossfly

gt1085 said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The latest news is that Satan is hiding out and designing clothes for Melanin Apparel and wants you to give him a raise.  He's been working his tail off for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you got your raise.
Click to expand...

Do you think I would work at your apparel company alongside the Devil?  What you are showing, employer of the Devil, is that you have been busy reading the hate sites.

I am beginning to think this poster is actually Louie Farrakhan's assistant at the Nation of Islam.


----------



## gt1085

Hossfly said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The latest news is that Satan is hiding out and designing clothes for Melanin Apparel and wants you to give him a raise.  He's been working his tail off for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you got your raise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think I would work at your apparel company alongside the Devil?  What you are showing, employer of the Devil, is that you have been busy reading the hate sites.
> 
> I am beginning to think this poster is actually Louie Farrakhan's assistant at the Nation of Islam.
Click to expand...

yes,okay.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, you would think after all these thousands of years humanity would have gotten over accusing people of being "satan worshippers" and taking that literally.  So much more work to do....
Click to expand...

you know it.


----------



## Vigilante




----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*


The Philistines who later became called Palestinians got there right about the same time as the ancient Hebrews from Egypt, as far as we can tell from ancient sources.

The ancient Egyptians are the primary source for the Philistines.

And Josephus Flavius the Jewish general and Roman historian is the primary source for the Hebrews.

So as far as who got there first, they got there about the same time.

The land which the Hebrews conquered was NOT Philistine land, it was Canaanite land.

After the Romans expelled the Jews from Judea and Galilee, the Philistines moved into the land.  But the land was not for rent or for sale.  It was depopulated by the Romans.

As to whom the land belongs to now, let them fight over it fair and square.

There won't be peace in this land until one of these two groups is all dead.


----------



## Shusha

The Philistines are not the Palestinians.  The Hebrews are the Canaanites.


----------



## montelatici

You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL

*Ancient Jewish History:
The Occupation of Canaan*
The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library



Oh please.  Do you have definitive archeological evidence that the Canaanites and the Israelites were two culturally distinctive peoples?  Because all of the evidence I have looked at is that the Israelites arose from within the Canaanite culture, sharing the same language origins and pottery styles and locations.


----------



## montelatici

So, you pick and choose what you want to believe of your bible. LOL


----------



## Roudy

Cannanites?  Pffffft!  They're an extinct people. Look it up.


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Interesting Christian take on who is indigenous,
> 
> "The number one biblical verse used by Zionist Jews and Zionist Christians alike to justify dispossessing the Palestinians of their land is this one:
> 
> _“On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates….” Genesis 15:18_
> 
> By descendants God definitely meant the same biological bloodline, the same DNA, actual grandchildren of Abram/Abraham. Not spiritual progeny. As even a cursory study would show, those today who are known as Jews are not remotely bloodline descendants of Abraham."   Are Jews the Israelites of the Bible?








 And just where do we see this being used the most in reality, when morons like you bring it into the equation and fail to support your claims with any form of evidence. It is amongst the many claims used to justify Jew hatred in your own mind because it is all you have left.



 So how about a link to this being used all the time, or will you once again ignore my request


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> So, you pick and choose what you want to believe of your bible. LOL








 Yes because we have self determination and a free thinkers. We are not constrained by power crazed old men living in luxury and waited on hand and foot. The Cardinals of Rome have a lot to answer for.


----------



## Phoenall

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
Click to expand...






Or is it the Saudi's, Iranians, Turks, Pakistani's etc. as they seem to be the ones who currently dictate who is and who is not a Palestinian


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
Click to expand...







 The reality is this is a lie to cover up the pact between the catholics and muslims who actually control the world, and any sane person can see this. The satan worshippers are the Africans who mix their ancestral religions with Catholicism and came up with the likes of Gods Army


----------



## Coyote

*Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*


----------



## Phoenall

montelatici said:


> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library








 Another spam cut and paste from monte because that is all he has.

 The Jews were around  2,500 years before the arab muslims were invited, and the Romans looked to God for salvation. Who is indigenous to the Americas, European invaders who had to ancestral ties to the land or Amerindians who were there when the first settlers landed ?



 There were no muslims or Christians in existence until they were created by man who stole the already extant religion of the place then altered it to meet with their perverted views. They also stole the covenant and claimed it as their own, and now the prophesy is coming true they are trying to alter it


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*






 Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There can be no self-determination without self-identification.  A peoples who are denied the right to choose who is and who is not part of their people, using their own criteria, has no self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So the Jewish people get to choose who is and who is not a Palestinian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well actually they are in charge,everyone seems to think they are the chosen people and in fact are not,but the synagogue of satan worshipers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that white history.We`re talking real history,Or to you Ancient history,since we know you cannot obtain the status Ancient.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reality is this is a lie to cover up the pact between the catholics and muslims who actually control the world, and any sane person can see this. The satan worshippers are the Africans who mix their ancestral religions with Catholicism and came up with the likes of Gods Army
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear that.


----------



## Coyote

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
Click to expand...


*Glad you're back in the land of the living Phoenal!  Please, if you answer them - throw in some content ok? *


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another spam cut and paste from monte because that is all he has.
> 
> The Jews were around  2,500 years before the arab muslims were invited, and the Romans looked to God for salvation. Who is indigenous to the Americas, European invaders who had to ancestral ties to the land or Amerindians who were there when the first settlers landed ?
> 
> 
> 
> There were no muslims or Christians in existence until they were created by man who stole the already extant religion of the place then altered it to meet with their perverted views. They also stole the covenant and claimed it as their own, and now the prophesy is coming true they are trying to alter it
Click to expand...

You people are a hoot.

"There  were no Christians until blah, blah, blah."

"There were no Muslims until blah, blah, blah.

Where did they come from? Did they just fall out of the sky?


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry to hear that.
Click to expand...






 Thank you for your concern, now on the road to recovery slowly but steadily


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Glad you're back in the land of the living Phoenal!  Please, if you answer them - throw in some content ok? *
Click to expand...






 Will try and thank you for being understanding


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another spam cut and paste from monte because that is all he has.
> 
> The Jews were around  2,500 years before the arab muslims were invited, and the Romans looked to God for salvation. Who is indigenous to the Americas, European invaders who had to ancestral ties to the land or Amerindians who were there when the first settlers landed ?
> 
> 
> 
> There were no muslims or Christians in existence until they were created by man who stole the already extant religion of the place then altered it to meet with their perverted views. They also stole the covenant and claimed it as their own, and now the prophesy is coming true they are trying to alter it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You people are a hoot.
> 
> "There  were no Christians until blah, blah, blah."
> 
> "There were no Muslims until blah, blah, blah.
> 
> Where did they come from? Did they just fall out of the sky?
Click to expand...








 YES  as they were invented at specific times. As in no Christians prior to 70 C.E. as they were not invented by the Romans until then. Before this they were Jewish followers of Jesus. Then the Romans took hold and created a new religion.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another spam cut and paste from monte because that is all he has.
> 
> The Jews were around  2,500 years before the arab muslims were invited, and the Romans looked to God for salvation. Who is indigenous to the Americas, European invaders who had to ancestral ties to the land or Amerindians who were there when the first settlers landed ?
> 
> 
> 
> There were no muslims or Christians in existence until they were created by man who stole the already extant religion of the place then altered it to meet with their perverted views. They also stole the covenant and claimed it as their own, and now the prophesy is coming true they are trying to alter it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You people are a hoot.
> 
> "There  were no Christians until blah, blah, blah."
> 
> "There were no Muslims until blah, blah, blah.
> 
> Where did they come from? Did they just fall out of the sky?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YES  as they were invented at specific times. As in no Christians prior to 70 C.E. as they were not invented by the Romans until then. Before this they were Jewish followers of Jesus. Then the Romans took hold and created a new religion.
Click to expand...

So, they were the same people who were already there?

That's good to know.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry to hear that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your concern, now on the road to recovery slowly but steadily
Click to expand...

That`s great,It just take time.so get well.


----------



## Phoenall

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> You sure enjoy making up history.  The logical impossibility of the people carrying out the occupation Canaan being Canaanites doesn't seem to register. LOL
> 
> *Ancient Jewish History:*
> *The Occupation of Canaan*
> The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) | Jewish Virtual Library
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another spam cut and paste from monte because that is all he has.
> 
> The Jews were around  2,500 years before the arab muslims were invited, and the Romans looked to God for salvation. Who is indigenous to the Americas, European invaders who had to ancestral ties to the land or Amerindians who were there when the first settlers landed ?
> 
> 
> 
> There were no muslims or Christians in existence until they were created by man who stole the already extant religion of the place then altered it to meet with their perverted views. They also stole the covenant and claimed it as their own, and now the prophesy is coming true they are trying to alter it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You people are a hoot.
> 
> "There  were no Christians until blah, blah, blah."
> 
> "There were no Muslims until blah, blah, blah.
> 
> Where did they come from? Did they just fall out of the sky?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YES  as they were invented at specific times. As in no Christians prior to 70 C.E. as they were not invented by the Romans until then. Before this they were Jewish followers of Jesus. Then the Romans took hold and created a new religion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, they were the same people who were already there?
> 
> That's good to know.
Click to expand...







 No they were invading colonists from Rome, Greece and arabia.  The people that lived there were the Jews and they are the indigenous people of Palestine.


 The arab muslims have no legal or moral  rights to palestine


----------



## gt1085

And i agree,Phoenall i do apologize to you if accept sometimes being me say afro american all the injustice sometime people just have to vent,and the people do know whats going on,but it is slowly coming around where people are seeing it for what it really is,and know what?Most are white most most important ingredient in all of this ,one thing it`s just happening to too slow.Peace.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> And i agree,Phoenall i do apologize to you if accept sometimes being me say afro american all the injustice sometime people just have to vent,and the people do know whats going on,but it is slowly coming around where people are seeing it for what it really is,and know what?Most are white most most important ingredient in all of this ,one thing it`s just happening to too slow.Peace.







 The problem has been the afro Americans were given too many freedoms all in one go and they have pigged out on them. They should have been weaned slowly into society and given boundaries to work within, not just having the gates opened and told to "go get 'em". Lacking self control at the genetics level left them with no bridle to their urges, and looking at Detroit is the perfect example of this. Some Africans are able to show self control, and these rise to the top.

 But best get back on topic and keep the thread to the header on who is considered indigenous to Palestine. The arab muslims and Christians never were as they were just violent invading colonists. They stole the aspects of Judaism that suited their original religion and padded it out. Then altered and twisted this even further to attract more members giving then leeway to act as they wanted. This is best shown by the Catholic Papal Dynasties that had every perversion under the sun practised as a religious observance.


----------



## gt1085

Their are still original people of that land on that land.The media does not show them,only the new  Palestine


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Some of you might need to review the rules for IP - posts must contain content related to the topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but have a lot to catch up on after a week in hospital on life support. I had a respiratory failure that nearly ended my life. So I am answering posts aimed at me that have accumulated over the last week. If I may be granted a small lee way under these circumstances it would be appreciated, and a heads up when you think I have reached the end of the line
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Glad you're back in the land of the living Phoenal!  Please, if you answer them - throw in some content ok? *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, "Phoenal" and "content" in the same sentence.
Click to expand...

Truth being shared.


----------



## Coyote

*Posts in IP require content related to topic...once again...if you want to just lob insults take it to the FZ.*


----------



## gt1085

Coyote said:


> *Posts in IP require content related to topic...once again...if you want to just lob insults take it to the FZ.*


okay i`ll keep my mouth close,can`t even Scripture in here?


----------



## Coyote

gt1085 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Posts in IP require content related to topic...once again...if you want to just lob insults take it to the FZ.*
> 
> 
> 
> okay i`ll keep my mouth close,can`t even Scripture in here?
Click to expand...


*gt, you can quote scripture as long as you include something related to the topic - who are the indigenous people in Palestine.  Ok? *


----------



## gt1085

Sorry if this offend you but,,their no other evidence showing who the real Palestians are,Except for who they are originally.
I will delete just to show who is and who is not.


----------



## Coyote

gt1085 said:


> Sorry if this offend you but,,their no other evidence showing who the real Palestians are,Except for who they are originally.
> I will delete just to show who is and who is not.



It's  not offending anyone, and it fits within the topic


----------



## Shusha

A quick wiki search reveals that the Tarabin tribe claims descendancy from "Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh ... and lived at Turba, east of Mecca".

*Origin*
_A name of Tarabin derives from the Taraba valley in Saudi Arabia where this tribe has once settled. Originally Tarabin were called Boqom tribes, but later found it easier to refer to the valley after they moved to Sinai.[1]

Tarabin Bedouin traced their ancestry to one 'Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh,[2] to which Mohammed the prophet of Islam belonged, and lived at Turba east of Mecca. It is believed that 'Atiya migrated to Sinai in the 14th Century. He was buried at al-Sharaf near Suez. 'Atiya had five sons to which various clans of the Tarabin trace their descent. Musa'id was remembered as ancestor of the Qusar; Hasbal of the Hasabila; Nab'a of the Naba'at; Sari of the Sarayi'a. These four sections lived in Sinai.[3]_



Indigenous?  Not so much.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> A quick wiki search reveals that the Tarabin tribe claims descendancy from "Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh ... and lived at Turba, east of Mecca".
> 
> *Origin*
> _A name of Tarabin derives from the Taraba valley in Saudi Arabia where this tribe has once settled. Originally Tarabin were called Boqom tribes, but later found it easier to refer to the valley after they moved to Sinai.[1]
> 
> Tarabin Bedouin traced their ancestry to one 'Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh,[2] to which Mohammed the prophet of Islam belonged, and lived at Turba east of Mecca. It is believed that 'Atiya migrated to Sinai in the 14th Century. He was buried at al-Sharaf near Suez. 'Atiya had five sons to which various clans of the Tarabin trace their descent. Musa'id was remembered as ancestor of the Qusar; Hasbal of the Hasabila; Nab'a of the Naba'at; Sari of the Sarayi'a. These four sections lived in Sinai.[3]_
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous?  Not so much.


Who then is indigenous,we know caucasians can`t be they can`t even be ancient people,they are not that old.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> Who then is indigenous ...



Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.


----------



## gt1085

Beside Seir was given to your forefather Esau for an inheritance,Genesis 36:8 So Esau lived in the hill country of Seir; Esau is Edom.9These then are the records of the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in the hill country of Seir.Deuteronomy 2:22
just as He did for the sons of Esau, who live in Seir, when He destroyed the Horites from before them; they dispossessed them and settled in their place even to this day.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
Click to expand...

Oldest culture still exist,before real.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> Indigenous? Not so much.



Far more indigenous than the European religious migrants that came over in the late 19th early 20th century. 



Shusha said:


> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.



Which would that be, given that Judaism is only a religion and "rabbinic" Judaism emerged after the last vestage of the Temple cult was eradicated by the Romans? The indigenous natives of Palestine were not all Jewish, one way or another over time converted to other religions but maintained their ties to the land.


----------



## Shusha

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous? Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Far more indigenous than the European religious migrants that came over in the late 19th early 20th century.
Click to expand...


Why?  Because they migrated in the 14th century instead of the 19th?  That somehow makes them "more" indigenous?



Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> 
> 
> Which would that be, given that Judaism is only a religion and "rabbinic" Judaism emerged after the last vestage of the Temple cult was eradicated by the Romans? The indigenous natives of Palestine were not all Jewish, one way or another over time converted to other religions but maintained their ties to the land.
Click to expand...


Indigeneity is not possession of territory, even long term possession of territory.  *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples. * The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.

Saying that the indigenous Jewish culture was eradicated is a lie.  The Jewish people survived both within the territory and outside Israel with their culture intact.

By arguing that the indigenous natives (the Jewish people) converted to other cultures (cultures which originated elsewhere and invaded and colonized the territory) you are conclusively arguing that those cultures, despite their long residency in the land, are not and can not be, the indigenous cultures or peoples.

Further, you are actually arguing that successful eradication of an existing or indigenous culture -- through conquest, ethnic cleansing, invasion, colonization and conversion is a VALID way to transfer indigeniety to the invading and colonizing cultures.  Which, if carried to its logical conclusion, means that even if you see the Jewish culture as an invading and colonizing culture (which of course its not), it can remove the rights from the existing peoples and usurp them for itself and be validated in doing so.  

You can't keep arguing from both sides of the coin depending on what you want the outcome to be; an outcome which is clearly predicated on a bias against the Jewish people and a fundamental denial of their existence as a people.


----------



## Shusha

And, for clarity, I will remind everyone that I am not arguing AGAINST anyone's rights.  These are arguments FOR the Jewish people, explaining the basis for their historical rights to sovereignty and self-determination in the territory.  

I am also FOR the rights of the Arab Palestinian people, the basis of which lies in their long residency and their desire for their own sovereignty and self-determination.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous? Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Far more indigenous than the European religious migrants that came over in the late 19th early 20th century.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why?  Because they migrated in the 14th century instead of the 19th?  That somehow makes them "more" indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which would that be, given that Judaism is only a religion and "rabbinic" Judaism emerged after the last vestage of the Temple cult was eradicated by the Romans? The indigenous natives of Palestine were not all Jewish, one way or another over time converted to other religions but maintained their ties to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigeneity is not possession of territory, even long term possession of territory.  *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples. * The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Saying that the indigenous Jewish culture was eradicated is a lie.  The Jewish people survived both within the territory and outside Israel with their culture intact.
> 
> By arguing that the indigenous natives (the Jewish people) converted to other cultures (cultures which originated elsewhere and invaded and colonized the territory) you are conclusively arguing that those cultures, despite their long residency in the land, are not and can not be, the indigenous cultures or peoples.
> 
> Further, you are actually arguing that successful eradication of an existing or indigenous culture -- through conquest, ethnic cleansing, invasion, colonization and conversion is a VALID way to transfer indigeniety to the invading and colonizing cultures.  Which, if carried to its logical conclusion, means that even if you see the Jewish culture as an invading and colonizing culture (which of course its not), it can remove the rights from the existing peoples and usurp them for itself and be validated in doing so.
> 
> You can't keep arguing from both sides of the coin depending on what you want the outcome to be; an outcome which is clearly predicated on a bias against the Jewish people and a fundamental denial of their existence as a people.
Click to expand...

First jew=ish is not even a people.Secondly what land are the caucasians Originals in.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> First jew=ish is not even a people.



Okay, I'll play.  Define "a people" using a list of objective criteria.  

I'll give you an example.  The Scottish people are a people because they: 

1.  have a distinctive language
2.  have an historical territory
3.  have a distinctive mode of dress
4.  have distinctive foods
5.  have distinctive holidays or special celebrations
6.  have distinctive music, instruments, dances

Here's another.  The Catalans are a people because they:

1.  have a distinctive language
2.  have an historical territory
3.  have distinctive foods
4.  have distinctive holidays or special celebrations

Show me your objective list of criteria that you could use to apply to any group anywhere in the world.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Sorry if this offend you but,,their no other evidence showing who the real Palestians are,Except for who they are originally.
> I will delete just to show who is and who is not.









 Since when have sub saharan people been Mediterraenian and not have DARK OLIVE SKIN TONES. These are more likely from Ethiopia, Somalia or Sudan 2000 klicks to the south, and muslims.


 GET AN EDUCATION AND STOP RELYING ON THE ONE YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous? Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Far more indigenous than the European religious migrants that came over in the late 19th early 20th century.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why?  Because they migrated in the 14th century instead of the 19th?  That somehow makes them "more" indigenous?
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which would that be, given that Judaism is only a religion and "rabbinic" Judaism emerged after the last vestage of the Temple cult was eradicated by the Romans? The indigenous natives of Palestine were not all Jewish, one way or another over time converted to other religions but maintained their ties to the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigeneity is not possession of territory, even long term possession of territory.  *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples. * The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Saying that the indigenous Jewish culture was eradicated is a lie.  The Jewish people survived both within the territory and outside Israel with their culture intact.
> 
> By arguing that the indigenous natives (the Jewish people) converted to other cultures (cultures which originated elsewhere and invaded and colonized the territory) you are conclusively arguing that those cultures, despite their long residency in the land, are not and can not be, the indigenous cultures or peoples.
> 
> Further, you are actually arguing that successful eradication of an existing or indigenous culture -- through conquest, ethnic cleansing, invasion, colonization and conversion is a VALID way to transfer indigeniety to the invading and colonizing cultures.  Which, if carried to its logical conclusion, means that even if you see the Jewish culture as an invading and colonizing culture (which of course its not), it can remove the rights from the existing peoples and usurp them for itself and be validated in doing so.
> 
> You can't keep arguing from both sides of the coin depending on what you want the outcome to be; an outcome which is clearly predicated on a bias against the Jewish people and a fundamental denial of their existence as a people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First jew=ish is not even a people.Secondly what land are the caucasians Originals in.
Click to expand...









 SAYS WHO..............as your education is so lacking that you do not know.

 Which ones as there are many different sub groups from around the world


----------



## Phoenall

Coyote said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if this offend you but,,their no other evidence showing who the real Palestians are,Except for who they are originally.
> I will delete just to show who is and who is not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's  not offending anyone, and it fits within the topic
Click to expand...







 It offends me beacause it is openly racist and designed to incite racism agaisnt a certain race of people. The poster is push a black supremacist policy that should be banned from the board


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> A quick wiki search reveals that the Tarabin tribe claims descendancy from "Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh ... and lived at Turba, east of Mecca".
> 
> *Origin*
> _A name of Tarabin derives from the Taraba valley in Saudi Arabia where this tribe has once settled. Originally Tarabin were called Boqom tribes, but later found it easier to refer to the valley after they moved to Sinai.[1]
> 
> Tarabin Bedouin traced their ancestry to one 'Atiya who belonged to the Quraysh,[2] to which Mohammed the prophet of Islam belonged, and lived at Turba east of Mecca. It is believed that 'Atiya migrated to Sinai in the 14th Century. He was buried at al-Sharaf near Suez. 'Atiya had five sons to which various clans of the Tarabin trace their descent. Musa'id was remembered as ancestor of the Qusar; Hasbal of the Hasabila; Nab'a of the Naba'at; Sari of the Sarayi'a. These four sections lived in Sinai.[3]_
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous?  Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous,we know caucasians can`t be they can`t even be ancient people,they are not that old.
Click to expand...








 Only by a handfull of generations compared to the sub saharans ( as in living to the south of the sahara desert ) Two distinct human developements took place at the same time the Neanderthals from which the great apes and sub saharans are devrlopements and the lighter skinned homo sapiens that travelled north as the glaciers melted. As the groups migrated they changed to interact with their surroundings. Dark skinned people stood out in the snow and suffered greatly from the cold so had to lose their pigmentation or be wiped out. 

Think about genetics and not longevity and you will realise that caucasu=ians have been around since the dawn of time, and they invented metallurgy in the temperate north. First with copper ores and then alloys with tin and zinc. Much later they invented iron and created iron tools to supplement the stone and bronze they were also using. All this time the blacks were living in caves or up in trees with not even fire to keep them warm or to scare the wild beasts away.

Dont try and claim that you invented metallurgy as there was no ores lying on the surface as there was no glaciation of the sub saharan regions so scour the top layers of.

By the way palestine was not inhabited until around 20,000BCE and then by lighter skinned nomadic stone age people. So you see that the inhabitants of what we call palestine today are light skinned and were the forefathers of the modern palestinians.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oldest culture still exist,before real.
Click to expand...







 Which happens to be the modern Jews according to DNA tests. No link between the land and the black africans what so ever


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous? Not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Far more indigenous than the European religious migrants that came over in the late 19th early 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which would that be, given that Judaism is only a religion and "rabbinic" Judaism emerged after the last vestage of the Temple cult was eradicated by the Romans? The indigenous natives of Palestine were not all Jewish, one way or another over time converted to other religions but maintained their ties to the land.
Click to expand...







 Not according to Genetic testing, which shows the same genome as that of the DNA extracted from the bodies of people buried in pre herod timesargue all you want it wont alter the facts.


----------



## gt1085

I Don`t Care,You Talk With Respect,You`ll Get Respect.How I See It


----------



## Shusha

Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?


I did`nt say that.


----------



## Shusha

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
Click to expand...


You also didn't answer the post....


----------



## gt1085

Well, long as we know that`s all that counts.See it`s different talking to uneducated and unlearned in our history.


----------



## gt1085

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
Click to expand...

I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
*Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
**


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
Click to expand...








 You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
Click to expand...

This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
Click to expand...


Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.


----------



## gt1085

Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.


----------



## Challenger

Shusha said:


> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*



Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers. 



Shusha said:


> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.



What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
Click to expand...

This why i hate talking to or with MUTANTS.lol,and it`s true they don`t know any TRUTH AT ALL.Dumb Dumbs.It`s okay i understand you and your kind.


----------



## gt1085

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
Click to expand...

I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.


----------



## gt1085

*T**he Birth of the Caucasian Race*
See below. They do look like White people, don’t they?
In order to have rights to land,and the mixed people because of their white blood.You want get it so why even talk about it .lol.WOW.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Post 1001 not respectful enough for you, gt1085 ?
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
Click to expand...








 Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism


----------



## Phoenall

Challenger said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
Click to expand...







 Is that like the Catholics and the UK muslims that have turned up in Israel claiming to be indigenous palestinians.   The Jews own the land under international law, so why are you denying that international law applies to the Jews when it works in their favour.  The arab muslims got 78% of palestine and it was called trans jordan, they also got a law that stated it would be Jew free.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...







 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT from africa


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
Click to expand...








 And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> *T**he Birth of the Caucasian Race*
> See below. They do look like White people, don’t they?
> In order to have rights to land,and the mixed people because of their white blood.You want get it so why even talk about it .lol.WOW.









 And these are from africa and not from Palestine. Nature says that palestinians will be olive skinned not black, nature makes the laws thaqt cant be broken


----------



## gt1085

still you call us black,does`nt matter you understood.Nature made your law I am not caucasian.The bible is my history Book only.This is why caucasians wanting to steal and have done all could to get can in any necessary.and of you don`t see this you are not affected.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?
Click to expand...

well we should`nt be having this conversation ,if you say im lying,ha one thing  i have learn though that it is  a waste of time and energy talking about anything with caucasians,But they too have been  spoon Fed Lies, Not All But some Are Awaking.but any way man we off subject.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT from africa
Click to expand...

lol we cannot nowhere on this planet ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.White peole are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT and practically all over the earth and not beiang smart aanything like that.And we off subject.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did`nt say that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
Click to expand...

lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> still you call us black,does`nt matter you understood.Nature made your law I am not caucasian.The bible is my history Book only.This is why caucasians wanting to steal and have done all could to get can in any necessary.and of you don`t see this you are not affected.








 Would you prefer to be called negroid then. Nature made everyones law regarding skin tone and it is based on your position relative to the equator. The further away you go the lighter your skin becomes .

 The Bible was not written until some time in the 4th or 5th Century by Greek scholars and scribes.

I dont see any stealing taking place other than by the likes of you who think the world owes them a living


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well we should`nt be having this conversation ,if you say im lying,ha one thing  i have learn though that it is  a waste of time and energy talking about anything with caucasians,But they too have been  spoon Fed Lies, Not All But some Are Awaking.but any way man we off subject.
Click to expand...







 We could say the same thing about you negroes


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who then is indigenous ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT from africa
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol we cannot nowhere on this planet ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.White peole are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT and practically all over the earth and not beiang smart aanything like that.And we off subject.
Click to expand...






 You have just shown how narrow minded and hypocritical you are as well as being a RACIST POS


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You also didn't answer the post....
> 
> 
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.
Click to expand...





I know more that you ever will my genetic makeup says that I can assimilate more knowledge than you can. Another of those laws of nature that put you back in your mud hut and grass skirt.

As I said your  "jews" look more like janjaweed muslims that are on the top of the list as most hated people in the world

Like these


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see that many people here are Retarded to history.
> *Black Palestinian natives of the Holy land*
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more that you ever will my genetic makeup says that I can assimilate more knowledge than you can. Another of those laws of nature that put you back in your mud hut and grass skirt.
> 
> As I said your  "jews" look more like janjaweed muslims that are on the top of the list as most hated people in the world
> 
> Like these
Click to expand...

Well at any rate the are from Jacob.So if you new so much,why didn`t you this.You just a baby yet,growing up ain`t ez.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oldest, surviving, distinct culture which originated in that place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right, Palestinian then. Problem solved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT from africa
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol we cannot nowhere on this planet ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.White peole are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT and practically all over the earth and not beiang smart aanything like that.And we off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have just shown how narrow minded and hypocritical you are as well as being a RACIST POS[/Q
> I am not racist,you are....
Click to expand...


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The whole point of identifying indigenous peoples is to preserve and protect the cultures which would otherwise be destroyed by invading and colonizing peoples.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish culture is clearly the oldest surviving culture in the territory, with historical evidence going back thousands and thousands of years. The Jewish culture clearly originated in that territory. And the Jewish culture is clearly not just a religion, but demonstrates every aspect of every criteria which you might name to identify a culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well we should`nt be having this conversation ,if you say im lying,ha one thing  i have learn though that it is  a waste of time and energy talking about anything with caucasians,But they too have been  spoon Fed Lies, Not All But some Are Awaking.but any way man we off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We could say the same thing about you negroes
Click to expand...

Say what about what negroes.lol.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are just retarded trying to push your LIES and RACISM. The laws of nature say that the blacks were not the original Jews, and these laws can not be repealed. They look like african janjaweed muslims to the trained eye, so should be deported as soon as they set foot in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more that you ever will my genetic makeup says that I can assimilate more knowledge than you can. Another of those laws of nature that put you back in your mud hut and grass skirt.
> 
> As I said your  "jews" look more like janjaweed muslims that are on the top of the list as most hated people in the world
> 
> Like these
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well at any rate the are from Jacob.So if you new so much,why didn`t you this.You just a baby yet,growing up ain`t ez.
Click to expand...







 They are cold blooded mass murdering rapists that should be treated as the rabid dogs they are. SHOT ON SIGHT


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Palestinians need protecting from the European colonisers.
> 
> What culture? The monotheistic cult that eventually became known as Judaism certiainly originated somewhere in the Judean highlands, but that was ultimately eradicated by the Romans. Rabbinical Judaism claims a "connection" with the destroyed Jerusalem temple cult, but has no other "cultural" connection that would identify an ethnic group with "rights" to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well we should`nt be having this conversation ,if you say im lying,ha one thing  i have learn though that it is  a waste of time and energy talking about anything with caucasians,But they too have been  spoon Fed Lies, Not All But some Are Awaking.but any way man we off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We could say the same thing about you negroes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Say what about what negroes.lol.
Click to expand...






 What you claim is the case for caucasians, that you know is just projection of your own kind.


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just answered the question,their is no other that has the rights to that certaintly they would not be mixed with the caucasians ,for they were the last to be made.Not being funny but Truthful and i know your kind cannot except TRUTH .TRUTH is in your people,like non-existence.So you can take it how ever you want to make it.Corresponding with an unlearned untaught mind you can makeup whatever you like it  your kind.Your are not the an·cient1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what is your evidence that cant be debunked by a 10 year old child ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well we should`nt be having this conversation ,if you say im lying,ha one thing  i have learn though that it is  a waste of time and energy talking about anything with caucasians,But they too have been  spoon Fed Lies, Not All But some Are Awaking.but any way man we off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We could say the same thing about you negroes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Say what about what negroes.lol.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you claim is the case for caucasians, that you know is just projection of your own kind.
Click to expand...

lol


----------



## gt1085

Phoenall said:


> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why i did`nt respond.You are Retarded,Theirs no discussion with stupid people take your shit else where DUMB DUMB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more that you ever will my genetic makeup says that I can assimilate more knowledge than you can. Another of those laws of nature that put you back in your mud hut and grass skirt.
> 
> As I said your  "jews" look more like janjaweed muslims that are on the top of the list as most hated people in the world
> 
> Like these
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well at any rate the are from Jacob.So if you new so much,why didn`t you this.You just a baby yet,growing up ain`t ez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are cold blooded mass murdering rapists that should be treated as the rabid dogs they are. SHOT ON SIGHT
Click to expand...

Yes they really and you learn to bath,just a no good stankin ass people right.You just down right  foul, nasty, you can`t change yourself either,lol.


----------



## Phoenall

gt1085 said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gt1085 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the best you can do when your argumants are torn apart and shown to be false based on racism
> 
> 
> 
> lol,but abit over confidence don`t go here buddy,exhausting talking to you ,You have proving you know nothing about history just brainwashed is the best i can say for you.Agian off subject.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know more that you ever will my genetic makeup says that I can assimilate more knowledge than you can. Another of those laws of nature that put you back in your mud hut and grass skirt.
> 
> As I said your  "jews" look more like janjaweed muslims that are on the top of the list as most hated people in the world
> 
> Like these
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well at any rate the are from Jacob.So if you new so much,why didn`t you this.You just a baby yet,growing up ain`t ez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are cold blooded mass murdering rapists that should be treated as the rabid dogs they are. SHOT ON SIGHT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they really and you learn to bath,just a no good stankin ass people right.You just down right  foul, nasty, you can`t change yourself either,lol.
Click to expand...





Is that like the inbred blacks like yourself who think they rule the world, and cant even rule a small village without getting it wrong. If you were as inyelligent as you make out you would never have been captured and taken as slaves, you would have had self loading rifles while the arabs and Europeans still had swords.


----------



## Mindful




----------



## JakeStarkey

The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Mindful said:


>



 In the common media vernacular any Palestinian is called "moderate" if they haven't actually been caught on camera killing somebody.



on a Tuesday.



in the rain




with a scimitar





purchased at a flea market.


----------



## theliq

JakeStarkey said:


> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.


The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
Click to expand...


Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?
Click to expand...

kEEP sPEWING.............. jEWS aRE nOT indigenous to Palestine(Correctly said PALESTINE,by jake)jEWS ARE FROM what is part of todays IRAQ.

Shame you know so little about Jewish History..........but ZIONIST TRASH often make this mistake because they are BRAINWASHED IN ZIONIST TERRORIST DOCTRINE.

I Suggest you speak to Tinnie,Monte or Penny if you wish to properly EDUCATE YOURSELF oN all Things........Jews and iSRAELITES

THEY are Educated and could help.............if you have an open mind,which only u know


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> kEEP sPEWING.............. jEWS aRE nOT indigenous to Palestine(Correctly said PALESTINE,by jake)jEWS ARE FROM what is part of todays IRAQ.
> 
> Shame you know so little about Jewish History..........but ZIONIST TRASH often make this mistake because they are BRAINWASHED IN ZIONIST TERRORIST DOCTRINE.
> 
> I Suggest you speak to Tinnie,Monte or Penny if you wish to properly EDUCATE YOURSELF oN all Things........Jews and iSRAELITES
> 
> THEY are Educated and could help.............if you have an open mind,which only u know
Click to expand...


LOL.

Especially the Monte and Penny bit.


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
Click to expand...








 Nor are the arab muslims, but the Jews are from 2,500 BCE


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> kEEP sPEWING.............. jEWS aRE nOT indigenous to Palestine(Correctly said PALESTINE,by jake)jEWS ARE FROM what is part of todays IRAQ.
> 
> Shame you know so little about Jewish History..........but ZIONIST TRASH often make this mistake because they are BRAINWASHED IN ZIONIST TERRORIST DOCTRINE.
> 
> I Suggest you speak to Tinnie,Monte or Penny if you wish to properly EDUCATE YOURSELF oN all Things........Jews and iSRAELITES
> 
> THEY are Educated and could help.............if you have an open mind,which only u know
Click to expand...








 LINK

 Your use of zionist as a racist attack is illegal in Australia

 No thanks we get more sense out of you

 They are uneducated and cant help themselves


----------



## Mindful

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> kEEP sPEWING.............. jEWS aRE nOT indigenous to Palestine(Correctly said PALESTINE,by jake)jEWS ARE FROM what is part of todays IRAQ.
> 
> Shame you know so little about Jewish History..........but ZIONIST TRASH often make this mistake because they are BRAINWASHED IN ZIONIST TERRORIST DOCTRINE.
> 
> I Suggest you speak to Tinnie,Monte or Penny if you wish to properly EDUCATE YOURSELF oN all Things........Jews and iSRAELITES
> 
> THEY are Educated and could help.............if you have an open mind,which only u know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK
> 
> Your use of zionist as a racist attack is illegal in Australia
> 
> No thanks we get more sense out of you
> 
> They are uneducated and cant help themselves
Click to expand...


Do you think it's all a big act he puts on? Like a Punch & Judy Show?


----------



## Mindful




----------



## Phoenall

Mindful said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are indigenous to Palestine, and the Arabs are late comers.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are  NOT  Indigenous to this area you Fool...........The Caananites and Moabites were
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Aren't you getting your tenses mixed up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> kEEP sPEWING.............. jEWS aRE nOT indigenous to Palestine(Correctly said PALESTINE,by jake)jEWS ARE FROM what is part of todays IRAQ.
> 
> Shame you know so little about Jewish History..........but ZIONIST TRASH often make this mistake because they are BRAINWASHED IN ZIONIST TERRORIST DOCTRINE.
> 
> I Suggest you speak to Tinnie,Monte or Penny if you wish to properly EDUCATE YOURSELF oN all Things........Jews and iSRAELITES
> 
> THEY are Educated and could help.............if you have an open mind,which only u know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LINK
> 
> Your use of zionist as a racist attack is illegal in Australia
> 
> No thanks we get more sense out of you
> 
> They are uneducated and cant help themselves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think it's all a big act he puts on? Like a Punch & Judy Show?
Click to expand...







 He tries to come across as a well respected islamic bussinness man in Australia, in reality he is some middle school ist generation muslim migrant who does not fit in so has the internet as his only outside line


----------



## Phoenall

Mindful said:


>








 TRUE, VERY TRUE


----------



## theliq

Phoenall said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE, VERY TRUE
Click to expand...

None of the above are worth or worthy to responding to


----------



## Phoenall

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TRUE, VERY TRUE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> None of the above are worth or worthy to responding to
Click to expand...








 Neither are you being a NAZI POS SCUM.

 The cartoon sums up what you defend the LIES of NAZISM and ISLAMOFASCISM


----------



## Mindful

The Invisible (female) Palestinians.


Instead of referring to the female candidates by name and publishing their pictures, the electoral lists are using the terms "the wife of" or "sister."


"It is disgraceful for any Islamic, national or independent list to scrap the names of the women. If they are not willing to recognize the woman's name, how will they accept the role of the women after they are elected? ... I'm against the participation of women in this manner. Let men participate in the election alone." — Nahed Abu Taima, Media Development Center at Bir Zeit University.


Dr. Walid Al-Qatati, a writer and analyst specializing in Islamic affairs, said that the move reminded him of wedding invitations that are sent out without naming the brides.


When Palestinian women carry out attacks against Israelis, Palestinian society glorifies them as heroes. Then the names and photos of these women are plastered across billboards. Yet it appears that when the women wish to work for life rather than for death, their identities are not fit for public consumption.
In a move that has outraged Palestinian women and various Palestinian factions, a number of Palestinian lists contesting the upcoming local elections, scheduled to take place on October 8, have decided to omit the names and photos of female candidates.

Instead of referring to the female candidates by name and publishing their pictures, the electoral lists are using the terms "the wife of" or "sister."

Critics have denounced the move as a "sign of retardation, extremism and bigotry." Other Palestinians have gone so far as comparing the removal of the female candidates' names and photos from the lists to the cruel pre-Islamic practice of infanticide (_wa'd_).


The Invisible (Female) Palestinians


----------



## Vagabond63

Mindful said:


> The Invisible (female) Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Instead of referring to the female candidates by name and publishing their pictures, the electoral lists are using the terms "the wife of" or "sister."
> 
> 
> "It is disgraceful for any Islamic, national or independent list to scrap the names of the women. If they are not willing to recognize the woman's name, how will they accept the role of the women after they are elected? ... I'm against the participation of women in this manner. Let men participate in the election alone." — Nahed Abu Taima, Media Development Center at Bir Zeit University.
> 
> 
> Dr. Walid Al-Qatati, a writer and analyst specializing in Islamic affairs, said that the move reminded him of wedding invitations that are sent out without naming the brides.
> 
> 
> When Palestinian women carry out attacks against Israelis, Palestinian society glorifies them as heroes. Then the names and photos of these women are plastered across billboards. Yet it appears that when the women wish to work for life rather than for death, their identities are not fit for public consumption.
> In a move that has outraged Palestinian women and various Palestinian factions, a number of Palestinian lists contesting the upcoming local elections, scheduled to take place on October 8, have decided to omit the names and photos of female candidates.
> 
> Instead of referring to the female candidates by name and publishing their pictures, the electoral lists are using the terms "the wife of" or "sister."
> 
> Critics have denounced the move as a "sign of retardation, extremism and bigotry." Other Palestinians have gone so far as comparing the removal of the female candidates' names and photos from the lists to the cruel pre-Islamic practice of infanticide (_wa'd_).
> 
> 
> The Invisible (Female) Palestinians


That's appalling. Would never have been allowed under British rule.


----------



## Mindful

Money donated to the people of Gaza for new homes, hospitals and schools is being stolen by Hamas to build terror tunnels, buy weapons and breed hate. This must stop.

Fight against terror. Add your name now to end-terror.com


----------



## Shusha

Posting this here too.



frigidweirdo said:


> Do the indigenous people of the USA have the right to self determination? Hell no they don't. The right to self governance? No. The right to preserve their own culture? No.


I'm not sure if you are trying to say that the First Nations peoples of the US do not have these rights, or that they have not yet the ability to exercise those rights.  But according to the UN they most certainly DO have those rights.  United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

_Article 3 Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Article 4 Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.

Article 5 Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.

Article 8 1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture._

_Article 11 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature._




> I asked the question about indigenous because I wanted to see the argument of people on here. People are making an argument, and often on here the arguments aren't very good. So, I try and look at the main parts and see if there's any logic at all.


How am I doing, then?



> Jewish people aren't an ethnicity.


That sounds very much you've like something you've made your mind up about. But I'd challenge you to consider where you got this idea.  Here's the definition of "ethnicity" again:

_the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition
_
The Jewish people have both a common national and cultural tradition, of which religion is a part, but only a part.  So it seems to me that you have to throw out the definition in order to reach your conclusion.  And that is faulty logic.




> But the point is we're dealing with who is indigenous of a particular piece of land. And the first factor here is that forefathers have to have lived there, and for many Jewish people this just isn't so. Or at least it isn't so for a long period of time. It depends on whether they think they can trace their ancestry back through Russia/Germany/wherever and then back to Palestine, which is probably almost impossible to do. So....


The Jewish people absolutely do believe they can trace their ancestry back to Israel, Judea and Samaria.  Proof?  Same language.  Same religion.  Same culture.  Same traditions.  Same life event practices (birth, marriage, death).  Same holidays.  Same celebrations.  Same rituals.  Same clothing peculiarities.  Same legal system.  Same foods.  Same agricultural practices.  Same myths.  Same literature.  Same history.

And again, a reminder that the definition of indigeneity is based on culture.

So it seems to me that while you are claiming to be trying to be fair and balanced, you have actually taken on a position which is untenable given the working definitions which apply to all other groups.  You are the one who is working backwards from a belief and trying to justify it.  Rather than checking to see if a particular group meets the criteria.  As a test, try it out on any other ethnic group.  Tell me how you would know they are part of that ethnic group.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Mindful said:


> Money donated to the people of Gaza for new homes, hospitals and schools is being stolen by Hamas to build terror tunnels, buy weapons and breed hate. This must stop.
> 
> Fight against terror. Add your name now to end-terror.com





Mindful said:


> Hamas to build terror tunnels,


Another bullshit Israel talking point. Every person attacked was an invading Israeli soldier. Not one civilian was attacked.

But this is just a part of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Money donated to the people of Gaza for new homes, hospitals and schools is being stolen by Hamas to build terror tunnels, buy weapons and breed hate. This must stop.
> 
> Fight against terror. Add your name now to end-terror.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas to build terror tunnels,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another bullshit Israel talking point. Every person attacked was an invading Israeli soldier. Not one civilian was attacked.
> 
> But this is just a part of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Mindful said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Money donated to the people of Gaza for new homes, hospitals and schools is being stolen by Hamas to build terror tunnels, buy weapons and breed hate. This must stop.
> 
> Fight against terror. Add your name now to end-terror.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas to build terror tunnels,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another bullshit Israel talking point. Every person attacked was an invading Israeli soldier. Not one civilian was attacked.
> 
> But this is just a part of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign is a hoot.


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> Posting this here too.
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do the indigenous people of the USA have the right to self determination? Hell no they don't. The right to self governance? No. The right to preserve their own culture? No.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if you are trying to say that the First Nations peoples of the US do not have these rights, or that they have not yet the ability to exercise those rights.  But according to the UN they most certainly DO have those rights.  United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
> 
> _Article 3 Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
> 
> Article 4 Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.
> 
> Article 5 Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.
> 
> Article 8 1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture._
> 
> _Article 11 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I asked the question about indigenous because I wanted to see the argument of people on here. People are making an argument, and often on here the arguments aren't very good. So, I try and look at the main parts and see if there's any logic at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How am I doing, then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish people aren't an ethnicity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That sounds very much you've like something you've made your mind up about. But I'd challenge you to consider where you got this idea.  Here's the definition of "ethnicity" again:
> 
> _the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition
> _
> The Jewish people have both a common national and cultural tradition, of which religion is a part, but only a part.  So it seems to me that you have to throw out the definition in order to reach your conclusion.  And that is faulty logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the point is we're dealing with who is indigenous of a particular piece of land. And the first factor here is that forefathers have to have lived there, and for many Jewish people this just isn't so. Or at least it isn't so for a long period of time. It depends on whether they think they can trace their ancestry back through Russia/Germany/wherever and then back to Palestine, which is probably almost impossible to do. So....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish people absolutely do believe they can trace their ancestry back to Israel, Judea and Samaria.  Proof?  Same language.  Same religion.  Same culture.  Same traditions.  Same life event practices (birth, marriage, death).  Same holidays.  Same celebrations.  Same rituals.  Same clothing peculiarities.  Same legal system.  Same foods.  Same agricultural practices.  Same myths.  Same literature.  Same history.
> 
> And again, a reminder that the definition of indigeneity is based on culture.
> 
> So it seems to me that while you are claiming to be trying to be fair and balanced, you have actually taken on a position which is untenable given the working definitions which apply to all other groups.  You are the one who is working backwards from a belief and trying to justify it.  Rather than checking to see if a particular group meets the criteria.  As a test, try it out on any other ethnic group.  Tell me how you would know they are part of that ethnic group.
Click to expand...

There is NO proof because the Majority are Synthetic Converts to Judaism and have ZILCH direct decent from Abraham...End Of


----------



## Linkiloo

Is Synthetic Converts in capitals because it is a real term? Something tells me that isn't the case


----------



## The Great Goose

maybe there is no indigenous, anywhere? Or maybe its the people who were there longest?


----------



## LA RAM FAN

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Money donated to the people of Gaza for new homes, hospitals and schools is being stolen by Hamas to build terror tunnels, buy weapons and breed hate. This must stop.
> 
> Fight against terror. Add your name now to end-terror.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas to build terror tunnels,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another bullshit Israel talking point. Every person attacked was an invading Israeli soldier. Not one civilian was attacked.
> 
> But this is just a part of Israel's terrorist propaganda campaign.
Click to expand...


amen brotha.


----------



## thetor

Shusha said:


> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.


Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land


----------



## Roudy

thetor said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
Click to expand...

Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.


----------



## Humanity

Roudy said:


> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
Click to expand...


Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!

The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
Click to expand...


The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.

That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.

In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.

IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.


----------



## thetor

Roudy said:


> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
Click to expand...

Check your DNA Pharisee


----------



## thetor

Sixties Fan said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
Click to expand...

Your FACTS are merely opinions,!!!   yours unfortunately.............. but wrong.


----------



## Sixties Fan

thetor said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your FACTS are merely opinions,!!!   yours unfortunately.............. but wrong.
Click to expand...


Says someone who keeps yelling "PHARISSEES " !!!!  and whose facts come from.........Christian, Muslim, Arab denial of Jewish rights to the land ?  And only since 1948?   Is that it?

Should I be impressed by your voodoo visions attacks?


----------



## thetor

Sixties Fan said:


> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> 
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your FACTS are merely opinions,!!!   yours unfortunately.............. but wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says someone who keeps yelling "PHARISSEES " !!!!  and whose facts come from.........Christian, Muslim, Arab denial of Jewish rights to the land ?  And only since 1948?   Is that it?
> 
> Should I be impressed by your voodoo visions attacks?
Click to expand...

There is s
omething wrong with you,clearly


----------



## Sixties Fan

thetor said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your FACTS are merely opinions,!!!   yours unfortunately.............. but wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says someone who keeps yelling "PHARISSEES " !!!!  and whose facts come from.........Christian, Muslim, Arab denial of Jewish rights to the land ?  And only since 1948?   Is that it?
> 
> Should I be impressed by your voodoo visions attacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is s
> omething wrong with you,clearly
Click to expand...



I will speak for the descendants of all the Canaanite tribes which ended up forming the Jewish Nation and surviving endless Greek, Greek, Roman, Greek, Muslim, Crusade, Ottoman and British invasions to their lands.

Check your eyes  

And when you do meet a true Canaanite, who still calls themselves of the tribe of Canaan, or any of the other tribes in the region known in ancient times as Canaan, give us all a ring over here.  Photo, name, 
how many are left, where do they live, etc, etc, etc.
Where can we find them and have a good conversation about their history since 3000 years ago.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!



Um.  People here (not just you) really don't understand what being indigenous means.  Being indigenous does not mean that your tribe was there "first".  Or that your tribe was there before another tribe.  And its not a zero sum game -- more than one people can claim indigenous status in the same territory.  The fact that Canaanites were there first is true.  Its also true that the Jewish culture arose and developed from the Canaanite culture.  You could argue that the two cultures are distinct enough that they both qualify for indigenous status, or you could argue that they are similar enough that they are the same culture and the Jewish culture is simply the development of the Caananite culture.  Doesn't really matter which.  


Being indigenous refers to a culture which came into being and developed in a particular location or territory.  It is a pre-invasion, pre-colonialization culture which existed in the territory prior to invasion, conquest or colonization by an outside culture (a culture which developed elsewhere).  Without doubt the Jewish culture developed pre-invasion on the territory we are discussing.  

If you want to make the argument that the Jewish people are invaders and not indigenous -- you would have to find evidence that the Jewish culture *originated elsewhere*.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
Click to expand...




Sixties Fan said:


> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.


Indeed, all of the various peoples folded into each other eventually to become the Palestinians after WWI.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> his Land_
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, all of the various peoples folded into each other eventually to become the Palestinians after WWI.
Click to expand...


Your therapist called me.  He is really in need of talking to you.  

The Canaanites becoming part of  the Nation of Israel as Jews happened after WWI.

Yeap, fast, call your therapist.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well then,the Jews claim to this Land is Null and Void...Completely..Because the Jews invaded this Land and overthrough the Indigenous Canaanites that originally owned this Land
> 
> 
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, all of the various peoples folded into each other eventually to become the Palestinians after WWI.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your therapist called me.  He is really in need of talking to you.
> 
> The Canaanites becoming part of  the Nation of Israel as Jews happened after WWI.
> 
> Yeap, fast, call your therapist.
Click to expand...




Sixties Fan said:


> Nation of Israel


Aren't those the people who got the boot because they would not keep God's commandments?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Know any Canaanites?  Yup, that's what I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> That the Arabs, even those who call themselves Palestinians now, were all living in Arabia until the 7th century CE, is also not a debatable fact.
> 
> In other words, if you still do not understand it,  the Jewish Nation/People is made up of all, if not most, of the Canaanite tribes of Ancient Canaan, including a tribe called Canaan.
> 
> IN OTHER WORDS,  Jews are the indigenous people of the ancient land of Canaan.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The FACT that Canaanite tribes became part of the Jewish Nation with the creation of Israel by King David is not a debatable fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, all of the various peoples folded into each other eventually to become the Palestinians after WWI.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your therapist called me.  He is really in need of talking to you.
> 
> The Canaanites becoming part of  the Nation of Israel as Jews happened after WWI.
> 
> Yeap, fast, call your therapist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nation of Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Aren't those the people who got the boot because they would not keep God's commandments?
Click to expand...


Here is a useful number

555-helpme


----------



## thetor

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah yeah the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites by Jews saw to that!
> 
> The FACT that Canaanites were there and THEN Jews... Is not a debatable fact!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  People here (not just you) really don't understand what being indigenous means.  Being indigenous does not mean that your tribe was there "first".  Or that your tribe was there before another tribe.  And its not a zero sum game -- more than one people can claim indigenous status in the same territory.  The fact that Canaanites were there first is true.  Its also true that the Jewish culture arose and developed from the Canaanite culture.  You could argue that the two cultures are distinct enough that they both qualify for indigenous status, or you could argue that they are similar enough that they are the same culture and the Jewish culture is simply the development of the Caananite culture.  Doesn't really matter which.
> 
> 
> Being indigenous refers to a culture which came into being and developed in a particular location or territory.  It is a pre-invasion, pre-colonialization culture which existed in the territory prior to invasion, conquest or colonization by an outside culture (a culture which developed elsewhere).  Without doubt the Jewish culture developed pre-invasion on the territory we are discussing.
> 
> If you want to make the argument that the Jewish people are invaders and not indigenous -- you would have to find evidence that the Jewish culture *originated elsewhere*.
Click to expand...

Gormless post,you forgot about the Moabites who resided in this area


----------



## Boston1

Tinhat has to be some kinda bot designed to simply spew certain things in response to certain other things. There certainly doesn't appear to be any intelligent logic to the arguments and the same arguments are presented over and over and over and over.


----------



## thetor

Boston1 said:


> Tinhat has to be some kinda bot designed to simply spew certain things in response to certain other things. There certainly doesn't appear to be any intelligent logic to the arguments and the same arguments are presented over and over and over and over.


could you repeat this above post in clear grammatical English in future...it makes no logic


----------



## Boston1

thetor said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinhat has to be some kinda bot designed to simply spew certain things in response to certain other things. There certainly doesn't appear to be any intelligent logic to the arguments and the same arguments are presented over and over and over and over.
> 
> 
> 
> could you repeat this above post in clear grammatical English in future...it makes no logic
Click to expand...


Tinhat = bot
Bot design parameters = spew nonsensical gibberish in response to any pro Israeli statement. 
Critical thinking = not required to fulfill design parameters 
Tactics = Redundancy and repetition, 
factual requirements = none


----------



## montelatici

Boston1 said:


> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinhat has to be some kinda bot designed to simply spew certain things in response to certain other things. There certainly doesn't appear to be any intelligent logic to the arguments and the same arguments are presented over and over and over and over.
> 
> 
> 
> could you repeat this above post in clear grammatical English in future...it makes no logic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tinhat = bot
> Bot design parameters = spew nonsensical gibberish in response to any pro Israeli statement.
> Critical thinking = not required to fulfill design parameters
> Tactics = Redundancy and repetition,
> factual requirements = none
Click to expand...


Boston=HASBOT
HASBOT operational program=Accuse anyone that has a balanced view of antisemitism
Tactics=Deny facts
Propaganda requirements=Use propaganda exclusively


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thetor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinhat has to be some kinda bot designed to simply spew certain things in response to certain other things. There certainly doesn't appear to be any intelligent logic to the arguments and the same arguments are presented over and over and over and over.
> 
> 
> 
> could you repeat this above post in clear grammatical English in future...it makes no logic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tinhat = bot
> Bot design parameters = spew nonsensical gibberish in response to any pro Israeli statement.
> Critical thinking = not required to fulfill design parameters
> Tactics = Redundancy and repetition,
> factual requirements = none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boston=HASBOT
> HASBOT operational program=Accuse anyone that has a balanced view of antisemitism
> Tactics=Deny facts
> Propaganda requirements=Use propaganda exclusively
Click to expand...


LOL, I just love this part

"Accuse anyone that has a *balanced *view of antisemitism"

Balanced, as in non biased.

That would not be you, nor tinmore, nor anyone who bashes Jews for sport.

Show one thing which can be considered unbiased about all the accusations launched at Jews, any Jews, all Jews for the past 1950 years.

If not, show just one thing which could be considered "balanced" in the allegations that Jews are not the indigenous people of the Land of Israel, since this is the theme of this thread.


----------



## fanger

HASBOT operational program=Accuse anyone that has a balanced view, of antisemitism
 just put the comma in

In Zionist history, the different waves of _aliyah_, beginning with the arrival of the _Biluim_ from Russia in 1882,
The khazar immigrants took over and now call themselves indigenous, more like ingenious


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine: Roman name for ancient Israel. Palestine is historically bogus



P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.


----------



## JoelT1

fanger said:


> HASBOT operational program=Accuse anyone that has a balanced view, of antisemitism
> just put the comma in
> 
> In Zionist history, the different waves of _aliyah_, beginning with the arrival of the _Biluim_ from Russia in 1882,
> The khazar immigrants took over and now call themselves indigenous, more like ingenious



Um, most Israeli Jews are indigenous to Israel. Khazar nonsense was discredited last century


----------



## JoelT1

Coyote said:


> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*



Palestine is from a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, “palaestina”


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.




Um, Jews were first called “palestinians,” by the British in the British Mandate. And, palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, about 2000 years ago


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.



Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, who called the British Mandate “palestine” after WW1. Palestine is the anglicized form of palaestina, the name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel by the Roman Empire.


----------



## Coyote

So?


----------



## JoelT1

Coyote said:


> So?



“Palestinians” 


Coyote said:


> So?



Jews, historically, are the “palestinians” as “palestine” originally was imposed on them and their land by the Roman Empire. Otherwise, “palestinians” has no legitimacy.


----------



## fanger

Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia


----------



## JoelT1

Bernard Lewis, Dean of Middle East historians: Romans rename Jews’ land “palestine”




fanger said:


> View attachment 152197
> 
> Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia


----------



## montelatici

Circa 450 BC

"Of the triremes the number proved to be one thousand two hundred and seven, and these were they who furnished them:–the Phoenicians, together with the Syrians who dwell in *Palestine *furnished three hundred; and they were equipped thus, that is to say, they had about their heads leathern caps made very nearly in the Hellenic fashion, and they wore corslets of linen, and had shields without rims and javelins. These Phoenicians dwelt in ancient time, as they themselves report, upon the Erythraian Sea, and thence they passed over and dwell in the country along the sea coast of Syria; and this part of Syria and all as far as Egypt is called *Palestine.*"

Herodotus, History 2:89


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> Circa 450 BC
> 
> "Of the triremes the number proved to be one thousand two hundred and seven, and these were they who furnished them:–the Phoenicians, together with the Syrians who dwell in *Palestine *furnished three hundred; and they were equipped thus, that is to say, they had about their heads leathern caps made very nearly in the Hellenic fashion, and they wore corslets of linen, and had shields without rims and javelins. These Phoenicians dwelt in ancient time, as they themselves report, upon the Erythraian Sea, and thence they passed over and dwell in the country along the sea coast of Syria; and this part of Syria and all as far as Egypt is called *Palestine.*"
> 
> Herodotus, History 2:89


Fascinating!!

I had no idea that Assyrians and Copts considered themselves Palestinians, or that they ever called their homelands Palestine.

It will most certainly come as a shock to them 

So, if Syria and Egypt are supposed to be Palestine, does that mean that all the Palestinians who are living in those areas are truly home and should not be made to live in refugee camps anymore?


----------



## montelatici

I guess you ignored the part where Herodotus stated "dwell in the country along the sea", i.e. Palestine  or Παλαιστίνη.


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> I guess you ignored the part where Herodotus stated "dwell in the country along the sea", i.e. Palestine  or Παλαιστίνη.



450 BC the Land of Israel was called Israel or Judea.
Maybe he was just dreaming?

After all it does mention Hellenic fashion, which means that the Greeks were around at the time.

Judea (Greek form of Judah, the Tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes)

I really do not recall the Greeks or Romans calling the area Palestine (before 135 CE) but ....who knows.....

Maybe you can find where the invading, conquering Greeks or Romans called the area Palestine before 135 CE (by the Romans) ?


----------



## montelatici

Sixties Fan said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you ignored the part where Herodotus stated "dwell in the country along the sea", i.e. Palestine  or Παλαιστίνη.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 450 BC the Land of Israel was called Israel or Judea.
> Maybe he was just dreaming?
> 
> After all it does mention Hellenic fashion, which means that the Greeks were around at the time.
> 
> Judea (Greek form of Judah, the Tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes)
> 
> I really do not recall the Greeks or Romans calling the area Palestine (before 135 CE) but ....who knows.....
> 
> Maybe you can find where the invading, conquering Greeks or Romans called the area Palestine before 135 CE (by the Romans) ?
Click to expand...


Maybe your Hasbara dreams have gotten the better of you.  Herodotus is considered the father of history, not Hasbara propaganda.


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you ignored the part where Herodotus stated "dwell in the country along the sea", i.e. Palestine  or Παλαιστίνη.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 450 BC the Land of Israel was called Israel or Judea.
> Maybe he was just dreaming?
> 
> After all it does mention Hellenic fashion, which means that the Greeks were around at the time.
> 
> Judea (Greek form of Judah, the Tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes)
> 
> I really do not recall the Greeks or Romans calling the area Palestine (before 135 CE) but ....who knows.....
> 
> Maybe you can find where the invading, conquering Greeks or Romans called the area Palestine before 135 CE (by the Romans) ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe your Hasbara dreams have gotten the better of you.  Herodotus is considered the father of history, not Hasbara propaganda.
Click to expand...

Still, what does him being the father of history has to do with what most nations in the area called the Land of Israel, which is Judah, because of the tribe, or Judea, as the Greeks spelled it and how it came to be known even during the Roman times and until this day?


----------



## montelatici

According to Herodotus it was known as Palestine when he wrote about the area, 450 BC.


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> According to Herodotus it was known as Palestine when he wrote about the area, 450 BC.


Too bad for him.  The Hebrew, Israelites knew their homeland as Israel.  And after the Assyrian invasion, what was left as Judea, for the tribe of Judah (Yehudah).
And it has been known as Judea and Samaria (Shomron)  since then, even to this day.

How many Arabs does it take to let you know that they did not care for the word Palestine, or being known as Palestinians until 1964, and not because they "felt" like Palestinians?


----------



## JoelT1

Sixties Fan said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to Herodotus it was known as Palestine when he wrote about the area, 450 BC.
> 
> 
> 
> Too bad for him.  The Hebrew, Israelites knew their homeland as Israel.  And after the Assyrian invasion, what was left as Judea, for the tribe of Judah (Yehudah).
> And it has been known as Judea and Samaria (Shomron)  since then, even to this day.
> 
> How many Arabs does it take to let you know that they did not care for the word Palestine, or being known as Palestinians until 1964, and not because they "felt" like Palestinians?
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a Roman name, palaestina, imposed on Jews and ancient Israel about 2000 years ago in an attempt to erase the Jewish history and heritage of the land which dates back several centuries before Rome existed. Palestine is the English anglicized version of palaestina. Palaestina referred to the Philistines, ancient enemies of the Israelites, non-indigenous invaders from Greece

Arabs historically called Syria “Sham” which simply means “land to the left” There’s no p in Arabic


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> According to Herodotus it was known as Palestine when he wrote about the area, 450 BC.



Um, Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek, referring to Philistines who were Greek invaders. Israel existed several centuries before Herodotus was born, verified by archaeology

First time the foreign name palestine designated a land was when Romans imposed it on Jews and ancient Israel, palaestina


----------



## jamesduncan

Of course the “leaders” of the Jewish people would be buried in their own Land and low and behold; it isn’t Palestine




Genesis 47:30  [ Israel speaks ] but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me where they are buried." I will do as you say," he said.

Genesis 50:5 My father made me swear an oath and said, "I am about to die; bury me in the tomb I dug for myself in the land of Canaan. "Now let me go up and bury my father; then I will return.'"

Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh's officials accompanied him--the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt--

Genesis 50:10  When they reached the threshing floor of Atad, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day period of mourning for his father.

Genesis 50:11 When the Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, "The Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of mourning." That is why that place near the Jordan is called Abel Mizraim.

Genesis 50:13 They carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre, which Abraham had bought as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite, along with the field.

Genesis 23:17 So Ephron's field in Machpelah near Mamre--both the field and the cave in it, and all the trees within the borders of the field--was deeded

Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,

Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

Genesis 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:

Genesis 50:13 For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.

Genesis 50:14 After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

jamesduncan said:


> Of course the “leaders” of the Jewish people would be buried in their own Land and low and behold; it isn’t Palestine
> View attachment 156028
> Genesis 47:30  [ Israel speaks ] but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me where they are buried." I will do as you say," he said.
> 
> Genesis 50:5 My father made me swear an oath and said, "I am about to die; bury me in the tomb I dug for myself in the land of Canaan. "Now let me go up and bury my father; then I will return.'"
> 
> Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh's officials accompanied him--the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt--
> 
> Genesis 50:10  When they reached the threshing floor of Atad, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day period of mourning for his father.
> 
> Genesis 50:11 When the Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, "The Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of mourning." That is why that place near the Jordan is called Abel Mizraim.
> 
> Genesis 50:13 They carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre, which Abraham had bought as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite, along with the field.
> 
> Genesis 23:17 So Ephron's field in Machpelah near Mamre--both the field and the cave in it, and all the trees within the borders of the field--was deeded
> 
> Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,
> 
> Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;
> 
> Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*
> 
> Genesis 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:
> 
> Genesis 50:13 For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.
> 
> Genesis 50:14 After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.



Thank you for those quotes from the Bible.  Have you ever been to the Tomb of the Patriarchs/ Cave of Machpelah in Hebron?  UNESCO recently called it a "Palestinian" heritage site, but it's really Jewish.


----------



## Sixties Fan

ForeverYoung436 said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course the “leaders” of the Jewish people would be buried in their own Land and low and behold; it isn’t Palestine
> View attachment 156028
> Genesis 47:30  [ Israel speaks ] but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me where they are buried." I will do as you say," he said.
> 
> Genesis 50:5 My father made me swear an oath and said, "I am about to die; bury me in the tomb I dug for myself in the land of Canaan. "Now let me go up and bury my father; then I will return.'"
> 
> Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh's officials accompanied him--the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt--
> 
> Genesis 50:10  When they reached the threshing floor of Atad, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day period of mourning for his father.
> 
> Genesis 50:11 When the Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, "The Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of mourning." That is why that place near the Jordan is called Abel Mizraim.
> 
> Genesis 50:13 They carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre, which Abraham had bought as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite, along with the field.
> 
> Genesis 23:17 So Ephron's field in Machpelah near Mamre--both the field and the cave in it, and all the trees within the borders of the field--was deeded
> 
> Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,
> 
> Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;
> 
> Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*
> 
> Genesis 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:
> 
> Genesis 50:13 For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.
> 
> Genesis 50:14 After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for those quotes from the Bible.  Have you ever been to the Tomb of the Patriarchs/ Cave of Machpelah in Hebron?  UNESCO recently called it a "Palestinian" heritage site, but it's really Jewish.
Click to expand...

It is a Palestinian Jews Heritage 

As long as UNESCO understands that.


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jewish Dead Sea Scrolls Dead Sea Scrolls – Cultural Institute


----------



## JoelT1

ForeverYoung436 said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course the “leaders” of the Jewish people would be buried in their own Land and low and behold; it isn’t Palestine
> View attachment 156028
> Genesis 47:30  [ Israel speaks ] but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me where they are buried." I will do as you say," he said.
> 
> Genesis 50:5 My father made me swear an oath and said, "I am about to die; bury me in the tomb I dug for myself in the land of Canaan. "Now let me go up and bury my father; then I will return.'"
> 
> Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh's officials accompanied him--the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt--
> 
> Genesis 50:10  When they reached the threshing floor of Atad, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day period of mourning for his father.
> 
> Genesis 50:11 When the Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, "The Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of mourning." That is why that place near the Jordan is called Abel Mizraim.
> 
> Genesis 50:13 They carried him to the land of Canaan and buried him in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre, which Abraham had bought as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite, along with the field.
> 
> Genesis 23:17 So Ephron's field in Machpelah near Mamre--both the field and the cave in it, and all the trees within the borders of the field--was deeded
> 
> Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,
> 
> Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;
> 
> Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*
> 
> Genesis 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:
> 
> Genesis 50:13 For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.
> 
> Genesis 50:14 After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for those quotes from the Bible.  Have you ever been to the Tomb of the Patriarchs/ Cave of Machpelah in Hebron?  UNESCO recently called it a "Palestinian" heritage site, but it's really Jewish.
Click to expand...


American archaeologists unearth ancient synagogue in Israel


----------



## JoelT1

Correct historical name of the land is Israel not palestine. Anyone unaware that Jews are the indigenous People are embarrassingly ignorant ⤵️


----------



## montelatici

JoelT1 said:


> Correct historical name of the land is Israel not palestine. Anyone unaware that Jews are the indigenous People are embarrassingly ignorant ⤵️



Europeans are not indigenous to Palestine.  The Europeans that practiced Judaism that colonized Palestine are not indigenous to Palestine.  They are indigenous to Europe.


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct historical name of the land is Israel not palestine. Anyone unaware that Jews are the indigenous People are embarrassingly ignorant ⤵️
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Europeans are not indigenous to Palestine.  The Europeans that practiced Judaism that colonized Palestine are not indigenous to Palestine.  They are indigenous to Europe.
Click to expand...

So says Nazi Monte, who cannot help himself but continue to attack the indigenous people of the land of Israel.  The Jews.
Keep attempting to delegitimize the indigenous Jewish people so that the Muslims can got back to having the land, out of all of those other other lands, which do not belong to them, from anywhere outside Arabia which they have invaded since the 7th Century CE.

That's a good Christian !  Or so you tell us you are


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine is from a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, “palaestina,” about 2000 years ago, reflecting the ancient Jewish heritage and history of the land.

And, ancient Israel existed 500+ years before Rome.

Houses of Ancient Israel Houses of Ancient Israel


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Correct historical name of the land is Israel not palestine. Anyone unaware that Jews are the indigenous People are embarrassingly ignorant ⤵️
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Europeans are not indigenous to Palestine.  The Europeans that practiced Judaism that colonized Palestine are not indigenous to Palestine.  They are indigenous to Europe.
Click to expand...


Um, palestine is a European name. Romans renamed ancient Israel palaestina about 2000 years, later anglicized to palestine by European Christians. And, Britain called the British Mandate “British palestine”

Jesus is called King of Israel and King of the Jews in the Bible. The European name palestine does not appear

Ancient Israel is recorded in archaeology dating back 3200+ years. The European name palestine does not appear in archaeology

Israel is the indigenous and only legitimate, correct name of the land for 3000+ years, Jews are the indigenous People

Ancient History of the Jews The Hebrew Bible | The Story of the Jews | PBS


----------



## abi

This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## Shusha

Point 1.  "Referred to the area as Palestine".  Sure.  It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years.  Including Israel, Judea and Samaria.  The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state.  For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia.  It has been called that for hundreds of years.  Does that make it a State?  Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty?  Of course not.  But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty?  How would that happen?  Just by calling themselves Appalachians?  Or does something else have to happen?

Point 2.  JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.  

Point 3.  She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people.  See point 2.  By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Point 1. "Referred to the area as Palestine". Sure. It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years. Including Israel, Judea and Samaria. The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state. For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia. It has been called that for hundreds of years. Does that make it a State? Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty? Of course not. But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty? How would that happen? Just by calling themselves Appalachians? Or does something else have to happen?


So, there in fact were Palestinians?



Shusha said:


> Point 2. JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.


I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?



Shusha said:


> Point 3. She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people. See point 2. By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.


Huh?


----------



## theHawk

Just because some Jews lie, doesn’t mean we should beleive or respect Muslims.

As for Palestine, you lost a war, deal with it and move out if you don’t like your oppressors.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.



Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?


----------



## Hossfly

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 1. "Referred to the area as Palestine". Sure. It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years. Including Israel, Judea and Samaria. The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state. For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia. It has been called that for hundreds of years. Does that make it a State? Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty? Of course not. But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty? How would that happen? Just by calling themselves Appalachians? Or does something else have to happen?
> 
> 
> 
> So, there in fact were Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 2. JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 3. She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people. See point 2. By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huh?
Click to expand...



Sure there was a Palestine. It was invented in the 1960s in a conference room at 1 Lubyanka, Dzershinsky Place, Red Square, Moscow, CCCP. It came complete with a "Palestinian people" too. In fact, its legacy leader, Arafat, was trained east of Moscow at the legendary Balashikha special-ops school.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> So, there in fact were Palestinians?


Well that all depends on how you define the term.  As Danny pointed out, there was no State of Palestine in 1948 or in 1967 nor anytime prior to about 1988 if you want to go with their declaration of independence.  So, if we define "Palestinian" as a nationality -- no, there were no Palestinians at the time and I would argue that there aren't any now since "Palestine" is not fully recognized as a State.

If you want to define "Palestinians" as an ethnic or cultural group, you'd be hard pressed to do so as there is little ethnic or cultural differentiation between them and Jordanians and Syrians, beyond minor regional differences in dialect or embroidery patterns on women's clothing.  And, indeed, the Palestinians themselves will say there is no difference between themselves and the Jordanians and Syrians.  

If you want to define them as a political group -- they came into existence somewhere in the late 1960s when they began to differentiate themselves from their surrounding Arab neighbors.  

If you want to define them by their place name, as "the people who lived in this territory and the people who were removed from this territory over the course of time" then the Palestinians include the world's Jews and could as easily be called Judeans, Galileans, Samarians and Israelites.  As a matter of fact, why don't we start calling them Judeans?  



> I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?


Bethlehem is in Judea.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 1. "Referred to the area as Palestine". Sure. It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years. Including Israel, Judea and Samaria. The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state. For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia. It has been called that for hundreds of years. Does that make it a State? Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty? Of course not. But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty? How would that happen? Just by calling themselves Appalachians? Or does something else have to happen?
> 
> 
> 
> So, there in fact were Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 2. JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 3. She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people. See point 2. By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huh?
Click to expand...


*I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?
*
A Jewish guy named Jesus was born in Palestine before Islam existed?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Hossfly said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 1. "Referred to the area as Palestine". Sure. It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years. Including Israel, Judea and Samaria. The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state. For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia. It has been called that for hundreds of years. Does that make it a State? Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty? Of course not. But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty? How would that happen? Just by calling themselves Appalachians? Or does something else have to happen?
> 
> 
> 
> So, there in fact were Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 2. JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Point 3. She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people. See point 2. By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sure there was a Palestine. It was invented in the 1960s in a conference room at 1 Lubyanka, Dzershinsky Place, Red Square, Moscow, CCCP. It came complete with a "Palestinian people" too. In fact, its legacy leader, Arafat, was trained east of Moscow at the legendary Balashikha special-ops school.
Click to expand...


Arafat, abi's favorite gay Egyptian.


----------



## Boston1

This ones funny, OK so when the king of Jordan says Jordan is palestine and palestine is Jordan then, um, its not true LOL 

Deal is there was a geographical location referred to by SOME as palestine that is now referred to as Jordan....... 

End of subject


----------



## teddyearp

When Jesus was born, Bethlehem was in Judea. The area was Judea, Samaria, Galilee, etc. It was 100 or so after Jesus died that the romans changed the name to spite the residents; who were Jews.

Your request for intellectual thought is hard to believe when you start from such a biased point of view and then when presented with contrary facts, you ignore them.


----------



## Shusha

The whole discussion of whether or not Palestinians exist (like the counter-argument of whether or not "real" Jews exist) is a foolish one and should be put to rest.  

Whether you call the place where JC was born two thousand years ago Judea or Rome or Palestine or Appalachia is a matter of correct history, but not one of international law.


----------



## montelatici

Stop your propaganda.

"Canaan was the name of a large and prosperous country (at times independent, at others a tributary to Egypt) which corresponds roughly to present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel and was also known as Phoenicia. 

The indigenous people of the land of Canaan worshiped many gods but, chief among them, the goddess Astarte and her consort Baal (considered vegetative/fertility deities who then took on more impressive attributes earlier ascribed to Sumerian gods such as Enlil). Women could and did serve as Priestesses, could own land, enter into contracts and initiate divorce. By the second millennium BCE Byblos was the great exporter of cedar from Mount Lebannon and of papyrus (the name of the _Bible_ comes from the Greek word _Byblos_for `Book, a reference to the city which supplied the surrounding nations, especially Egypt, with the papyrus to write on) and Tyre was a great industrial centre producing highly sought after purple garments made from the purple dye of Murex shells and the city of Sidon, also engaged in similar trade, was a great centre of learning. The Canaanites (Phoenicians) developed the first alphabetic writing system, mathematics, were renowned in the ancient world for their skill in ship building and navigating the seas and have also been cited as the early source or inspiration for the mythology of the Greek gods. "

Canaan


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> Stop your propaganda.
> 
> "Canaan was the name of a large and prosperous country (at times independent, at others a tributary to Egypt) which corresponds roughly to present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel and was also known as Phoenicia.
> 
> The indigenous people of the land of Canaan worshiped many gods but, chief among them, the goddess Astarte and her consort Baal (considered vegetative/fertility deities who then took on more impressive attributes earlier ascribed to Sumerian gods such as Enlil). Women could and did serve as Priestesses, could own land, enter into contracts and initiate divorce. By the second millennium BCE Byblos was the great exporter of cedar from Mount Lebannon and of papyrus (the name of the _Bible_ comes from the Greek word _Byblos_for `Book, a reference to the city which supplied the surrounding nations, especially Egypt, with the papyrus to write on) and Tyre was a great industrial centre producing highly sought after purple garments made from the purple dye of Murex shells and the city of Sidon, also engaged in similar trade, was a great centre of learning. The Canaanites (Phoenicians) developed the first alphabetic writing system, mathematics, were renowned in the ancient world for their skill in ship building and navigating the seas and have also been cited as the early source or inspiration for the mythology of the Greek gods. "
> 
> Canaan


Canaan, a country!!!!

ROTFLOL

Tell it again!!!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Toddsterpatriot said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
Click to expand...

Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> Stop your propaganda.
> 
> "Canaan was the name of a large and prosperous country (at times independent, at others a tributary to Egypt) which corresponds roughly to present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel and was also known as Phoenicia.
> 
> The indigenous people of the land of Canaan worshiped many gods but, chief among them, the goddess Astarte and her consort Baal (considered vegetative/fertility deities who then took on more impressive attributes earlier ascribed to Sumerian gods such as Enlil). Women could and did serve as Priestesses, could own land, enter into contracts and initiate divorce. By the second millennium BCE Byblos was the great exporter of cedar from Mount Lebannon and of papyrus (the name of the _Bible_ comes from the Greek word _Byblos_for `Book, a reference to the city which supplied the surrounding nations, especially Egypt, with the papyrus to write on) and Tyre was a great industrial centre producing highly sought after purple garments made from the purple dye of Murex shells and the city of Sidon, also engaged in similar trade, was a great centre of learning. The Canaanites (Phoenicians) developed the first alphabetic writing system, mathematics, were renowned in the ancient world for their skill in ship building and navigating the seas and have also been cited as the early source or inspiration for the mythology of the Greek gods. "
> 
> Canaan



Jews were Canaanites. Now you know. Archeologists Unearth 'Golden Calf' in Israel

Ancient Israel The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine never existed.

Ancient Israel etched in stone The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


----------



## P F Tinmore

JoelT1 said:


> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Ancient Israel etched in stone The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


*Lie, lie, lie,* Israel is based on lies.

The case raised the issue of the status of those concessions following the demise of the Turkish empire, meaning that the PCIJ needed to determine what kind of entity had replaced Turkey in the territory of Palestine. The Court said that *Palestine was a successor state to Turkey.*

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil
------------------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law, *nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*​
The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, *shall become Palestinian citizens.”*​
Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?
Click to expand...


Good question. Did the native Americans invade the area, impose their religious values on others, force the dhimmi status on those they invaded?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Ancient Israel etched in stone The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris
> 
> 
> 
> *Lie, lie, lie,* Israel is based on lies.
> 
> The case raised the issue of the status of those concessions following the demise of the Turkish empire, meaning that the PCIJ needed to determine what kind of entity had replaced Turkey in the territory of Palestine. The Court said that *Palestine was a successor state to Turkey.*
> 
> http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil
> ------------------------
> Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law, *nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*​
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, *shall become Palestinian citizens.”*​
> Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
Click to expand...

Ooops !!!  you are on the wrong thread with that answer.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

P F Tinmore said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?
Click to expand...


*What were native Americans called before it was America?
*
Americans were British.

"Palestinians" were Arabs.


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and their land of Israel, about 2000 years ago, reflecting the ancient Jewish heritage and history of the land as the indigenous People,

The Dean of Middle East historians further educates ⤵️


----------



## JoelT1

2000 years ago, Jesus, devout Jew, was called King of Israel in the Bible and walked in the land of Israel. Jews lived in Israel 1000+ years before Jesus

The word palestine does not appear in the Bible as it’s not the correct, legitimate, indigenous name


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient shekel of Israel minted by Jews, the indigenous People, a few decades after Jesus, himself a devout Jew Ancient Jewish Silver Shekel Coin from Year 1 of the First Revolt - 66 AD


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Ancient Israel etched in stone The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris
> 
> 
> 
> *Lie, lie, lie,* Israel is based on lies.
> 
> The case raised the issue of the status of those concessions following the demise of the Turkish empire, meaning that the PCIJ needed to determine what kind of entity had replaced Turkey in the territory of Palestine. The Court said that *Palestine was a successor state to Turkey.*
> 
> http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil
> ------------------------
> Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law, *nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*​
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, *shall become Palestinian citizens.”*​
> Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel.

Later, Britain named the British Mandate “palestine” that ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood ⤵️

Thus, palestine is a Western colonialist invention


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Ancient Israel etched in stone The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris
> 
> 
> 
> *Lie, lie, lie,* Israel is based on lies.
> 
> The case raised the issue of the status of those concessions following the demise of the Turkish empire, meaning that the PCIJ needed to determine what kind of entity had replaced Turkey in the territory of Palestine. The Court said that *Palestine was a successor state to Turkey.*
> 
> http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil
> ------------------------
> Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law, *nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*​
> The automatic, _ipso facto_, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
> 
> “Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, *shall become Palestinian citizens.”*​
> Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
Click to expand...


As the preeminent scholar of Arab history writes, Arabs rejected the existence of palestine. So, too, they rejected the term “palestinian” ⤵️


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Well that all depends on how you define the term. As Danny pointed out, there was no State of Palestine in 1948 or in 1967 nor anytime prior to about 1988 if you want to go with their declaration of independence. So, if we define "Palestinian" as a nationality -- no, there were no Palestinians at the time and I would argue that there aren't any now since "Palestine" is not fully recognized as a State.
> 
> If you want to define "Palestinians" as an ethnic or cultural group, you'd be hard pressed to do so as there is little ethnic or cultural differentiation between them and Jordanians and Syrians, beyond minor regional differences in dialect or embroidery patterns on women's clothing. And, indeed, the Palestinians themselves will say there is no difference between themselves and the Jordanians and Syrians.
> 
> If you want to define them as a political group -- they came into existence somewhere in the late 1960s when they began to differentiate themselves from their surrounding Arab neighbors.
> 
> If you want to define them by their place name, as "the people who lived in this territory and the people who were removed from this territory over the course of time" then the Palestinians include the world's Jews and could as easily be called Judeans, Galileans, Samarians and Israelites. As a matter of fact, why don't we start calling them Judeans?


Just let them be people and stop denying their existence and if you see your fellow pro-Israel posters do this, call them out. Be fair.



Shusha said:


> Bethlehem is in Judea.


Again, I am here for academic discussion and we don't use stories from the bible when discussing history in an academic environment.

The Jewish bible calls the area Judea, but the rest of the world knew that area as Palestine for centuries before Christ was born. Jesus was in fact born in Palestine. The Palestinian girl in the video was absolutely correct.



teddyearp said:


> When Jesus was born, Bethlehem was in Judea. The area was Judea, Samaria, Galilee, etc. It was 100 or so after Jesus died that the romans changed the name to spite the residents; who were Jews.
> 
> Your request for intellectual thought is hard to believe when you start from such a biased point of view and then when presented with contrary facts, you ignore them.


See above, Teddy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well that all depends on how you define the term. As Danny pointed out, there was no State of Palestine in 1948 or in 1967 nor anytime prior to about 1988 if you want to go with their declaration of independence. So, if we define "Palestinian" as a nationality -- no, there were no Palestinians at the time and I would argue that there aren't any now since "Palestine" is not fully recognized as a State.
> 
> If you want to define "Palestinians" as an ethnic or cultural group, you'd be hard pressed to do so as there is little ethnic or cultural differentiation between them and Jordanians and Syrians, beyond minor regional differences in dialect or embroidery patterns on women's clothing. And, indeed, the Palestinians themselves will say there is no difference between themselves and the Jordanians and Syrians.
> 
> If you want to define them as a political group -- they came into existence somewhere in the late 1960s when they began to differentiate themselves from their surrounding Arab neighbors.
> 
> If you want to define them by their place name, as "the people who lived in this territory and the people who were removed from this territory over the course of time" then the Palestinians include the world's Jews and could as easily be called Judeans, Galileans, Samarians and Israelites. As a matter of fact, why don't we start calling them Judeans?
> 
> 
> 
> Just let them be people and stop denying their existence and if you see your fellow pro-Israel posters do this, call them out. Be fair.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bethlehem is in Judea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, I am here for academic discussion and we don't use stories from the bible when discussing history in an academic environment.
> 
> The Jewish bible calls the area Judea, but the rest of the world knew that area as Palestine for centuries before Christ was born. Jesus was in fact born in Palestine. The Palestinian girl in the video was absolutely correct.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> When Jesus was born, Bethlehem was in Judea. The area was Judea, Samaria, Galilee, etc. It was 100 or so after Jesus died that the romans changed the name to spite the residents; who were Jews.
> 
> Your request for intellectual thought is hard to believe when you start from such a biased point of view and then when presented with contrary facts, you ignore them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See above, Teddy.
Click to expand...


DERP!


----------



## teddyearp

Abi, what is your source to back your claim that the area was known as Palestine "centuries before Christ"? It is not only the bible that called the area Judea.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Just let them be people and stop denying their existence and if you see your fellow pro-Israel posters do this, call them out. Be fair.


To be fair, I HAVE been calling out Joel.  But he bores me, repeating the same thing over and over and over.  



> Again, I am here for academic discussion and we don't use stories from the bible when discussing history in an academic environment.


LOL.  Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.  



> The Jewish bible calls the area Judea, but the rest of the world knew that area as Palestine for centuries before Christ was born. Jesus was in fact born in Palestine. The Palestinian girl in the video was absolutely correct.


Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.  And if you see your fellow anti-Israeli posters do this, call them out.  Starting with you.  

The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty.  Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.


----------



## teddyearp

Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?


----------



## teddyearp

teddyearp said:


> Abi, what is your source to back your claim that the area was known as Palestine "centuries before Christ"? It is not only the bible that called the area Judea.





teddyearp said:


> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?



For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Goodness, gracious, sakes alive.

 What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.


----------



## P F Tinmore

abi said:


> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.


The girl in the video* – DANA DAJANI*

**


----------



## Hollie

A woman with no talent.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

P F Tinmore said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The girl in the video* – DANA DAJANI*
> 
> **
Click to expand...


Her hair is not covered.
Why isn't she being beaten?


----------



## fanger

Toddsterpatriot said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The girl in the video* – DANA DAJANI*
> 
> **
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Her hair is not covered.
> Why isn't she being beaten?
Click to expand...


I knew we were in trouble the moment I saw the letter on the official United Talmudical Academy stationary in the mail. The letter was curt and stated unequivocally that because of my failure to dress in accordance with the stringent _tznius,_ modesty, rules of the holy shtetl, our 3-year-old son could no longer attend school. After the shock wore off, my husband and I scrambled to arrange a meeting with the Va’ad Hatznius — the mysterious group charged with maintaining the highest standards of modesty, especially for women. The group was known to resort to extreme measures, such as slashing car tires, when warnings and threats did not work to restore modesty.



As I sat at the table with the Va’ad Hatznius, the head of the group told my husband and me that it could no longer tolerate my modern clothing. This is a holy shtetl, and the rebbe would be horrified if he were still alive, he said in Yiddish, while swaying side to side in his folding chair. Another man chimed in to say he also heard that I have _bei-hur,_ a derisive term used to describe hair on a married woman. They couldn’t confirm it, he said, but _oy vey_ to my family and me. What a disgrace.

Read more: Ex-Hasidic Woman Marks Five Years Since She Shaved Her Head


----------



## teddyearp

abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread?  In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.

Again.  What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?


----------



## fanger

teddyearp said:


> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread?  In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again.  What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?


The first clear use of the term Palestine to refer to the entire area between Phoenicia and Egypt was in 5th century BC Ancient Greece,[7][8] when Herodotus wrote of a "district of Syria, called _Palaistinê_" in _The Histories_, which included the Judean mountains and theJordan Rift Valley.[9][10][11][12][13][14] In the treatise _Meteorology_ c.340 BC, Aristotle wrote, "_there is a lake in Palestine_".[15][16][17][18] This is understood by scholars to be a reference to the Dead Sea.
Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia


----------



## Roudy

abi said:


> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.


Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:

Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:

“Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
“We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
“When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.

The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:


"There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
- Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -

*Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*

"There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -

"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -

Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
"The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".

What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:

"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
- Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -

"You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
- Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -

"As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".

-An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.


This is simply false. Please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.



Shusha said:


> Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.


Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.



Shusha said:


> The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty. Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.


All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.

My personal solution is what I have explained previously. And be aware, that my paper has now morphed into a book. I am writing with a Palestinian friend who escaped Gaza years ago. Our Jesuit priest teacher found us a publisher and will be involved as well. A Jew, Christian and Palestinian working together in harmony whodathunkit, right? Well, actually, this is how it was prior to zionism.

Research
Read
Study
Learn
It must start there.



teddyearp said:


> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?


#internettroll

See above and sorry for not responding to you sooner, but I can't be here all the time as I have many other things going on.


teddyearp said:


> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.


See above and try to chill, please. My first interaction with you was you lying about me, twice, and then finally apologizing (a pretty half-assed apology with insinuations of antisemitism). There is no need to ask three times unless you are here to stalk/troll.



Dogmaphobe said:


> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.


The zionist narrative is a fantasy. She used Begin's own words. Facts are facts.



teddyearp said:


> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?


#internettrollstalker



teddyearp said:


> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?


Like I explained above to Shusha, please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.

HINT: she gave two source in the video.



Roudy said:


> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:


Sorry, we can't use an unsourced web page in academic work any more than we can use the bible. And if you took a few minutes as I did to read some of the stuff published on that page, then you would know that it is a simple propaganda site. Basically, it disqualifies itself.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.



The term "Jewish people" is no more confusing than the terms "French people", "Scots people", or "Catalan people".  It is easily understood, except by those who wish to demonize Jews.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Shusha said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The term "Jewish people" is no more confusing than the terms "French people", "Scots people", or "Catalan people".  It is easily understood, except by those who wish to demonize Jews.
Click to expand...


Actually the term Scots people is pretty confusing.
The Highland Scots are Celts, while the Lowland Scots are Germanic's.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises.



Now THIS is an interesting statement.  They are ALL bogus solutions?  

Because we've covered all our bases in those threads.  The only "solution" we haven't covered is an exclusive State with the other peoples removed.  But we kinda all agree that is NOT COOL.

So what is this "impossible premise" you speak of?  What should be the proper premise to approach the conflict and how will we end it?


----------



## Roudy

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> This is simply false. Please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty. Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.
> 
> My personal solution is what I have explained previously. And be aware, that my paper has now morphed into a book. I am writing with a Palestinian friend who escaped Gaza years ago. Our Jesuit priest teacher found us a publisher and will be involved as well. A Jew, Christian and Palestinian working together in harmony whodathunkit, right? Well, actually, this is how it was prior to zionism.
> 
> Research
> Read
> Study
> Learn
> It must start there.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettroll
> 
> See above and sorry for not responding to you sooner, but I can't be here all the time as I have many other things going on.
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See above and try to chill, please. My first interaction with you was you lying about me, twice, and then finally apologizing (a pretty half-assed apology with insinuations of antisemitism). There is no need to ask three times unless you are here to stalk/troll.
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The zionist narrative is a fantasy. She used Begin's own words. Facts are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettrollstalker
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I explained above to Shusha, please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> HINT: she gave two source in the video.
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, we can't use an unsourced web page in academic work any more than we can use the bible. And if you took a few minutes as I did to read some of the stuff published on that page, then you would know that it is a simple propaganda site. Basically, it disqualifies itself.
Click to expand...

But we can use you bullshit Pallywood propaganda video, sure Abdul. 

Those quotes are real and true, the fact that you can't deal with it is irrelvant!


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Roudy said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
Click to expand...


You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.

What a buffoon.


----------



## Roudy

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
Click to expand...

Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.  

"There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -

"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
- Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -

Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
"The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".

What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:

"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
- Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -

"You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
- Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Roudy said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
Click to expand...


So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.


----------



## Hollie

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
> Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
> Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
> Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.
Click to expand...


They would still find reasons to slaughter each other, just as they’ve done for 1400 years.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Toddsterpatriot said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *What were native Americans called before it was America?
> *
> Americans were British.
> 
> "Palestinians" were Arabs.
Click to expand...


You're probably British, which would explain the kook ideals you support like Zionist, and denying Native American existence pre-British Americans.

Usually only Brits, in fact basically just British Americans are the only people this stupid to follow this junk.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Hollie said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
> Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
> Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
> Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They would still find reasons to slaughter each other, just as they’ve done for 1400 years.
Click to expand...


Give it some time, and Jews may very well do the same to each other.

Racism in Israel - Wikipedia

*Intra-Jewish racism: Racism between Jews*
Some Jewish Israelis of European descent, known also as Ashkenazi Jews, have been described as viewing themselves as superior to non-Ashkenazi Jews. They are accused of maintaining an elite position in Israeli society,[150][151] with some describing the attitudes of Ashkenazim as racist or of being a manifestation of racism.[152]

Other authorities describe the discrimination by Ashkenazi as class-based, not race-based.[153][154] For example, the differences between (Mizrahi) Sephardic Jews (N. Africans, Middle Easterners, Yemenites, etc.) are referred to as _Adatiyut_ [155][156][157][158] community-differences (resulting also in some traditional customary gaps).[159]

Some sources claim that reports of intra-Jewish discrimination in Israel arise from propaganda published by Arab sources which ignores the normality and harmony between the communities.[160][161]

*Sephardim and Mizrahim (Middle Eastern and North African Jews)*



Poster for Shas, a political party formed to represent the interests of religiously observant Mizrahi (Middle Eastern) Jews,[162] featuring Eli Yishai.
See also: Mizrahi Jews
Israeli society in general – and Ashkenazi Jews in particular – have been described as holding discriminatory attitudes towards Jews of Middle Eastern and North African descent, known as Mizrahi Jews, Sephardic Jews, and Oriental Jews.[163] A variety of Mizrahi critics of Israeli policy have cited "past ill-treatment, including the _maabarot_, the squalid tent cities into which Mizrahim were placed upon arrival in Israel; the humiliation of Moroccan and other Mizrahi Jews when Israeli immigration authorities shaved their heads and sprayed their bodies with the pesticide DDT; the socialist elite's enforced secularization; the destruction of traditional family structure, and the reduced status of the patriarch by years of poverty and sporadic unemployment" as examples of mistreatment.[164] In September 1997, Israeli Labor Party leader Ehud Barak made a high-profile apology to Oriental Jews in Netivot stating:

We must admit to ourselves [that] the inner fabric of communal life was torn. Indeed, sometimes the intimate fabric of family life was torn. Much suffering was inflicted on the immigrants and that suffering was etched in their hearts, as well as in the hearts of their children and grandchildren. There was no malice on the part of those bringing the immigrants here—on the contrary, there was much goodwill—but pain was inflicted nevertheless. In acknowledgement of this suffering and pain, and out of identification with the sufferers and their descendants, I hereby ask forgiveness in my own name and in the name of the historical Labor movement.[165]
Barak's address also said that during the 1950s, Mizrahi immigrants were "made to feel that their own traditions were inferior to those of the dominant Ashkenazi [European-origin] Israelis [_Alex Weingrod's paraphrase_]."[166] Several prominent Labor party figures, including Teddy Kollek and Shimon Peres, distanced themselves from the apology while agreeing that mistakes were made during the immigration period.[166]

The cultural differences between Mizrahi and Ashkenazi Jews impacted the degree and rate of assimilation into Israeli society, and sometimes the divide between Eastern European and Middle Eastern Jews was quite sharp. Segregation, especially in the area of housing, limited integration possibilities over the years.[167] Intermarriage between Ashkenazim and Mizrahim is increasingly common in Israel, and by the late 1990s 28% of all Israeli children had multi-ethnic parents (up from 14% in the 1950s).[168] A 1983 research found that children of inter-ethnic marriages in Israel enjoyed improved socio-economic status.[169]

Although social integration is constantly improving, disparities persist. A study conducted by the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS), Mizrahi Jews are less likely to pursue academic studies than Ashkenazi Jews. Israeli-born Ashkenazi are up to twice more likely to study in a university than Israeli-born Mizrahim.[170] Furthermore, the percentage of Mizrahim who seek a university education remains low compared to second-generation immigrant groups of Ashkenazi origin, such as Russians.[171] According to a survey by the Adva Center,[172] the average income of Ashkenazim was 36 percent higher than that of Mizrahim in 2004.[173]

Some claim that the education system discriminates against Jewish minorities from North Africa and the Middle East, and one source suggests that "ethnic prejudice against Mizrahi Jews is a relatively general phenomenon, not limited to the schooling process".[174]

There was a case in 2010, when a Haredi school system, where Sephardi and Mizrahi students were sometimes excluded or segregated.[175][176] In 2010, the Israeli supreme court sent a strong message against discrimination in a case involving the Slonim Hassidic sect of the Ashkenazi, ruling that segregation between Ashkenazi and Sephardi students in a school is illegal.[177] They argue that they seek "to maintain an equal level of religiosity, not from racism."[178] Responding to the charges, the Slonim Haredim invited Sephardi girls to school, and added in a statement: “All along, we said it's not about race, but the High Court went out against our rabbis, and therefore we went to prison."[179]

*Teimani children (Yemenite Jews)*



Yemenite Jews en route from Aden to Israel, during Operation Magic Carpet
See also: Yemenite Jews
In the 1950s, 1,033[180] children of Yemenite immigrant families disappeared. In most instances, the parents claim that they were told their children were ill and required hospitalization. Upon later visiting the hospital, it is claimed that the parents were told that their children had died though no bodies were presented or graves which have later proven to be empty in many cases were shown to the parents. Those who believe the theory contend that the Israeli government as well as other organizations in Israel kidnapped the children and gave them for adoption. Secular Israeli Jews of European descent were accused of collaborating in the disappearance of babies of Yemeni Jews and anti religious motives and Anti-religious coercion were alleged,[181][182][183][184][185][186][187] Some went further to accuse the Israeli authorities of conspiring to kidnap the Yemeni children due to "racist" motives.[188]

In 2001 a seven-year public inquiry commission concluded that the accusations that Yemenite children were kidnapped are not true. The commission has unequivocally rejected claims of a plot to take children away from Yemenite immigrants. The report determined that documentation exists for 972 of the 1,033 missing children. Five additional missing babies were found to be alive. The commission was unable to discover what happened in another 56 cases. With regard to these unresolved 56 cases, the commission deemed it "possible" that the children were handed over for adoption following decisions made by individual local social workers, but not as part of an official policy.[180]

*Bene Israel (Indian Jews)*
In 1962, authorities in Israel were accused by articles in the Indian press of racism in relation to Jews of Indian ancestry (called Bene Israel).[189][190] In the case that caused the controversy, the Chief Rabbi of Israel ruled that before registering a marriage between Indian Jews and Jews not belonging to that community, the registering rabbi should investigate the lineage of the Indian applicant for possible non-Jewish descent, and in case of doubt, require the applicant to perform conversion or immersion.[189][190] The alleged discrimination may actually be related to the fact that some religious authorities believe that the Bene Israel are not fully Jewish because of inter-marriage during their long separation.[191]

In 1964 the government of Israel led by Levi Eshkol declared that it regards Bene Israel of India as Jews without exception, who are equal to other Jews in respect of all matters.[189]

*Beta Israel (Ethiopian Jews)*



Ethiopian Israeli soldier
Main article: Beta Israel
Nearly all of the Ethiopian Beta Israel community, a community of Black Jews, resides in Israel. The Israeli government has mounted rescue operations, most notably during Operation Moses (1984) and Operation Solomon (1991), for their migration when civil war and famine threatened populations within Ethiopia.[_citation needed_] Today 81,000 Israelis were born in Ethiopia, while 38,500 or 32% of the community are native born Israelis.[192]

According to the sociologist Prof. Uzi Rebhun, it represents an ambitious attempt to deny the significance of race.[193] Israeli authorities, aware of the situation of most African diaspora communities in other Western countries, hosted programs to avoid setting in patterns of discrimination.[193] The Ethiopian Jewish community's internal challenges have been complicated by racist attitudes on the part of some elements of Israeli society and the official establishment.[194] Racism has commonly been cited as explanation for policies and programs that failed to meet expectations. Racism was alleged regarding delays in admitting Ethiopian Jews to Israel under the Law of return.[193] The delays in admitting Ethiopians may be attributed to religious motivations rather than racism, since there was debate whether or not Falasha Jews' (Beta Israel) were Jewish.[195][196]

Racism was also alleged in 2009, in a case where school children of Ethiopian ancestry were denied admission into three semi-private religious schools in the town of Petah Tikva. An Israeli government official criticised the Petah Tikva Municipality and the semi-private Haredi schools, saying "This concerns not only the three schools that have, for a long time, been deceiving the entire educational system. For years, racism has developed here undeterred". Shas spiritual leader Ovadia Yosef threatened to fire any school principal from Shas's school system who refused to receive Ethiopian students. The Israeli Education Ministry decided to pull the funding from the Lamerhav, Da'at Mevinim and Darkei Noam schools, the three semi-private institutions that refused to accept the students. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuspoke out against the rejection of Ethiopian children, calling it "a moral terror attack."[197][198]

When Ethiopians protested that blood donations from their community were thrown out, Harry Wall, the Israeli Director of the Anti-Defamation League stated that it was the result of the high incidence of HIV in Africans, not racism: "Whatever Israel's mistakes towards its Ethiopian Jewish community, the cause is not racism." It explains that "what causes the distress is bureaucratic ineptitude and a cultural gap between a traditional community and a modern, technologically-advanced, highly-competitive nation."[199]

In 2012, Israel appointed the country's first Ethiopian-born ambassador, Belaynesh Zevadia. According to the foreign minister of Israel, this represented an important milestone in fighting racism and prejudice.[200]

*Depo Provera prescription controversy*
In 2010, Israel was accused of a "sterilization policy" aimed towards Ethiopian Jews, for allowing the prescription of contraceptive drugs like Depo-Provera to the community.[201][202] They stated that the Israeli government deliberately gives female Ethiopian Jews long-lasting contraceptive drugs like Depo-Provera.[201] Jewish agencies involved in immigration said that Ethiopian women were offered different types of contraceptives and that "all of them participated voluntarily in family planning".[201] Dr. Yifat Bitton, a member of the Israeli Anti-Discrimination Legal Center "Tmura" said that 60 percent of the women receiving this contraceptive are Ethiopian Jews, while Ethiopians made up only 1 percent of population and "the gap here is just impossible to reconcile in any logical manner that would somehow resist the claims of racism".[201] Professor Zvi Bentwich, an immunologist and human rights activist from Tel-Aviv, rejected the claim and said there's no ground to suspect a negative official policy towards Ethiopian Jews.[201]

Israel initially denied the claim of imposing a sterilization policy on the Ethiopian women,[201] but later admitted to it, and ordered gynaecologists to stop administering the drugs for women of Ethiopian origin if there is concern that they might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.[203] Action on the issue finally took place after a documentary aired in December 2012 on public television. In it, 35 Ethiopian women who had immigrated to Israel said they had been told they would not be allowed into Israel unless they agreed to the shots. While Ethiopians have been admitted to Israel, they are often discriminated against in education and in employment. The Times of Israel notes details of a nurse, unaware of a hidden camera, saying Depo-Provera is given to Ethiopian women because "they forget, they don’t understand, and it’s hard to explain to them, so it’s best that they receive a shot once every three months … basically they don’t understand anything." [204]

Thereafter, the Israeli government began an investigation into the policy, and instructed gynecologists not to administer the shots if there is suspicion that the recipient does not fully understand the effects.[205]


----------



## Hollie

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
> Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
> Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
> Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They would still find reasons to slaughter each other, just as they’ve done for 1400 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Give it some time, and Jews may very well do the same to each other.
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> *Intra-Jewish racism: Racism between Jews*
> Some Jewish Israelis of European descent, known also as Ashkenazi Jews, have been described as viewing themselves as superior to non-Ashkenazi Jews. They are accused of maintaining an elite position in Israeli society,[150][151] with some describing the attitudes of Ashkenazim as racist or of being a manifestation of racism.[152]
> 
> Other authorities describe the discrimination by Ashkenazi as class-based, not race-based.[153][154] For example, the differences between (Mizrahi) Sephardic Jews (N. Africans, Middle Easterners, Yemenites, etc.) are referred to as _Adatiyut_ [155][156][157][158] community-differences (resulting also in some traditional customary gaps).[159]
> 
> Some sources claim that reports of intra-Jewish discrimination in Israel arise from propaganda published by Arab sources which ignores the normality and harmony between the communities.[160][161]
> 
> *Sephardim and Mizrahim (Middle Eastern and North African Jews)*
> 
> 
> 
> Poster for Shas, a political party formed to represent the interests of religiously observant Mizrahi (Middle Eastern) Jews,[162] featuring Eli Yishai.
> See also: Mizrahi Jews
> Israeli society in general – and Ashkenazi Jews in particular – have been described as holding discriminatory attitudes towards Jews of Middle Eastern and North African descent, known as Mizrahi Jews, Sephardic Jews, and Oriental Jews.[163] A variety of Mizrahi critics of Israeli policy have cited "past ill-treatment, including the _maabarot_, the squalid tent cities into which Mizrahim were placed upon arrival in Israel; the humiliation of Moroccan and other Mizrahi Jews when Israeli immigration authorities shaved their heads and sprayed their bodies with the pesticide DDT; the socialist elite's enforced secularization; the destruction of traditional family structure, and the reduced status of the patriarch by years of poverty and sporadic unemployment" as examples of mistreatment.[164] In September 1997, Israeli Labor Party leader Ehud Barak made a high-profile apology to Oriental Jews in Netivot stating:
> 
> We must admit to ourselves [that] the inner fabric of communal life was torn. Indeed, sometimes the intimate fabric of family life was torn. Much suffering was inflicted on the immigrants and that suffering was etched in their hearts, as well as in the hearts of their children and grandchildren. There was no malice on the part of those bringing the immigrants here—on the contrary, there was much goodwill—but pain was inflicted nevertheless. In acknowledgement of this suffering and pain, and out of identification with the sufferers and their descendants, I hereby ask forgiveness in my own name and in the name of the historical Labor movement.[165]
> Barak's address also said that during the 1950s, Mizrahi immigrants were "made to feel that their own traditions were inferior to those of the dominant Ashkenazi [European-origin] Israelis [_Alex Weingrod's paraphrase_]."[166] Several prominent Labor party figures, including Teddy Kollek and Shimon Peres, distanced themselves from the apology while agreeing that mistakes were made during the immigration period.[166]
> 
> The cultural differences between Mizrahi and Ashkenazi Jews impacted the degree and rate of assimilation into Israeli society, and sometimes the divide between Eastern European and Middle Eastern Jews was quite sharp. Segregation, especially in the area of housing, limited integration possibilities over the years.[167] Intermarriage between Ashkenazim and Mizrahim is increasingly common in Israel, and by the late 1990s 28% of all Israeli children had multi-ethnic parents (up from 14% in the 1950s).[168] A 1983 research found that children of inter-ethnic marriages in Israel enjoyed improved socio-economic status.[169]
> 
> Although social integration is constantly improving, disparities persist. A study conducted by the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS), Mizrahi Jews are less likely to pursue academic studies than Ashkenazi Jews. Israeli-born Ashkenazi are up to twice more likely to study in a university than Israeli-born Mizrahim.[170] Furthermore, the percentage of Mizrahim who seek a university education remains low compared to second-generation immigrant groups of Ashkenazi origin, such as Russians.[171] According to a survey by the Adva Center,[172] the average income of Ashkenazim was 36 percent higher than that of Mizrahim in 2004.[173]
> 
> Some claim that the education system discriminates against Jewish minorities from North Africa and the Middle East, and one source suggests that "ethnic prejudice against Mizrahi Jews is a relatively general phenomenon, not limited to the schooling process".[174]
> 
> There was a case in 2010, when a Haredi school system, where Sephardi and Mizrahi students were sometimes excluded or segregated.[175][176] In 2010, the Israeli supreme court sent a strong message against discrimination in a case involving the Slonim Hassidic sect of the Ashkenazi, ruling that segregation between Ashkenazi and Sephardi students in a school is illegal.[177] They argue that they seek "to maintain an equal level of religiosity, not from racism."[178] Responding to the charges, the Slonim Haredim invited Sephardi girls to school, and added in a statement: “All along, we said it's not about race, but the High Court went out against our rabbis, and therefore we went to prison."[179]
> 
> *Teimani children (Yemenite Jews)*
> 
> 
> 
> Yemenite Jews en route from Aden to Israel, during Operation Magic Carpet
> See also: Yemenite Jews
> In the 1950s, 1,033[180] children of Yemenite immigrant families disappeared. In most instances, the parents claim that they were told their children were ill and required hospitalization. Upon later visiting the hospital, it is claimed that the parents were told that their children had died though no bodies were presented or graves which have later proven to be empty in many cases were shown to the parents. Those who believe the theory contend that the Israeli government as well as other organizations in Israel kidnapped the children and gave them for adoption. Secular Israeli Jews of European descent were accused of collaborating in the disappearance of babies of Yemeni Jews and anti religious motives and Anti-religious coercion were alleged,[181][182][183][184][185][186][187] Some went further to accuse the Israeli authorities of conspiring to kidnap the Yemeni children due to "racist" motives.[188]
> 
> In 2001 a seven-year public inquiry commission concluded that the accusations that Yemenite children were kidnapped are not true. The commission has unequivocally rejected claims of a plot to take children away from Yemenite immigrants. The report determined that documentation exists for 972 of the 1,033 missing children. Five additional missing babies were found to be alive. The commission was unable to discover what happened in another 56 cases. With regard to these unresolved 56 cases, the commission deemed it "possible" that the children were handed over for adoption following decisions made by individual local social workers, but not as part of an official policy.[180]
> 
> *Bene Israel (Indian Jews)*
> In 1962, authorities in Israel were accused by articles in the Indian press of racism in relation to Jews of Indian ancestry (called Bene Israel).[189][190] In the case that caused the controversy, the Chief Rabbi of Israel ruled that before registering a marriage between Indian Jews and Jews not belonging to that community, the registering rabbi should investigate the lineage of the Indian applicant for possible non-Jewish descent, and in case of doubt, require the applicant to perform conversion or immersion.[189][190] The alleged discrimination may actually be related to the fact that some religious authorities believe that the Bene Israel are not fully Jewish because of inter-marriage during their long separation.[191]
> 
> In 1964 the government of Israel led by Levi Eshkol declared that it regards Bene Israel of India as Jews without exception, who are equal to other Jews in respect of all matters.[189]
> 
> *Beta Israel (Ethiopian Jews)*
> 
> 
> 
> Ethiopian Israeli soldier
> Main article: Beta Israel
> Nearly all of the Ethiopian Beta Israel community, a community of Black Jews, resides in Israel. The Israeli government has mounted rescue operations, most notably during Operation Moses (1984) and Operation Solomon (1991), for their migration when civil war and famine threatened populations within Ethiopia.[_citation needed_] Today 81,000 Israelis were born in Ethiopia, while 38,500 or 32% of the community are native born Israelis.[192]
> 
> According to the sociologist Prof. Uzi Rebhun, it represents an ambitious attempt to deny the significance of race.[193] Israeli authorities, aware of the situation of most African diaspora communities in other Western countries, hosted programs to avoid setting in patterns of discrimination.[193] The Ethiopian Jewish community's internal challenges have been complicated by racist attitudes on the part of some elements of Israeli society and the official establishment.[194] Racism has commonly been cited as explanation for policies and programs that failed to meet expectations. Racism was alleged regarding delays in admitting Ethiopian Jews to Israel under the Law of return.[193] The delays in admitting Ethiopians may be attributed to religious motivations rather than racism, since there was debate whether or not Falasha Jews' (Beta Israel) were Jewish.[195][196]
> 
> Racism was also alleged in 2009, in a case where school children of Ethiopian ancestry were denied admission into three semi-private religious schools in the town of Petah Tikva. An Israeli government official criticised the Petah Tikva Municipality and the semi-private Haredi schools, saying "This concerns not only the three schools that have, for a long time, been deceiving the entire educational system. For years, racism has developed here undeterred". Shas spiritual leader Ovadia Yosef threatened to fire any school principal from Shas's school system who refused to receive Ethiopian students. The Israeli Education Ministry decided to pull the funding from the Lamerhav, Da'at Mevinim and Darkei Noam schools, the three semi-private institutions that refused to accept the students. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuspoke out against the rejection of Ethiopian children, calling it "a moral terror attack."[197][198]
> 
> When Ethiopians protested that blood donations from their community were thrown out, Harry Wall, the Israeli Director of the Anti-Defamation League stated that it was the result of the high incidence of HIV in Africans, not racism: "Whatever Israel's mistakes towards its Ethiopian Jewish community, the cause is not racism." It explains that "what causes the distress is bureaucratic ineptitude and a cultural gap between a traditional community and a modern, technologically-advanced, highly-competitive nation."[199]
> 
> In 2012, Israel appointed the country's first Ethiopian-born ambassador, Belaynesh Zevadia. According to the foreign minister of Israel, this represented an important milestone in fighting racism and prejudice.[200]
> 
> *Depo Provera prescription controversy*
> In 2010, Israel was accused of a "sterilization policy" aimed towards Ethiopian Jews, for allowing the prescription of contraceptive drugs like Depo-Provera to the community.[201][202] They stated that the Israeli government deliberately gives female Ethiopian Jews long-lasting contraceptive drugs like Depo-Provera.[201] Jewish agencies involved in immigration said that Ethiopian women were offered different types of contraceptives and that "all of them participated voluntarily in family planning".[201] Dr. Yifat Bitton, a member of the Israeli Anti-Discrimination Legal Center "Tmura" said that 60 percent of the women receiving this contraceptive are Ethiopian Jews, while Ethiopians made up only 1 percent of population and "the gap here is just impossible to reconcile in any logical manner that would somehow resist the claims of racism".[201] Professor Zvi Bentwich, an immunologist and human rights activist from Tel-Aviv, rejected the claim and said there's no ground to suspect a negative official policy towards Ethiopian Jews.[201]
> 
> Israel initially denied the claim of imposing a sterilization policy on the Ethiopian women,[201] but later admitted to it, and ordered gynaecologists to stop administering the drugs for women of Ethiopian origin if there is concern that they might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.[203] Action on the issue finally took place after a documentary aired in December 2012 on public television. In it, 35 Ethiopian women who had immigrated to Israel said they had been told they would not be allowed into Israel unless they agreed to the shots. While Ethiopians have been admitted to Israel, they are often discriminated against in education and in employment. The Times of Israel notes details of a nurse, unaware of a hidden camera, saying Depo-Provera is given to Ethiopian women because "they forget, they don’t understand, and it’s hard to explain to them, so it’s best that they receive a shot once every three months … basically they don’t understand anything." [204]
> 
> Thereafter, the Israeli government began an investigation into the policy, and instructed gynecologists not to administer the shots if there is suspicion that the recipient does not fully understand the effects.[205]
Click to expand...


Well, as long as you have a long cut and paste from wiki, it must be true. However, _if ya’ dun’ seen it on YouTube_,  I’d be more inclined to accept it.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
Most of them are Zionists.
I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
F*ck off to Israel.


----------



## Hollie

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.



Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Hollie said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
Click to expand...


What country do you reside in?
The U.S, or Israel?
If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.


----------



## Hollie

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
Click to expand...


You have confused this site with the one you subscribe to for those live stream adult pay per views.


----------



## MJB12741

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
Click to expand...


"Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.


----------



## MJB12741

MJB12741 said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.
Click to expand...


Want peace Israel?  Dump your damn Zionist shithead agenda & start treating the Palestinians with the surrounding Arab country love, justice & respect the Palestinians were so well accustomed to --- And so well deserve.  LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

MJB12741 said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.
Click to expand...


*PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire*
 May 11, 2015 11:27 PM  IMEMC Agencies Gaza Strip, Internal Unrest, News Report 0




11 MAY
11:27 PM
Following disengagement from the Gaza Strip in September 2005, Israel unilaterally and illegally established a so-called ‘buffer zone’, an area prohibited to Palestinians along the land and sea borders of the Gaza Strip. The precise area designated by Israel as a ‘buffer zone’ is not clear and this Israeli policy is typically enforced with live fire. The establishment of the ‘buffer zone’ is illegal under both Israeli and international law.Preventing Palestinians from accessing their lands and fishing areas violates numerous provisions of international human rights law, including the right to work, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Enforcing the ‘buffer zone’ through the use of live fire often results in, inter alia, the direct targeting of civilians and/or indiscriminate attacks, both of which constitute war crimes.

Following the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip in November 2012, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which included terms related to access to land and sea. In an online statement on 25 February 2013, the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) declared that fishermen could now access the sea up to six nautical miles offshore, and that farmers could now access lands in the border area up to 100m from the border fence. However, both references have since been removed from the statement.

Then, on 21 March 2013, the Israeli forces’ spokesperson announced re-reducing the fishing area allowed for Palestinian fishermen from 6 nautical miles to 3 nautical miles. However, on 21 May 2013, Israeli authorities decided to allow fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles.

Following the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (08 July – 26 August 2014), a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which allowed fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles. However, the Israeli naval forces have not allowed fishermen to sail up to this limit as all Israeli attacks have taken place within the 6-nautical- mile fishing area.

Dimensions

_On land, inside Palestinian territory_

Distance from the border fence, up to which access is permitted:

· Second Intifada (2000): 150 metres

· According to Israel (2010) :300 metres

· 22 November 2012: unclear parameters

· 21 March 2013: 300 metres

In reality, attacks against civilians take place anywhere upto approximately 1.5 kilometres inside the border fence. This constitutes approximately 17% of the total territory of the Gaza Strip.

_At sea, off the coast of the Gaza Strip_

Distance from the shore, up to which access is permitted:

· Oslo Accords (1994): 20 nautical miles (nm)

· Bertini Commitment (2002): 12 nm

· October 2006: 6 nm

· End of 2007 : 3 nm

· 22 November 2012: 6 nm

· 25 February 2013: unknown

· 12 March 2013: 3 nm

· 21 May 2013: 6 nm

In addition, access is consistently denied in the following areas:

· 1.5 nm in the north along the maritime boundary with Israel

· 1 nm in the south along the maritime boundary with Egypt

Impact

_On land_

· Approximately 27,000 dunums, 35% of the Gaza Strip’s agricultural

land, can only be accessed under high personal risk, as Israeli attacks may

result in injury or death of civilians.

· 95% of the restricted area is arable land.

· After the evacuation of settlements (2005) and ‘Operation Cast Lead’

(2008-2009), the majority of Palestinian families living in the border areas

abandoned their land and homes.

_At sea_

· Palestinians are completely prevented from accessing 85% of the

Palestinian maritime areas recognised in the 1994 Gaza Jericho Agreement.

· Approximately 3,700 fishermen work under high personal risk every day

at sea.

· Approximately 8,200 persons work in the fishing industry.

· Approximately 65,000 persons, including individuals who work in the

fishing industry and their dependents, are affected by the ‘buffer zone’

restrictions at sea.

· The area near the coast is markedly over-fished.

» PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire– IMEMC News


----------



## Yarddog

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> This is simply false. Please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty. Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.
> 
> My personal solution is what I have explained previously. And be aware, that my paper has now morphed into a book. I am writing with a Palestinian friend who escaped Gaza years ago. Our Jesuit priest teacher found us a publisher and will be involved as well. A Jew, Christian and Palestinian working together in harmony whodathunkit, right? Well, actually, this is how it was prior to zionism.
> 
> Research
> Read
> Study
> Learn
> It must start there.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettroll
> 
> See above and sorry for not responding to you sooner, but I can't be here all the time as I have many other things going on.
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See above and try to chill, please. My first interaction with you was you lying about me, twice, and then finally apologizing (a pretty half-assed apology with insinuations of antisemitism). There is no need to ask three times unless you are here to stalk/troll.
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The zionist narrative is a fantasy. She used Begin's own words. Facts are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettrollstalker
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I explained above to Shusha, please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> HINT: she gave two source in the video.
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, we can't use an unsourced web page in academic work any more than we can use the bible. And if you took a few minutes as I did to read some of the stuff published on that page, then you would know that it is a simple propaganda site. Basically, it disqualifies itself.
Click to expand...



The History of Israel - Time Line

To try make it simple, here is a timeline.  Note in the year 1099, the crusaders killed both Jews and Muslims, meaning that jews have always lived there. They never disappeared from the region that was known as Judea. How you think it was called Palestine centuries before Christ is mind boggling. 
Face it, Jews have always lived in that area for thousands of years, they were never completely driven out. The fact that more Jews later came from Europe and elswhere doesnt lessen that fact.


----------



## Yarddog

And Trans Jordan was supposed to be the area allocated for those who wanted a pure Arab State. What was left over was to be shared by both Arabs and Jews but the Arabs rejected this a few times. So they wanted all of "Palestine" for their own.
You cant see whats wrong with this?


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Yarddog said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> This is simply false. Please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty. Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.
> 
> My personal solution is what I have explained previously. And be aware, that my paper has now morphed into a book. I am writing with a Palestinian friend who escaped Gaza years ago. Our Jesuit priest teacher found us a publisher and will be involved as well. A Jew, Christian and Palestinian working together in harmony whodathunkit, right? Well, actually, this is how it was prior to zionism.
> 
> Research
> Read
> Study
> Learn
> It must start there.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettroll
> 
> See above and sorry for not responding to you sooner, but I can't be here all the time as I have many other things going on.
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See above and try to chill, please. My first interaction with you was you lying about me, twice, and then finally apologizing (a pretty half-assed apology with insinuations of antisemitism). There is no need to ask three times unless you are here to stalk/troll.
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The zionist narrative is a fantasy. She used Begin's own words. Facts are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettrollstalker
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I explained above to Shusha, please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> HINT: she gave two source in the video.
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, we can't use an unsourced web page in academic work any more than we can use the bible. And if you took a few minutes as I did to read some of the stuff published on that page, then you would know that it is a simple propaganda site. Basically, it disqualifies itself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The History of Israel - Time Line
> 
> To try make it simple, here is a timeline.  Note in the year 1099, the crusaders killed both Jews and Muslims, meaning that jews have always lived there. They never disappeared from the region that was known as Judea. How you think it was called Palestine centuries before Christ is mind boggling.
> Face it, Jews have always lived in that area for thousands of years, they were never completely driven out. The fact that more Jews later came from Europe and elswhere doesnt lessen that fact.
Click to expand...


Most European Jews were living in Europe since Roman times.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *What were native Americans called before it was America?
> *
> Americans were British.
> 
> "Palestinians" were Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're probably British, which would explain the kook ideals you support like Zionist, and denying Native American existence pre-British Americans.
> 
> Usually only Brits, in fact basically just British Americans are the only people this stupid to follow this junk.
Click to expand...


*You're probably British
*
Nope.

*denying Native American existence pre-British Americans.
*
Nah, there were a bunch of Indians here before the British arrived.

Lots of them were murderous brutes.


----------



## Roudy

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
> Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
> Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
> Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.
Click to expand...

Are you having this discussion just to vent your Jew hate or are you looking for historical accuracy?

If the latter then yes, the only "Palestinians" at the time were Jews that lived in the region.  The Arabs then ganged up and attacked Israel, not once but many times, it wasn't to create this so called Palestinian state that never existed.  They just wanted to destroy the Jewish state for the same reason that Muslims want Spain back. Once a land is under Muslim control, then it must never fall under infidel hands.


----------



## Yarddog

SobieskiSavedEurope said:


> Yarddog said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> This is simply false. Please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you take some of your own advice and just the Jewish people be people and stop denying their existence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish people are people. I have never had a problem there. It is your use of "the Jewish people" that creates so much confusion. The majority of your posts would hold more weight by speaking of the zionist people when you use that all encompassing term.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name of the territory in history has nothing to do with the rights of the TWO very distinct peoples who are now both asking for self-determination and sovereignty. Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.
> 
> My personal solution is what I have explained previously. And be aware, that my paper has now morphed into a book. I am writing with a Palestinian friend who escaped Gaza years ago. Our Jesuit priest teacher found us a publisher and will be involved as well. A Jew, Christian and Palestinian working together in harmony whodathunkit, right? Well, actually, this is how it was prior to zionism.
> 
> Research
> Read
> Study
> Learn
> It must start there.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes abi, I'll ask again, what is your solution to the conflict?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettroll
> 
> See above and sorry for not responding to you sooner, but I can't be here all the time as I have many other things going on.
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> See above and try to chill, please. My first interaction with you was you lying about me, twice, and then finally apologizing (a pretty half-assed apology with insinuations of antisemitism). There is no need to ask three times unless you are here to stalk/troll.
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The zionist narrative is a fantasy. She used Begin's own words. Facts are facts.
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> #internettrollstalker
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I explained above to Shusha, please research this stuff yourself. I don't have time to teach history, especially the simple stuff.
> 
> HINT: she gave two source in the video.
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, we can't use an unsourced web page in academic work any more than we can use the bible. And if you took a few minutes as I did to read some of the stuff published on that page, then you would know that it is a simple propaganda site. Basically, it disqualifies itself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The History of Israel - Time Line
> 
> To try make it simple, here is a timeline.  Note in the year 1099, the crusaders killed both Jews and Muslims, meaning that jews have always lived there. They never disappeared from the region that was known as Judea. How you think it was called Palestine centuries before Christ is mind boggling.
> Face it, Jews have always lived in that area for thousands of years, they were never completely driven out. The fact that more Jews later came from Europe and elswhere doesnt lessen that fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most European Jews were living in Europe since Roman times.
Click to expand...



I don't know when most European Jews lived in Europe, but, they were still living throughout parts of the ME as well and they were still in the areas of Israel today. There has been a Jewish homeland there for thousands of years, as uncomfortable that fact is for many people.


----------



## SobieskiSavedEurope

Roudy said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, piece of bullshit propaganda. And now for the truth, from the mouth of Arabs and so called Palestinians themselves:
> 
> Palestinians are the newest of all the peoples on the face of the Earth, and began to exist in a single day by a kind of supernatural phenomenon that is unique in the whole history of mankind, as it is witnessed by a former PLO terrorist that acknowledged the lie he was fighting for and the truth he was fighting against:
> 
> “Why is it that on June 4th 1967 I was a Jordanian and overnight I became a Palestinian?”
> “We did not particularly mind Jordanian rule. The teaching of the destruction of Israel was a definite part of the curriculum, but we considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians - they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag”.
> “When I finally realized the lies and myths I was taught, it is my duty as a righteous person to speak out”.
> 
> The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name, but adopted and adapted from the Latin _Palæstina_ . How can an Arab people have a western name instead of one in their own language? Because the use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab group is only a modern political creation without any historic or ethnic grounds, and did not indicate any people before 1967. An Arab writer and journalist declared:
> 
> 
> "There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Iraqis, etc. Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today... No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough".
> - Joseph Farah, "Myths of the Middle East" -
> 
> *Let us hear what other Arabs have said:*
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> "As I lived in Palestine, everyone I knew could trace their heritage back to the original country their great grandparents came from. Everyone knew their origin was not from the Canaanites, but ironically, this is the kind of stuff our education in the Middle East included. The fact is that today's Palestinians are immigrants from the surrounding nations! I grew up well knowing the history and origins of today's Palestinians as being from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Christians from Greece, muslim Sherkas from Russia, muslims from Bosnia, and the Jordanians next door. My grandfather, who was a dignitary in Bethlehem, almost lost his life by Abdul Qader Al-Husseni (the leader of the Palestinian revolution) after being accused of selling land to Jews. He used to tell us that his village Beit Sahur (The Shepherds Fields) in Bethlehem County was empty before his father settled in the area with six other families. The town has now grown to 30,000 inhabitants".
> 
> -An "ex-Palestinian" terrorist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've admitted to Palestinians committing the Hebron Massacre in 1929, but then will say Palestinians didn't exist until 1967.
> 
> What a buffoon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read my post again, dumbass, it's the Arabs and their leaders at the time that said it.
> 
> "There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it".
> - Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937 -
> 
> "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not".
> - Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946 -
> 
> "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".
> - Representant of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956 -
> 
> Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated:
> "The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years".
> 
> What other Arabs declared after the Six-Day War:
> 
> "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity... yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel".
> - Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council -
> 
> "You do not represent Palestine as much as we do. Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people".
> - Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're arguing for a unified Arab state?
> Wouldn't that be Israel's worst nightmare?
> Because if there's just an "Arab country" and no such thing as Iraq, or Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or Palestine etc.
> Well, then there must be an Arab state which is unified, and would amount to over 420 million of them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you having this discussion just to vent your Jew hate or are you looking for historical accuracy?
> 
> If the latter then yes, the only "Palestinians" at the time were Jews that lived in the region.  The Arabs then ganged up and attacked Israel, not once but many times, it wasn't to create this so called Palestinian state that never existed.  They just wanted to destroy the Jewish state for the same reason that Muslims want Spain back. Once a land is under Muslim control, then it must never fall under infidel hands.
Click to expand...


There was a Nakba, or Palestinian Exodus from Jewish massacres, and Jewish expulsions, whether you acknowledge it, or not.

It wouldn't really matter what they called themselves, what matters is you support something that kicked them off the land they lived on.


----------



## teddyearp

Thanks for the special hashtags. Let's get started.



abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL. Says the girl who brought up JC in the first place -- a person unknown in history other than from the Bible, btw.
> 
> 
> 
> This is simply false.
Click to expand...


Are you denying that you were the first one to bring up Jesus Christ in this thread?



abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> <snip>Why don't you post on the solutions thread and give us an idea of how you would solve the conflict.
> 
> 
> 
> All those solutions threads are bogus solutions built on impossible premises. And the very idea that I or any of us can solve this is silly.
Click to expand...


Agreed, we cannot solve the problem here ourselves on this board, but your refusal to try to participate in those threads by saying they're built on bogus solutions and built on impossible premises does speak volumes for us here. Or at least for me.

You see, I am not some little boy you can push around and assign silly hashtags to.

Spoiler alert. I watched the 1967 seven day war. I watched Yasser Arafat form the PLO. I watched Yasser Arafat proclaim violence. I watched the 1972 Olympics. I watched the Black September Jordanian response. I watched the 1973 Yom Kipper war. I have been alive for the last 50+ years and seen it all.

You are (perhaps younger and) making a study, maybe you could ask me what I remember?

If you think I am a troll, well so be it. I am not. I only ask for you to think and when you do not answer a question, I ask again. An Internet troll only tries to provoke responses based upon a highly biased premise.


----------



## abi

teddyearp said:


> Are you denying that you were the first one to bring up Jesus Christ in this thread?


Yes, it was the young lady in the OP video. And I must wonder, why can you not follow a conversation? Shusha's claim was false and that is why she left this thread. Hopefully, by now, she has realized that there is much extra-biblical evidence of Jesus. Hopefully, another realization that she came to is that yes, Palestine was Palestine for centuries before Christ was born.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you denying that you were the first one to bring up Jesus Christ in this thread?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it was the young lady in the OP video. And I must wonder, why can you not follow a conversation? Shusha's claim was false and that is why she left this thread. Hopefully, by now, she has realized that there is much extra-biblical evidence of Jesus. Hopefully, another realization that she came to is that yes, Palestine was Palestine for centuries before Christ was born.
Click to expand...


Palestine was nice before all the Arabs invaded, eh?


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you denying that you were the first one to bring up Jesus Christ in this thread?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it was the young lady in the OP video. And I must wonder, why can you not follow a conversation? Shusha's claim was false and that is why she left this thread. Hopefully, by now, she has realized that there is much extra-biblical evidence of Jesus. Hopefully, another realization that she came to is that yes, Palestine was Palestine for centuries before Christ was born.
Click to expand...


I have SO not left this thread.  There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.  (Though, personally, I think the existence of the NT is enough to believe that he was *probably* an historic figure.)  Please do not try to prove me wrong by introducing the doctored quotes from Josephus; the writings of Pliny and Tacitus which discuss Xtians and not JC; the claimed reference in the Talmud, which does not reference JC and PLEASE do not even consider attempting to point to fake artifacts like the Shroud of Turin or the ossuary.  

Israel has been Israel for thousands of years.  Does the fact that it was called Israel in antiquity give Jewish people rights to that land?  Does the fact that it was also called, at times, Palestine, give Arab people rights to that land?  

This ridiculous idea that how we label things gives rights needs to be dropped asap.


----------



## teddyearp

abi said:


> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you denying that you were the first one to bring up Jesus Christ in this thread?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it was the young lady in the OP video. And I must wonder, why can you not follow a conversation? Shusha's claim was false and that is why she left this thread.<snip>
Click to expand...


I see that, yet it is your OP in your thread in which the video is posted, therefore that proves (or at the very least, implies) that it was you who first brought up JC in this thread. Jesus Christ, however is not the subject of this thread.

I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post. Are you having a hard time following a conversation? I see a pattern developing here where you chose not to address certain questions, deflect, and/or make false claims.  Obviously Shusha has not left this thread. You did for several days. And your remarks about the solutions thread(s) marks more of the pattern I see here in you. A pattern I have seen in most all here who claim to be Pro-Palestinian.

Which brings me to this question. Are you pro-Palestinian and also recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most people on the Israel, and Palestine forum rarely even venture into the rest of the forum.
> Most of them are Zionists.
> I guess proving Jewish claims to Israel is the most important thing for America. Haha, right.
> F*ck off to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire*
> May 11, 2015 11:27 PM  IMEMC Agencies Gaza Strip, Internal Unrest, News Report 0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11 MAY
> 11:27 PM
> Following disengagement from the Gaza Strip in September 2005, Israel unilaterally and illegally established a so-called ‘buffer zone’, an area prohibited to Palestinians along the land and sea borders of the Gaza Strip. The precise area designated by Israel as a ‘buffer zone’ is not clear and this Israeli policy is typically enforced with live fire. The establishment of the ‘buffer zone’ is illegal under both Israeli and international law.Preventing Palestinians from accessing their lands and fishing areas violates numerous provisions of international human rights law, including the right to work, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Enforcing the ‘buffer zone’ through the use of live fire often results in, inter alia, the direct targeting of civilians and/or indiscriminate attacks, both of which constitute war crimes.
> 
> Following the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip in November 2012, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which included terms related to access to land and sea. In an online statement on 25 February 2013, the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) declared that fishermen could now access the sea up to six nautical miles offshore, and that farmers could now access lands in the border area up to 100m from the border fence. However, both references have since been removed from the statement.
> 
> Then, on 21 March 2013, the Israeli forces’ spokesperson announced re-reducing the fishing area allowed for Palestinian fishermen from 6 nautical miles to 3 nautical miles. However, on 21 May 2013, Israeli authorities decided to allow fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles.
> 
> Following the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (08 July – 26 August 2014), a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which allowed fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles. However, the Israeli naval forces have not allowed fishermen to sail up to this limit as all Israeli attacks have taken place within the 6-nautical- mile fishing area.
> 
> Dimensions
> 
> _On land, inside Palestinian territory_
> 
> Distance from the border fence, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Second Intifada (2000): 150 metres
> 
> · According to Israel (2010) :300 metres
> 
> · 22 November 2012: unclear parameters
> 
> · 21 March 2013: 300 metres
> 
> In reality, attacks against civilians take place anywhere upto approximately 1.5 kilometres inside the border fence. This constitutes approximately 17% of the total territory of the Gaza Strip.
> 
> _At sea, off the coast of the Gaza Strip_
> 
> Distance from the shore, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Oslo Accords (1994): 20 nautical miles (nm)
> 
> · Bertini Commitment (2002): 12 nm
> 
> · October 2006: 6 nm
> 
> · End of 2007 : 3 nm
> 
> · 22 November 2012: 6 nm
> 
> · 25 February 2013: unknown
> 
> · 12 March 2013: 3 nm
> 
> · 21 May 2013: 6 nm
> 
> In addition, access is consistently denied in the following areas:
> 
> · 1.5 nm in the north along the maritime boundary with Israel
> 
> · 1 nm in the south along the maritime boundary with Egypt
> 
> Impact
> 
> _On land_
> 
> · Approximately 27,000 dunums, 35% of the Gaza Strip’s agricultural
> 
> land, can only be accessed under high personal risk, as Israeli attacks may
> 
> result in injury or death of civilians.
> 
> · 95% of the restricted area is arable land.
> 
> · After the evacuation of settlements (2005) and ‘Operation Cast Lead’
> 
> (2008-2009), the majority of Palestinian families living in the border areas
> 
> abandoned their land and homes.
> 
> _At sea_
> 
> · Palestinians are completely prevented from accessing 85% of the
> 
> Palestinian maritime areas recognised in the 1994 Gaza Jericho Agreement.
> 
> · Approximately 3,700 fishermen work under high personal risk every day
> 
> at sea.
> 
> · Approximately 8,200 persons work in the fishing industry.
> 
> · Approximately 65,000 persons, including individuals who work in the
> 
> fishing industry and their dependents, are affected by the ‘buffer zone’
> 
> restrictions at sea.
> 
> · The area near the coast is markedly over-fished.
> 
> » PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire– IMEMC News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look at Shejaiya. I say that the neighborhood was wiped out merely for Israel's increased buffer Zone.
Click to expand...


Islamic terrorism carries consequences.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Awww, now is time for your shot of vodka and continue your coma.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire*
> May 11, 2015 11:27 PM  IMEMC Agencies Gaza Strip, Internal Unrest, News Report 0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11 MAY
> 11:27 PM
> Following disengagement from the Gaza Strip in September 2005, Israel unilaterally and illegally established a so-called ‘buffer zone’, an area prohibited to Palestinians along the land and sea borders of the Gaza Strip. The precise area designated by Israel as a ‘buffer zone’ is not clear and this Israeli policy is typically enforced with live fire. The establishment of the ‘buffer zone’ is illegal under both Israeli and international law.Preventing Palestinians from accessing their lands and fishing areas violates numerous provisions of international human rights law, including the right to work, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Enforcing the ‘buffer zone’ through the use of live fire often results in, inter alia, the direct targeting of civilians and/or indiscriminate attacks, both of which constitute war crimes.
> 
> Following the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip in November 2012, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which included terms related to access to land and sea. In an online statement on 25 February 2013, the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) declared that fishermen could now access the sea up to six nautical miles offshore, and that farmers could now access lands in the border area up to 100m from the border fence. However, both references have since been removed from the statement.
> 
> Then, on 21 March 2013, the Israeli forces’ spokesperson announced re-reducing the fishing area allowed for Palestinian fishermen from 6 nautical miles to 3 nautical miles. However, on 21 May 2013, Israeli authorities decided to allow fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles.
> 
> Following the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (08 July – 26 August 2014), a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which allowed fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles. However, the Israeli naval forces have not allowed fishermen to sail up to this limit as all Israeli attacks have taken place within the 6-nautical- mile fishing area.
> 
> Dimensions
> 
> _On land, inside Palestinian territory_
> 
> Distance from the border fence, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Second Intifada (2000): 150 metres
> 
> · According to Israel (2010) :300 metres
> 
> · 22 November 2012: unclear parameters
> 
> · 21 March 2013: 300 metres
> 
> In reality, attacks against civilians take place anywhere upto approximately 1.5 kilometres inside the border fence. This constitutes approximately 17% of the total territory of the Gaza Strip.
> 
> _At sea, off the coast of the Gaza Strip_
> 
> Distance from the shore, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Oslo Accords (1994): 20 nautical miles (nm)
> 
> · Bertini Commitment (2002): 12 nm
> 
> · October 2006: 6 nm
> 
> · End of 2007 : 3 nm
> 
> · 22 November 2012: 6 nm
> 
> · 25 February 2013: unknown
> 
> · 12 March 2013: 3 nm
> 
> · 21 May 2013: 6 nm
> 
> In addition, access is consistently denied in the following areas:
> 
> · 1.5 nm in the north along the maritime boundary with Israel
> 
> · 1 nm in the south along the maritime boundary with Egypt
> 
> Impact
> 
> _On land_
> 
> · Approximately 27,000 dunums, 35% of the Gaza Strip’s agricultural
> 
> land, can only be accessed under high personal risk, as Israeli attacks may
> 
> result in injury or death of civilians.
> 
> · 95% of the restricted area is arable land.
> 
> · After the evacuation of settlements (2005) and ‘Operation Cast Lead’
> 
> (2008-2009), the majority of Palestinian families living in the border areas
> 
> abandoned their land and homes.
> 
> _At sea_
> 
> · Palestinians are completely prevented from accessing 85% of the
> 
> Palestinian maritime areas recognised in the 1994 Gaza Jericho Agreement.
> 
> · Approximately 3,700 fishermen work under high personal risk every day
> 
> at sea.
> 
> · Approximately 8,200 persons work in the fishing industry.
> 
> · Approximately 65,000 persons, including individuals who work in the
> 
> fishing industry and their dependents, are affected by the ‘buffer zone’
> 
> restrictions at sea.
> 
> · The area near the coast is markedly over-fished.
> 
> » PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire– IMEMC News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look at Shejaiya. I say that the neighborhood was wiped out merely for Israel's increased buffer Zone.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Islamic terrorism carries consequences.
Click to expand...

Look at the map.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SobieskiSavedEurope said:
> 
> 
> 
> What country do you reside in?
> The U.S, or Israel?
> If it's Israel why are you on this forum?
> If it's the U.S why do you never leave the Israel vs Palestine forum?
> What a bunch of Zionist shitheads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Zionist shitheads" piss me off too.  What kind of people make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence to keep them in Israel & even grant them land concessions?  Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, ever treated them like those Zionist shitheads in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire*
> May 11, 2015 11:27 PM  IMEMC Agencies Gaza Strip, Internal Unrest, News Report 0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11 MAY
> 11:27 PM
> Following disengagement from the Gaza Strip in September 2005, Israel unilaterally and illegally established a so-called ‘buffer zone’, an area prohibited to Palestinians along the land and sea borders of the Gaza Strip. The precise area designated by Israel as a ‘buffer zone’ is not clear and this Israeli policy is typically enforced with live fire. The establishment of the ‘buffer zone’ is illegal under both Israeli and international law.Preventing Palestinians from accessing their lands and fishing areas violates numerous provisions of international human rights law, including the right to work, the right to an adequate standard of living, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Enforcing the ‘buffer zone’ through the use of live fire often results in, inter alia, the direct targeting of civilians and/or indiscriminate attacks, both of which constitute war crimes.
> 
> Following the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip in November 2012, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which included terms related to access to land and sea. In an online statement on 25 February 2013, the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) declared that fishermen could now access the sea up to six nautical miles offshore, and that farmers could now access lands in the border area up to 100m from the border fence. However, both references have since been removed from the statement.
> 
> Then, on 21 March 2013, the Israeli forces’ spokesperson announced re-reducing the fishing area allowed for Palestinian fishermen from 6 nautical miles to 3 nautical miles. However, on 21 May 2013, Israeli authorities decided to allow fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles.
> 
> Following the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (08 July – 26 August 2014), a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Palestinian armed groups was brokered by the Egyptian government, which allowed fishermen to sail up to 6 nautical miles. However, the Israeli naval forces have not allowed fishermen to sail up to this limit as all Israeli attacks have taken place within the 6-nautical- mile fishing area.
> 
> Dimensions
> 
> _On land, inside Palestinian territory_
> 
> Distance from the border fence, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Second Intifada (2000): 150 metres
> 
> · According to Israel (2010) :300 metres
> 
> · 22 November 2012: unclear parameters
> 
> · 21 March 2013: 300 metres
> 
> In reality, attacks against civilians take place anywhere upto approximately 1.5 kilometres inside the border fence. This constitutes approximately 17% of the total territory of the Gaza Strip.
> 
> _At sea, off the coast of the Gaza Strip_
> 
> Distance from the shore, up to which access is permitted:
> 
> · Oslo Accords (1994): 20 nautical miles (nm)
> 
> · Bertini Commitment (2002): 12 nm
> 
> · October 2006: 6 nm
> 
> · End of 2007 : 3 nm
> 
> · 22 November 2012: 6 nm
> 
> · 25 February 2013: unknown
> 
> · 12 March 2013: 3 nm
> 
> · 21 May 2013: 6 nm
> 
> In addition, access is consistently denied in the following areas:
> 
> · 1.5 nm in the north along the maritime boundary with Israel
> 
> · 1 nm in the south along the maritime boundary with Egypt
> 
> Impact
> 
> _On land_
> 
> · Approximately 27,000 dunums, 35% of the Gaza Strip’s agricultural
> 
> land, can only be accessed under high personal risk, as Israeli attacks may
> 
> result in injury or death of civilians.
> 
> · 95% of the restricted area is arable land.
> 
> · After the evacuation of settlements (2005) and ‘Operation Cast Lead’
> 
> (2008-2009), the majority of Palestinian families living in the border areas
> 
> abandoned their land and homes.
> 
> _At sea_
> 
> · Palestinians are completely prevented from accessing 85% of the
> 
> Palestinian maritime areas recognised in the 1994 Gaza Jericho Agreement.
> 
> · Approximately 3,700 fishermen work under high personal risk every day
> 
> at sea.
> 
> · Approximately 8,200 persons work in the fishing industry.
> 
> · Approximately 65,000 persons, including individuals who work in the
> 
> fishing industry and their dependents, are affected by the ‘buffer zone’
> 
> restrictions at sea.
> 
> · The area near the coast is markedly over-fished.
> 
> » PCHR-Gaza: Israeli Buffer Zone Policies Typically Enforced with Live Fire– IMEMC News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look at Shejaiya. I say that the neighborhood was wiped out merely for Israel's increased buffer Zone.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Islamic terrorism carries consequences.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look at the map.
Click to expand...


Gee-had knows no political boundaries or passage of time.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> I have SO not left this thread.


Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.



Shusha said:


> There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.


Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care. The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?



teddyearp said:


> I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post.


What now, Teddy? Be specific, what have I not addressed that is on topic? And watch the video again if you must. What claims did she make that you take issue with. If you follow the rules and stay on topic, I will stop thinking of you as a troll.

Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?

Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?

Come on now, this is simple stuff and it is verified historical fact. The denial must stop to even begin to discuss a solution. Let the narrative be damned and focus on what we know.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.


If I have failed to answer a direct question, it was not intentional.  Please re-direct me to your specific questions.



> Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care.


  Research beyond Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, Talmud and various fake artifacts?  If you've got something, please point the way.



> The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?


And Bethlehem existed in Israel for centuries prior to that.  The territory has had many names over thousands of years.  None of that MATTERS.  The fact that it was called Palestine in antiquity does not give Arabs the exclusive right to it in modern times.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Research beyond Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, Talmud and various fake artifacts? If you've got something, please point the way.


Now you want to tell me what and how to research? Chuckling aside, the historicity of Jesus is a settled matter among legitimate historians, at least as far as his existence. I am sure you can find a few who will argue that, but in academia, this is a settled matter. Beyond that, the Talmud you reference does not deny his existence. Quite the contrary in fact, as it's authors seem to be concerned with discrediting his actions. Again, even the Talmud does not deny his existence. But again, this is for academic purposes and when we discuss history in academia, religious texts are not used as sources.



Shusha said:


> And Bethlehem existed in Israel for centuries prior to that.


What historical reference are you basing that claim upon? See above about using religious text in these academic discussions and when you are done doing your honest research into this matter, you will find that that area was not "Israel" until the zionists captured it during the six-day war. That brings us all the way to 1967!

That said, Bethlehem was still not in Israel and she had returned power to the Palestinian National Authority in 1995 (kind of).

It has been called Palestine though, since at least 450 BC. This is historical fact.



Shusha said:


> The territory has had many names over thousands of years. None of that MATTERS.



It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.



Shusha said:


> The fact that it was called Palestine in antiquity does not give Arabs the exclusive right to it in modern times.


Thanks for making a point about what nobody has claimed.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Research beyond Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, Talmud and various fake artifacts? If you've got something, please point the way.
> 
> 
> 
> Now you want to tell me what and how to research? Chuckling aside, the historicity of Jesus is a settled matter among legitimate historians, at least as far as his existence. I am sure you can find a few who will argue that, but in academia, this is a settled matter. Beyond that, the Talmud you reference does not deny his existence. Quite the contrary in fact, as it's authors seem to be concerned with discrediting his actions. Again, even the Talmud does not deny his existence. But again, this is for academic purposes and when we discuss history in academia, religious texts are not used as sources.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Bethlehem existed in Israel for centuries prior to that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What historical reference are you basing that claim upon? See above about using religious text in these academic discussions and when you are done doing your honest research into this matter, you will find that that area was not "Israel" until the zionists captured it during the six-day war. That brings us all the way to 1967!
> 
> That said, Bethlehem was still not in Israel and she had returned power to the Palestinian National Authority in 1995 (kind of).
> 
> It has been called Palestine though, since at least 450 BC. This is historical fact.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The territory has had many names over thousands of years. None of that MATTERS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was called Palestine in antiquity does not give Arabs the exclusive right to it in modern times.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks for making a point about what nobody has claimed.
Click to expand...

*
you will find that that area was not "Israel" until the zionists captured it during the six-day war. That brings us all the way to 1967!
*
How were Jews being born in "Palestine" 2000+ years ago?


----------



## abi

teddyearp said:


> For someone who wanted honest and intelligent discussion, all I hear now is crickets . . . . doesn't seem very honest to me. Nor academic.


The crickets is what I have heard form you. All you have done so far is trolled. You call me out, I post specifically for you and Shusha, and then poof, gone, but were trolling on another thread, I noticed.



Dogmaphobe said:


> Goodness, gracious, sakes alive.
> 
> What those of us who were paying attention to the actual events in 1967 really need is some brainwashed young girl who wasn't even close to being alive at the time telling us what really went down.


She quoted Menachem Begin. It was his own words.

*In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.*



teddyearp said:


> abi What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread? In another thread you said you are not some kid that I can lie about. Well then defend your statements.
> 
> Again. What is your source of your claim that Judea was called Palestine centuries before Christ?


It was posted several times and explained in the video. What happened to you? Why do you not answer honest questions that have been posed to you in this thread?



Shusha said:


> The term "Jewish people" is no more confusing than the terms "French people", "Scots people", or "Catalan people". It is easily understood, except by those who wish to demonize Jews.


Not true at all and I have explained multiple times that using "the Jewish people" as they are a single entity who all support Israel is ludicrous.



Yarddog said:


> How you think it was called Palestine centuries before Christ is mind boggling.


I showed this already. Are you still in denial?

Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?

Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle referred to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?"



Yarddog said:


> You cant see whats wrong with this?


You don't see that one nation cannot give a group of people other people's land?



Shusha said:


> I have SO not left this thread.


But you were trolling another thread and simply haven't returned?



Shusha said:


> Israel has been Israel for thousands of years. Does the fact that it was called Israel in antiquity give Jewish people rights to that land?


I am still not ready to source religious texts, sorry.



Toddsterpatriot said:


> How were Jews being born in "Palestine" 2000+ years ago?


Do I really need to explain this part too? Their parents grabbed a jug of wine about 9 months prior. Can you figure out the rest?


----------



## teddyearp

Abi, why are you quoting old posts that you have already ignored?  I realized that what ever I reply to you here is going to be taken as trolling and/or off topic by you, so I am done.

Unless you wish to answer this one question.  Do you believe the State of Israel should exist?


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.



This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.

But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The term "Jewish people" is no more confusing than the terms "French people", "Scots people", or "Catalan people". It is easily understood, except by those who wish to demonize Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Not true at all and I have explained multiple times that using "the Jewish people" as they are a single entity who all support Israel is ludicrous.
Click to expand...


Then using terms like "Catalan people" or "Scots people" or "American people" or "Palestinian people" is equally ludicrous.  

Are there Catalans who do not want to secede from Spain.  Sure.  They are still part of the Catalan people.


----------



## montelatici

Shusha said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.
> 
> But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.
Click to expand...


Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan).  Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are.  The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions.  Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.


----------



## Hollie

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.
> 
> But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan).  Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are.  The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions.  Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
Click to expand...


Wouldn't it have been easier to post links to the dozen or so other locations you cut and pasted the above?


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.
> 
> But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan).  Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are.  The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions.  Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
Click to expand...


1st Palestine Arab Congress stated officially:

1 .* We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria* as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds.

2. The Declaration made by M. Pichon, Minister for Foreig Affairs for France, that France had rights in our country based on the desires and aspirations of the inhabitants has no foundation and we reject all the declarations made in his speech of 29th December 1918, as *our wishes and aspirations are only in Arab unity* and complete independence.

3. In view of the above we desire that one* district Southern Syria or Palestine should not be separated *from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.

4. In accordance with the rule laid down by President Wilson and approved by most of the Great Powers we consider that every promise or treaty concluded in respect of our country and its future as null and void and reject the same.

5. The Government of the country will apply for help to its friend Great Britain in case of need for the improvement and development of the country provided that this will not affect its independence and Arab unity in any way and will keep good relations with the Allied Powers. 78



Q. Still going to those "white hoodie conventions"?


----------



## Hugo Furst

rylah said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.
> 
> But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan).  Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are.  The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions.  Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1st Palestine Arab Congress stated officially:
> 
> 1 .* We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria* as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds.
> 
> 2. The Declaration made by M. Pichon, Minister for Foreig Affairs for France, that France had rights in our country based on the desires and aspirations of the inhabitants has no foundation and we reject all the declarations made in his speech of 29th December 1918, as *our wishes and aspirations are only in Arab unity* and complete independence.
> 
> 3. In view of the above we desire that one* district Southern Syria or Palestine should not be separated *from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 4. In accordance with the rule laid down by President Wilson and approved by most of the Great Powers we consider that every promise or treaty concluded in respect of our country and its future as null and void and reject the same.
> 
> 5. The Government of the country will apply for help to its friend Great Britain in case of need for the improvement and development of the country provided that this will not affect its independence and Arab unity in any way and will keep good relations with the Allied Powers. 78
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Still going to those "white hoodie conventions"?
Click to expand...



*Mod note:

Cut and pastes need links*


----------



## rylah

WillHaftawaite said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does matter as the majority of the zionists posting here claim  that Palestine - and more importantly - Palestinians never existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true.  Many of Team Israel here claim -- correctly -- that the STATE of Palestine does not (yet) exist.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that there is no cultural marker by which to differentiate an Arab Palestinian from an Arab Syrian or an Arab Jordanian.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians themselves do not differentiate between Palestinians, Jordanians and Syrians.  Many also claim -- correctly -- that the Arab Palestinians did not exist as a distinct national group until it became politically desirable in the mid 1960s.  A few of them claim that Arab Palestinians have no further rights to territory because they already received their territory in the division of Palestine between Israel and Jordan.
> 
> But I know of NONE who claim that the Arab Palestinians are prohibited from having a State for any of these reasons.  Therefore, it doesn't matter in terms of solving the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan).  Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are.  The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions.  Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1st Palestine Arab Congress stated officially:
> 
> 1 .* We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria* as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds.
> 
> 2. The Declaration made by M. Pichon, Minister for Foreig Affairs for France, that France had rights in our country based on the desires and aspirations of the inhabitants has no foundation and we reject all the declarations made in his speech of 29th December 1918, as *our wishes and aspirations are only in Arab unity* and complete independence.
> 
> 3. In view of the above we desire that one* district Southern Syria or Palestine should not be separated *from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 4. In accordance with the rule laid down by President Wilson and approved by most of the Great Powers we consider that every promise or treaty concluded in respect of our country and its future as null and void and reject the same.
> 
> 5. The Government of the country will apply for help to its friend Great Britain in case of need for the improvement and development of the country provided that this will not affect its independence and Arab unity in any way and will keep good relations with the Allied Powers. 78
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Still going to those "white hoodie conventions"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *Mod note:
> 
> Cut and pastes need links*
Click to expand...


Sure, my mistake:

http://content.ecf.org.il/files/M00661_FirstArabCongress1919ParisResolutionArabic.pdf

http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/db.php?eid=2535


----------



## abi

I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.

1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
The Palestine Exploration Fund: History

2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*

3) 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Are these facts somehow not clear?


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?


It doesn't mean what You think.

Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
*Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.

In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
_
"The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)." 
[Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)

Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_


----------



## abi

rylah said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
Click to expand...


1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?

2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?

3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?

Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
Click to expand...


1. It was founded roughly a 100 years after Jews were referred as "Palestinians" and 102 years before any Arab identified as such.

2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.

3. Yes, yet  Arabs declared to be officially Syrians, with allegiance to a foreign King from Mecca.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
Click to expand...



Palestine (now called Israel) is the homeland for the Jewish people and was legally reconstituted after WWI.  It matters not one whit that it was called Palestine and then renamed Israel. 

What are you arguing here?  That the very name of Palestine somehow prohibits Jewish sovereignty and only allows for Arab sovereignty?  Ridiculous.



Edit to add:  the name Israel was restored, not created.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. It was founded roughly a 100 years after Jews were referred as "Palestinians" and 102 years before any Arab identified as such.
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> 3. Yes, yet  Arabs declared to be officially Syrians, with allegiance to a foreign King from Mecca.
Click to expand...




rylah said:


> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.


The British Mandate was not a place.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?



Tell me more about that Jewish guy born in Palestine.
When did the first Muslim arrive there?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. It was founded roughly a 100 years after Jews were referred as "Palestinians" and 102 years before any Arab identified as such.
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> 3. Yes, yet  Arabs declared to be officially Syrians, with allegiance to a foreign King from Mecca.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The British Mandate was not a place.
Click to expand...


Yet the Arabs declared they were Syrians, and declared their allegiance to a king from Mecca who helped the British conquer the land.

Ariel Sharon was a Palestine Mandate citizen, while the Arabs didn't want any part of Palestine to be independent, but a part of a bigger Arab empire.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

abi said:


> I am pretty sure that Bethlehem is in Palestine. What are you trying to say?
> 
> Sis, you're wrong:
> 
> The New Testament says, "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea," (MATTHEW 2:1) and that his father, "took the young child [Jesus] and his mother, and came into the land of Israel." (MATTHEW 2:21


----------



## abi

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Tell me more about that Jewish guy born in Palestine.


His name is Ariel Sharon.

*"The New Testament says, "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea," (MATTHEW 2:1) and that his father, "took the young child [Jesus] and his mother, and came into the land of Israel." (MATTHEW 2:21"*

Sorry, *Ria_Longhorn,* but we are still not working with scripture for academic purposes.



montelatici said:


> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan). Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are. The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions. Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.


Thank-you for the sanity. Is anyone here arguing these facts?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me more about that Jewish guy born in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> His name is Ariel Sharon.
> 
> *"The New Testament says, "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea," (MATTHEW 2:1) and that his father, "took the young child [Jesus] and his mother, and came into the land of Israel." (MATTHEW 2:21"*
> 
> Sorry, *Ria_Longhorn,* but we are still not working with scripture for academic purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan). Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are. The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions. Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank-you for the sanity. Is anyone here arguing these facts?
Click to expand...


*His name is Ariel Sharon.
*
I was thinking of Jesus. A Jewish guy born in Bethlehem, hundreds of years before the first Muslim showed up.
Doesn't that damage the claim that Bethlehem should be part of a new Muslim nation?


----------



## Hollie

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me more about that Jewish guy born in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> His name is Ariel Sharon.
> 
> *"The New Testament says, "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea," (MATTHEW 2:1) and that his father, "took the young child [Jesus] and his mother, and came into the land of Israel." (MATTHEW 2:21"*
> 
> Sorry, *Ria_Longhorn,* but we are still not working with scripture for academic purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan). Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are. The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions. Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank-you for the sanity. Is anyone here arguing these facts?
Click to expand...


Actually, you're working with muhammedan ideology when dealing with islamic terrorist organizations such as Hamas. Read their charter. It makes specific reference to the land of Israel as a _waqf_.

You should understand what that term means.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. It was founded roughly a 100 years after Jews were referred as "Palestinians" and 102 years before any Arab identified as such.
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> 3. Yes, yet  Arabs declared to be officially Syrians, with allegiance to a foreign King from Mecca.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The British Mandate was not a place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet the Arabs declared they were Syrians, and declared their allegiance to a king from Mecca who helped the British conquer the land.
> 
> Ariel Sharon was a Palestine Mandate citizen, while the Arabs didn't want any part of Palestine to be independent, but a part of a bigger Arab empire.
Click to expand...




rylah said:


> Ariel Sharon was a Palestine Mandate citizen,


The Palestine Mandate was not a place.


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine never existed

Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture


----------



## jamesduncan

*Palestine* usually refers to:


Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
"Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine

*Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).

*The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.

The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.

The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Palestine never existed
> 
> Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture



Let it be known that this alleged Jewish coin came from or during the living life of Jesus


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let it be known that this alleged Jewish coin came from or during the living life of Jesus
Click to expand...


Jesus, King of the Jews, King of Israel, in the Bible

Palestine never existed


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let it be known that this alleged Jewish coin came from or during the living life of Jesus
Click to expand...


Ancient shekel of Israel, from British Museum Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture

Palestine never existed


----------



## jamesduncan

_Herod arranged a renovation of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, with a massive expansion of the Temple Mount platform and major expansion of the Jewish Temple around 19 BCE. Around the time associated with the birth of Jesus, _*Roman Palestine*_ was in a state of disarray and direct _*Roman*_ rule was re-established.
History of Palestine - Wikipedia_

In the beginning the Jews of old lived in Egypt

_Gen 42:6 KJV)  And Joseph was the governor over the land, and he it was that sold to all the people of the land:_

_(Gen 42:25 KJV)  Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

_(Gen 45:20 KJV)  Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._

_(Gen 45:21 KJV)  And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._

_(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [_*ISRAEL*_] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.
_
Scripture clearly states that the Jews of old came from Cannon before moving to Egypt
Where the Leaders of the Jewish people were buried is where they believed was their true homeland.

_Genesis 50:5 My father made me swear an oath and said, "I am about to die; bury me in the tomb I dug for myself *in the land of Canaan*. "Now let me go up and bury my father; then I will return.'" _

_ Genesis 50:7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh's officials accompanied him--the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt-- _

_ Genesis 50:10  When they reached the threshing floor of Atad, near the Jordan, they lamented loudly and bitterly; and there Joseph observed a seven-day period of mourning for his father._

_Genesis 50:11 When the Canaanites who lived there saw the mourning at the threshing floor of Atad, they said, "The Egyptians are holding a solemn ceremony of mourning." That is why that place near the Jordan is called Abel Mizraim. _

_Genesis 50:13 *They carried him to the land of Canaan* and buried him in the cave in the field of Machpelah, near Mamre, which Abraham had bought as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite, along with the field._

Where the great Jewish leaders were buried is even more proof they are not from Palestine

_Genesis 23:17 So Ephron's field in Machpelah near Mamre--both the field and the cave in it, and all the trees within the borders of the field--was deeded_

_Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite, _

_Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

_Genesis 49:31 There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah._

_Genesis 50:10  And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, _*which is beyond Jordan*_, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_

_Genesis 50:14 For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

_Genesis 50:14 After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._


----------



## JoelT1

Palestine never existed.

Ancient Jewish history in Israel


----------



## P F Tinmore

jamesduncan said:


> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264





jamesduncan said:


> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.


Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.


----------



## jamesduncan

To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)

_And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_

_Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well_

The above few posts are a combination of scripture and my opinion of these events.

You may decide what is right or wrong


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Palestine never existed.
> .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,]



Sorry but you have it backwards. No nation/State called "Israel" existed before 1947AD.

Please prove me wrong; if you can -


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible





P F Tinmore said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
Click to expand...


Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.

Palestine never existed


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but you have it backwards. No nation/State called "Israel" existed before 1947AD.
> 
> Please prove me wrong; if you can -
Click to expand...


Jesus walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible. 2000 years ago.


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> .,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but you have it backwards. No nation/State called "Israel" existed before 1947AD.
> 
> Please prove me wrong; if you can -
Click to expand...


Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture


----------



## P F Tinmore

JoelT1 said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
Click to expand...

Link?


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


Ancient Israel The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Palestine never existed


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> .,.,.,.,.Palestine never existed



If believing this helps you sleep at night; by all means sleep well

-


----------



## jillian

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .,.,.,.,.Palestine never existed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If believing this helps you sleep at night; by all means sleep well
> 
> -
Click to expand...


palesine was the name given to Israel by the brits when they had the mandate.... it was taken from the word philistine. 

so-called Palestinians were beduins living in Transjordan. but Jordan hates them and wouldn't let them in.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean what You think.
> 
> Nobody says the geographical area was not called Palestine, but Arabs didn't identify with it.
> Until this day they identify with either the Northern Arabian or South Yemenite tribes.
> *Doesn't change the "We are Syrians" part in the Arab declaration.*
> Arabs didn't identify as Palestinians until the last century when it was politically profitable.
> 
> In fact Jews were referred to as "Palestinians among us" 200 years before any Arab even began considering the term:
> _
> "The Palestinians living among us have, for the most part, earned a not unfounded reputation for being cheaters, because of their spirit of usury since their exile. Certainly, it seems strange to conceive of a nation of cheaters; but it is just as odd to think of a nation of merchants, the great majority of whom, bound by an ancient superstition that is recognized by the State they live in, seek no civil dignity and try to make up for this loss by the advantage of duping the people among whom they find refuge, and even one another. The situation could not be otherwise, given a whole nation of merchants, as non-productive members of society (for example, the Jews in Poland). So their constitution, which is sanctioned by ancient precepts and even by the people among whom they live (since we have certain sacred writings in common with them), cannot consistently be abolished — even though the supreme principle of their morality in trading with us is "Let the buyer beware." I shall not engage in the futile undertaking of lecturing to these people, in terms of morality, about cheating and honesty. Instead, I shall present my conjectures about the origin of this peculiar constitution (the constitution, namely, of a nation of merchants)."
> [Quoted in Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View 1785)
> 
> Curtis Bowman: An Anti-Semitic Observation From Kant_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) What year was the *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) founded?
> 
> 2) When was Ariel Sharon born and where?
> 
> 3) It was called the mandate for *Palestine.* True or false?
> 
> Let's not get caught up with opinion pieces (spin) and focus on the facts that we can verify.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. It was founded roughly a 100 years after Jews were referred as "Palestinians" and 102 years before any Arab identified as such.
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> 3. Yes, yet  Arabs declared to be officially Syrians, with allegiance to a foreign King from Mecca.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Ariel Sharon was a citizen of the British mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The British Mandate was not a place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet the Arabs declared they were Syrians, and declared their allegiance to a king from Mecca who helped the British conquer the land.
> 
> Ariel Sharon was a Palestine Mandate citizen, while the Arabs didn't want any part of Palestine to be independent, but a part of a bigger Arab empire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ariel Sharon was a Palestine Mandate citizen,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestine Mandate was not a place.
Click to expand...


A place doesn't have a citizenship, a govt. does.
He was indeed a Mandate citizen. 

Arabs declared it to be Syria, and themselves "Arabs" - no mention of anyone else.


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> .,.,.,.,.Palestine never existed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If believing this helps you sleep at night; by all means sleep well
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Jesus spoke of the cities of Israel, in the Bible

But no mention of palestine It didn’t exist


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always been a separate people from Bedouins, Arabians (the indigenous people of Jordan). Palestine has also been separate from Syria, being a separate administrative unit of the Ottoman Empire and a separate Roman Province. Palestinians that speak Arabic are not Arabians, no more than Tunisians and Egyptians are. The Palestinians, Muslim and Christian are descendants of the indigenous people of Palestine with an admixture of migratory peoples that came to the area from many places and who adopted Christianity first and then Islam as their religions. Jews that converted to Christianity especially after the adoption of Christianity as the Roman state religion in the late 4th century are also ancestors of the Palestinians. Note: Many Jews became Christians in the first 2-3 centuries after the birth of Christ. The first Christians were, in fact, practiced Judaism before becoming Christians.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank-you for the sanity. Is anyone here arguing these facts?
Click to expand...


Yes the Arabs themselves contradict it :

1st Palestine Arab Congress stated officially:

1 .* We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria* as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds.

2. The Declaration made by M. Pichon, Minister for Foreig Affairs for France, that France had rights in our country based on the desires and aspirations of the inhabitants has no foundation and we reject all the declarations made in his speech of 29th December 1918, as *our wishes and aspirations are only in Arab unity* and complete independence.

3. In view of the above we desire that one* district Southern Syria or Palestine should not be separated *from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.

4. In accordance with the rule laid down by President Wilson and approved by most of the Great Powers we consider that every promise or treaty concluded in respect of our country and its future as null and void and reject the same.

5. The Government of the country will apply for help to its friend Great Britain in case of need for the improvement and development of the country provided that this will not affect its independence and Arab unity in any way and will keep good relations with the Allied Powers. 78



http://content.ecf.org.il/files/M00661_FirstArabCongress1919ParisResolutionArabic.pdf

http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/db.php?eid=2535


----------



## abi

rylah said:


> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.


Thanks for posting.


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...


I don't think I ever wrote this sentence...Abi did You just _"compose"_ this in my name?


----------



## abi

rylah said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think I ever wrote this sentence...Abi did You just _"compose"_ this in my name?
Click to expand...

No, now stop trolling or at least know what you cut and paste, please.


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...


Wait a sec, so an Arabian king from Mecca expanding his empire into the Levant is not "foreign influence"?

*Faisal I bin Hussein bin Ali al-Hashemi*,


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
Click to expand...


Did You see any _"independent Palestine"_...or _"Palestinian nation"_ in that declaration?


----------



## abi

rylah said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You see any _"independent Palestine"_...or _"Palestinian nation"_ in that declaration?
Click to expand...

Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?

Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> and to be free from all foreign influence and protection.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You see any _"independent Palestine"_...or _"Palestinian nation"_ in that declaration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?
Click to expand...


*Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
*
You talking about a region that had a bunch of Jews and zero Muslims?


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Jesus walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible. 2000 years ago.



The land was comprised of thousands upon thousands upon thousands of fellow human beings. The Jewish population accounted for; maybe at best.,.,.a 1,000+/-

Jesus walked the land of Palestine as did the Romans & a clan of Israelites.

King James Bible
The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye _were_ the fewest of all people:

such is life
-
.


----------



## P F Tinmore

JoelT1 said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
Click to expand...

Interesting Israeli talking point.

Do you have any proof of that?


----------



## jamesduncan

Note: If the text is too small to read on your monitor,

Just hold down the [CTRL] key while rolling your mouse roller up or down.


----------



## jamesduncan

Your opinion of the following is needed & welcome up or down​
(Ezek 36:17 KJV)  _Son of man, __when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings__: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._

(Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel__, Thus saith the Lord GOD; __I do not this for your sakes__, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake__, which ye have profaned among the heathen,__ whither ye went._

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, __and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land__._

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good__, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._

(Ezek 36:32 KJV) Not_ for your sakes do I this__, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: __be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel__._

(Jer 24:9 KJV) _And I will deliver them to be removed__ into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, __to be a reproach and a proverb__, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them._

--- 
*King James Bible*

Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no _more_ remembered: for I the LORD have spoken _it_.

.._According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."_

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population

 comments welcome, up or down or sideways; your comments are welcome -


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Your opinion of the following is needed & welcome up or down​
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV)  _Son of man, __when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings__: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> 
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel__, Thus saith the Lord GOD; __I do not this for your sakes__, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake__, which ye have profaned among the heathen,__ whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, __and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land__._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good__, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) Not_ for your sakes do I this__, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: __be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel__._
> 
> (Jer 24:9 KJV) _And I will deliver them to be removed__ into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, __to be a reproach and a proverb__, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them._
> 
> ---
> *King James Bible*
> 
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no _more_ remembered: for I the LORD have spoken _it_.
> 
> .._According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."_
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population
> 
> comments welcome, up or down or sideways; your comments are welcome -


What does any of the above have to do with who the indigenous people of the Land of Israel/Ancient Canaan are?
Who are the descendants of the Hebrews/Israelites/Judeans?


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting Israeli talking point.
> 
> Do you have any proof of that?
Click to expand...


Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting Israeli talking point.
> 
> Do you have any proof of that?
Click to expand...


Jesus’ Jewish synagogue in Israel Israeli Archeologists Discover "Jesus' Synagogue"


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting Israeli talking point.
> 
> Do you have any proof of that?
Click to expand...


Jesus’ Israelite/Jewish geneology


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> To end my tirade on this subject the Jewish people flourished and multiplied exceedingly while living in Egypt. They would have stayed if Moses had not murdered someone in the streets. The pharaoh tried to capture Moses but fail because Moses and his followers fled.  (marking the exodus)
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_
> 
> _Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and _
> 
> Jesus, a devout Jew, walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestine* usually refers to:
> 
> 
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> State of Palestine, a modern _de jure_ sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> "Palestinian territories", or "*occupied Palestinian territories*", terms referring to the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip which are occupied or otherwise under the control of Israel
> Palestinian National Authority, also known as the _Palestinian Authority_, an interim self-government body established in 1994 to govern parts of the territories. Since 2013, the _Palestinian National Authority_ is officially referred to as the _State of Palestine_ by most international organisations.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
> 
> *Palestine, *area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> 
> *The term Palestine* has been associated variously and sometimes controversially with this small region, which some have asserted also includes Jordan. Both the geographic area designated by the name and the political status of it have changed over the course of some three millennia. The region (or at least a part of it) is also known as the Holy Land and is held sacred among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Since the 20th century it has been the object of conflicting claims of Jewish and Arab national movements, and the conflict has led to prolonged violence and, in several instances, open warfare.
> 
> The word *Palestine* derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century bce occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century ce in “Syria Palaestina,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after World War I and the end of rule by the Ottoman Empire, when it was adopted for one of the regions mandated to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the mandate included the territory east of the Jordan River now constituting the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of Palestine immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory.
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries. The perception of what constitutes Palestine’s eastern boundary has been especially fluid, although the boundary frequently has been perceived as lying east of the Jordan River, extending at times to the edge of the Arabian Desert. In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension reaching the Gulf of Aqaba.
> https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine
> 
> View attachment 160264
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The name Palestine has long been in popular use as a general term to denote a traditional region, but this usage does not imply precise boundaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine's international borders were defined by post WWI treaties. (The map you posted shows Palestine inside its international borders.) The people who normally lived in that territory became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, Britain’s name for the British Mandate, the platform for Israeli statehood, ceased to exist in 1948 with the state of Israel.
> 
> Palestine never existed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting Israeli talking point.
> 
> Do you have any proof of that?
Click to expand...


Arabs’ own Koran says Allah decreed Israel to Children of Israel. No mention of fake palestine and fakestinians


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible



There is NO bible verse that states Jesus King of the Jews.
The truth is Jesus was killed by the Romans on orders by local Rabbis because Jesus was preaching Old Testament verses that painted a bad light of the Jewish people and their relationship with the Lord.

There was no land, state called Israel at that time in history. Israel was a person & not a place (period)

Some people grasp at straws that are empty of substance & lie to themselves and once they hear their own lies they believe them as well.

Clearly Trump must be Israeli at heart because he mirrors this same falsehood.
-


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NO bible verse that states Jesus King of the Jews.
> The truth is Jesus was killed by the Romans on orders by local Rabbis because Jesus was preaching Old Testament verses that painted a bad light of the Jewish people and their relationship with the Lord.
> 
> There was no land, state called Israel at that time in history. Israel was a person & not a place (period)
> 
> Some people grasp at straws that are empty of substance & lie to themselves and once they hear their own lies they believe them as well.
> 
> Clearly Trump must be Israeli at heart because he mirrors this same falsehood.
> -
Click to expand...

The "King of the Jews" is a Christian belief, not a Jewish one.

What was the "Province of Judea" if there was no Jewish land, homeland, or whatever one wishes to call it?

The person Israel (Jacob) is one thing.
The Kingdom of Israel, where Kings David, Solomon and all the other Jewish ones reigned was a concrete place, with a capital, Jerusalem, which continued to be the capital of the Jewish kingdom until the Jews rioted and the Romans destroyed and later kept the Jews from entering it.


Your desire that the Jewish people and all of Israel, poof, disappeared into thin air after the Romans, is.......what exactly.

Modern day Christian, Atheist, I am so desperate for Salvation or Peace?  

Pick one, pick all, but the Jewish People have become sovereign over PART of their ancient homeland IN SPITE of the endless hatred towards Jews which has been spread, at first by the Christians, and later on by the Muslims.

The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.

NOW, they have sovereignty over part of it.

Justice at last.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NO bible verse that states Jesus King of the Jews.
> The truth is Jesus was killed by the Romans on orders by local Rabbis because Jesus was preaching Old Testament verses that painted a bad light of the Jewish people and their relationship with the Lord.
> 
> There was no land, state called Israel at that time in history. Israel was a person & not a place (period)
> 
> Some people grasp at straws that are empty of substance & lie to themselves and once they hear their own lies they believe them as well.
> 
> Clearly Trump must be Israeli at heart because he mirrors this same falsehood.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The "King of the Jews" is a Christian belief, not a Jewish one.
> 
> What was the "Province of Judea" if there was no Jewish land, homeland, or whatever one wishes to call it?
> 
> The person Israel (Jacob) is one thing.
> The Kingdom of Israel, where Kings David, Solomon and all the other Jewish ones reigned was a concrete place, with a capital, Jerusalem, which continued to be the capital of the Jewish kingdom until the Jews rioted and the Romans destroyed and later kept the Jews from entering it.
> 
> 
> Your desire that the Jewish people and all of Israel, poof, disappeared into thin air after the Romans, is.......what exactly.
> 
> Modern day Christian, Atheist, I am so desperate for Salvation or Peace?
> 
> Pick one, pick all, but the Jewish People have become sovereign over PART of their ancient homeland IN SPITE of the endless hatred towards Jews which has been spread, at first by the Christians, and later on by the Muslims.
> 
> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.
> 
> NOW, they have sovereignty over part of it.
> 
> Justice at last.
Click to expand...




Sixties Fan said:


> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.


So have a lot of other people. They were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.

There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NO bible verse that states Jesus King of the Jews.
> The truth is Jesus was killed by the Romans on orders by local Rabbis because Jesus was preaching Old Testament verses that painted a bad light of the Jewish people and their relationship with the Lord.
> 
> There was no land, state called Israel at that time in history. Israel was a person & not a place (period)
> 
> Some people grasp at straws that are empty of substance & lie to themselves and once they hear their own lies they believe them as well.
> 
> Clearly Trump must be Israeli at heart because he mirrors this same falsehood.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The "King of the Jews" is a Christian belief, not a Jewish one.
> 
> What was the "Province of Judea" if there was no Jewish land, homeland, or whatever one wishes to call it?
> 
> The person Israel (Jacob) is one thing.
> The Kingdom of Israel, where Kings David, Solomon and all the other Jewish ones reigned was a concrete place, with a capital, Jerusalem, which continued to be the capital of the Jewish kingdom until the Jews rioted and the Romans destroyed and later kept the Jews from entering it.
> 
> 
> Your desire that the Jewish people and all of Israel, poof, disappeared into thin air after the Romans, is.......what exactly.
> 
> Modern day Christian, Atheist, I am so desperate for Salvation or Peace?
> 
> Pick one, pick all, but the Jewish People have become sovereign over PART of their ancient homeland IN SPITE of the endless hatred towards Jews which has been spread, at first by the Christians, and later on by the Muslims.
> 
> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.
> 
> NOW, they have sovereignty over part of it.
> 
> Justice at last.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So have a lot of other people. They were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
Click to expand...


I was hoping that someone with your knowledge of international law could explain how that would preclude an exclusive Jewish State.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.



This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).

I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited. 

However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity. 

The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history. 

And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
Click to expand...

The original Palestinian state included Muslims, Christians, and Jews. The 1970 PLO proposed solution was a state that included all Muslims, Christians, and Jews.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The original Palestinian state included Muslims, Christians, and Jews. The 1970 PLO proposed solution was a state that included all Muslims, Christians, and Jews.



One of the actual Palestinian States INCLUDES Muslims, Christians and Jews.  The other actual Palestinian State does not.  

So which, would you say, is demonstrably a more effective example of cultural inclusiveness?


----------



## abi

Toddsterpatriot said:


> You talking about a region that had a bunch of Jews and zero Muslims?


There was no Islam at that point in history. That conversion was centuries later and most had already converted to Christianity prior to that. So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> You talking about a region that had a bunch of Jews and zero Muslims?
> 
> 
> 
> There was no Islam at that point in history. That conversion was centuries later and most had already converted to Christianity prior to that. So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
Click to expand...

*
So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
*
Excellent!


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The original Palestinian state included Muslims, Christians, and Jews. The 1970 PLO proposed solution was a state that included all Muslims, Christians, and Jews.
Click to expand...


The original “palestine” was merely a Roman name imposed on Jews about 2000 years ago, and about 500 years before Muslims existed. Jews’ land was named Israel. Jesus is King of Israel in the Bible.


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The original Palestinian state included Muslims, Christians, and Jews. The 1970 PLO proposed solution was a state that included all Muslims, Christians, and Jews.
Click to expand...



Muslims’ Koran refers to the land inhabited by Children of Israel. No mention of palestine, it didn’t exist


----------



## JoelT1

This eminent scholar of Roman history does not refer to “palestine” as it was an illegitimate foreign Roman name for indigenous Jews’ land


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews, King of Israel in the Bible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NO bible verse that states Jesus King of the Jews.
> The truth is Jesus was killed by the Romans on orders by local Rabbis because Jesus was preaching Old Testament verses that painted a bad light of the Jewish people and their relationship with the Lord.
> 
> There was no land, state called Israel at that time in history. Israel was a person & not a place (period)
> 
> Some people grasp at straws that are empty of substance & lie to themselves and once they hear their own lies they believe them as well.
> 
> Clearly Trump must be Israeli at heart because he mirrors this same falsehood.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The "King of the Jews" is a Christian belief, not a Jewish one.
> 
> What was the "Province of Judea" if there was no Jewish land, homeland, or whatever one wishes to call it?
> 
> The person Israel (Jacob) is one thing.
> The Kingdom of Israel, where Kings David, Solomon and all the other Jewish ones reigned was a concrete place, with a capital, Jerusalem, which continued to be the capital of the Jewish kingdom until the Jews rioted and the Romans destroyed and later kept the Jews from entering it.
> 
> 
> Your desire that the Jewish people and all of Israel, poof, disappeared into thin air after the Romans, is.......what exactly.
> 
> Modern day Christian, Atheist, I am so desperate for Salvation or Peace?
> 
> Pick one, pick all, but the Jewish People have become sovereign over PART of their ancient homeland IN SPITE of the endless hatred towards Jews which has been spread, at first by the Christians, and later on by the Muslims.
> 
> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.
> 
> NOW, they have sovereignty over part of it.
> 
> Justice at last.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people have always been present on their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So have a lot of other people. They were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
Click to expand...


Ancient Israel was a Jewish “state” Jews are the indigenous People of Israel dating back 3000+ years How many other countries are 3000+ years old? Ever hear of archaeology? The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Palestine originated as a name imposed on Jews by the Roman Empire, about 2000 years ago. Jews have a really long history in Israel

Ever hear of a Jewish rabbi named Jesus? He’s called King of Israel in the Bible Israeli Archeologists Discover "Jesus' Synagogue"


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.



I agree, the truth is the Jews never had a "state" or "country" in the past.  It was only out of remorse for the mass killing of Jews during WW2 that wrongly created the State of Israel.
The past is the past and nothing can change it but making excuses for creating this abomination is wrong as well.
Just look at what they have done since the creation of Israel~~
*
12 yr old boy SHOT DEAD in front of your eyes
Updated 9.48 p.m., 3rd Oct 2000*
http://www.themodernreligion.com/jihad/sniper.html

*The sad story of the never ending killing of Palestinian children by the Israeli Defense Force all in the name of self-defense.*
Murdering little girls is an Israeli sport it seems
*Gaza girl said killed*
By Amos Harel and Nir Hasson, Haaretz Correspondents, and Haaretz Service
Thu., October 28, 2004
*IDF troops shot and killed an 8-year-old Palestinian girl who was on her way to school in a Gaza Strip refugee camp *
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/494672.html

*UN officials: Girl hit by IDF gunfire in UN school in Gaza*
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent and AP
Tue., October 12, 2004 Tishrei 27, 5765
 An 11-year-old Palestinian girl was shot in the stomach and critically wounded by Israel Defense Forces gunfire *IDF troops fired two shots, one of the shots hit  *a fifth-grade student at the school. *Last month, a 10-year-old girl was killed by IDF gunfire while sitting at her desk at  the same school.*
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/487788.html

*United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) 7 September 2004* At 07:45 *10-year old Raghda Adnan Al-Assar was struck in the head* by Israeli  fire while sitting  at her desk in UNRWA's Elementary Girl's School On June 1 this year *two ten-year old children* in UNRWA's Al-Umariye Elementary Boys' School  in Rafah *were hit by a bullet from a Israeli tank*
In March 2003
*12-year old Hoda Darwish was hit in the head by a bullet* fired *Two 10 year-old schoolchildren were shot* in the al-Omaria school run by UNRWA in Rafah, *when an Israeli tank fired into their classroom.*

*Bullets fired from the tank flew through the classroom window*, hitting Mahmoud Hamad in the neck and Hisham al Habil in the head. The boys had not even been sitting by the windows but in the middle of the room.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/index.html

*Photos of a 12 year old palestinian boy being shot* by Israeli soldiers and the ambulance driver who tried to save him also being shot and killed.
http://www.palestine-net.com/misc/durra/

*Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and ead while buying candy with her friends.
5 June 2004*
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2785.shtml

*An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends

http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk

*Boy of 17, shot by Israeli soldiers, left bleeding overnight to die*
September 8, 2003
*The bullet ridden corpse* of Mohammad Abdullah Abu al-Husni, was found yesterday morning near the town of Jabaliya, where he lived in Gaza.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/left_to_die.htm

*Haneen, who was eight years old, had been shot twice in the head* by an Israeli soldier as she walked down the street in Khan Yunis refugee camp with her mother.
 28 July 2003
*She was coming down the street and ran to me and hugged me, crying*,

'Mother, mother'. *Two bullets hit her in the head*, one straight after the other.
She was still in my arms and she died."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1007051,00.html

*This boy was in his own house and an IDF soldier barges into the house and shoots him dead Mohammed a 7-year-old boy  fell dead, still clutching his piece of bread.*
Tuesday December 23, 2003
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1112055,00.html

*Israel Baby is born then dies*
September 11, 2003
*Birth and death at the checkpoint*
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/338937.html

*Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers*, one a 15-year-old boy
*Siege off Nablus
January, 2004*
*15 year old boy* who was *shot* while standing in front of his house. The sniper bulet hit Amjad *in the back. * He died on his way to the hospital. The second is  *Amer Kathym Arafat* who was also *shot in the back* by a sniper bullet. The third is *Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25*, who was also *shot in the back by a sniper.*
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm

*Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends. 
5 June 2004*
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2785.shtml

*15 year old boy* &  Amer Kathym & Rouhi Hazem Shouman all *shot in the back* by a sniper.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm

*An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends
http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk

*IDF shoots 13-year-old girl in the back with 20 bullets * and then the *IDF commander goes over to the girl and shoots her again* to make sure she was dead
 Tue., October 05, 2004
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485274.html
*“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport." *

http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html

http://tinyurl.com/8rmn2g3


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Ever hear of a Jewish rabbi named Jesus? He’s called King of Israel in the Bible Israeli Archeologists Discover "Jesus' Synagogue"



I don't believe Jesus would spit on Christians but there are Rabbi's who do.

*Rabbi David Rosen* is a talented and respected rabbi, originally from the UK.
Since in some circles it seems to be *more encouraged to spit on Christian clergymen* than build bridges (this week's events in the Old City), Rabbi Rosen is unpopular with Eskin and his ilk.
*Rabbi David Rosen*

It has been Jerusalem's dirty little secret for decades: * Orthodox yeshiva students and other Jewish residents vandalizing churches and spitting on Christian clergyman* as they walk along the narrow, ancient stone streets of the Old City.
http://tinyurl.com/v7dbq

*Christians say ultra-Orthodox Jewish students spit at them* or at the ground when they pass. There have *also been acts of vandalism against statues of the Virgin Mary.* 
*Ultra-orthodox Jews 'must stop religious abuse'*

 You cannot find one incident where Muslims spit on Christians but you can find countless incidents where Orthodox Jews spit on Christians. Has the American press ever covered the above-?

Just google "spiting on Christians" & then come back and tell me what you found.

-


----------



## JoelT1

Rabbi Jesus King of Israel in the Bible. No mention of palestine It didn’t exist


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ever hear of a Jewish rabbi named Jesus? He’s called King of Israel in the Bible Israeli Archeologists Discover "Jesus' Synagogue"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe Jesus would spit on Christians but there are Rabbi's who do.
> 
> *Rabbi David Rosen* is a talented and respected rabbi, originally from the UK.
> Since in some circles it seems to be *more encouraged to spit on Christian clergymen* than build bridges (this week's events in the Old City), Rabbi Rosen is unpopular with Eskin and his ilk.
> *Rabbi David Rosen*
> 
> It has been Jerusalem's dirty little secret for decades: * Orthodox yeshiva students and other Jewish residents vandalizing churches and spitting on Christian clergyman* as they walk along the narrow, ancient stone streets of the Old City.
> http://tinyurl.com/v7dbq
> 
> *Christians say ultra-Orthodox Jewish students spit at them* or at the ground when they pass. There have *also been acts of vandalism against statues of the Virgin Mary.
> Ultra-orthodox Jews 'must stop religious abuse'*
> 
> You cannot find one incident where Muslims spit on Christians but you can find countless incidents where Orthodox Jews spit on Christians. Has the American press ever covered the above-?
> 
> Just google "spiting on Christians" & then come back and tell me what you found.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Most of this posting is in the wrong thread.
Discuss Jews not being indigenous of Ancient Canaan and show evidence of it.

As far as Muslim treatment of Christians on the land, one can look at the 1300 years before WWI, or one can look at more recent history where Christians are being made to leave in droves and are going to Israel.  Why would they choose Israel is the Jews there  are as bad as you keep trying to make them?
Muslims have done much more than just spit at Christians, just ask the Copt Christians about it.

Until 1993, under Israeli government, Bethlehem was 85% Arab Christians.  After the PA took over it is now 15%.
(Go ahead, blame it on Israel )

The "spitting on Christians" are Israeli extremists, and not the majority of Israeli Jews.

Which is nothing compared to what Christians did to Jews for 1700 years of Christian history in Europe and even when they invaded the land of Israel during the Crusades.

You are a Denialist.   It is a sick ideology which does nothing but obliterate the truth where any Jew or Jewish History is concerned.
For Christian Denialists like yourself, Jews have no right to exist.
They must convert or die, in order to bring the second coming, or some such thing.

Hitting, hurting, killing Jews is nothing but a sport to a denialist.

Who are the Indigenous People to the Land of Israel?

The Jews, who have a recorded history on the land, thanks to all the invaders they had to deal with and who never denied they existed.  
On the contrary, even Muslims in the Quran acknowledge that the Land of Israel belongs to the Jews.  No mention of any Arab Palestinians, or a country called Palestine.

Deal with it


----------



## JoelT1

Jesus, Joseph and Mary, all Jews, traveled in the land of Israel, in the Bible. No mention of palestine It didn’t exist.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
Click to expand...

Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
Click to expand...

Pity you do not apply the same to Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.
Only ONE people have sovereignty over those lands.  Muslims.
Arabs.  With no non Muslims allowed residence in them.

HYPOCRYTE!!!!

The Jewish Nation has every right to have Sovereignty over their own ancient land, with all the freedoms which go to all non Jews  as it happens in every DEMOCRATIC country.

HYPOCRYTE  !!!!


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.



I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled. 

You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews. 

And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan. 

If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pity you do not apply the same to Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.
> Only ONE people have sovereignty over those lands.  Muslims.
> Arabs.  With no non Muslims allowed residence in them.
> 
> HYPOCRYTE!!!!
> 
> The Jewish Nation has every right to have Sovereignty over their own ancient land, with all the freedoms which go to all non Jews  as it happens in every DEMOCRATIC country.
> 
> HYPOCRYTE  !!!!
Click to expand...

Israel has land?

Do you have any proof of that?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.


Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is both right and wrong.  (Mostly wrong).
> 
> I agree that there is no historic precedence for an indigenous peoples reconstituting their sovereignty in the form of a State anywhere in the world.  This does not, however, suggest that such a reconstitution is not just or moral or desirable or nor that it is prohibited.
> 
> However, there are numerous examples of self-determination and sovereignty established due the dissolution of Empires or other national entities with multiple ethnic or cultural groups.  The most obvious examples are Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan.  But also applies to places like Catalonia.  The basic assumption of right with respect to reconstituting a national homeland for the Catalan people in the form of what is now called a State is two-fold:  1.  On the strength of their cultural distinction as a people.  2.  On the basis of their historic national identity.
> 
> The problem with this chain of argument from you is that it:  1.  assumes that historic precedence is somehow REQUIRED for the formation of a nation.  It is not.  And 3.  denies the reality of Jewish history.
> 
> And, of course, there is no historic precedence for an Arab Palestinian state either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pity you do not apply the same to Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.
> Only ONE people have sovereignty over those lands.  Muslims.
> Arabs.  With no non Muslims allowed residence in them.
> 
> HYPOCRYTE!!!!
> 
> The Jewish Nation has every right to have Sovereignty over their own ancient land, with all the freedoms which go to all non Jews  as it happens in every DEMOCRATIC country.
> 
> HYPOCRYTE  !!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel has land?
> 
> Do you have any proof of that?
Click to expand...



Prove Jordan has land. Or France.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
Click to expand...



You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
Click to expand...

But not in their homeland.


----------



## JoelT1

View attachment 160796


P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews, the indigenous population, about 2000 years ago. No such things as palestinians


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
Click to expand...


Jews were originally called palestinians, by the British who made up the word. No such things as palestinians


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
Click to expand...


Israel is, of course, Jews’ Homeland. Ever hear of a Jewish rabbi named Jesus? His synagogue in Israel Israeli Archeologists Discover "Jesus' Synagogue"


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
Click to expand...


Anyone with a functioning brain knows that (Saudi) Arabia is Arabs’ homeland.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> But not in their homeland.



Of course in their homeland.  I'm not suggesting Poland.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

JoelT1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is that you have the racist view that "one people" should have sovereignty. Palestine had been a mult-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic place for centuries. To say that one group is superior and run the show for their own benefit is the root of the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Anyone with a functioning brain knows that (Saudi) Arabia is Arabs’ homeland.
Click to expand...



They have 22 or 23 homelands.  How many homelands do the Arabs need?


----------



## JoelT1

ForeverYoung436 said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government. There are currently nearly 200 countries in the world and nearly all of them are based on the sovereignty of a specific peoples. And more people - like the Catalans - are working toward it. Surely, you are not suggesting they are ALL racist and believe themselves superior. Surely you are not suggesting they ALL be dismantled.
> 
> You just keep confirming that the root of the problem is antisemitism. It's a fundamental belief that it's fine for the Catalans or the Tibetans or the Jordanians to have a nation but not for the Jews.
> 
> And "Palestine" IS multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic in all of the places under Jewish sovereignty. ONLY in the places of Jewish sovereignty. In the places under Arab sovereignty there is only one ethnicity and for the most part one religion. So your comments should actually be directed to the PA, Hamas and Jordan.
> 
> If you want to address racist views why don't you start with the simple act of demanding ALL people have access to holy places?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hold a view that all peoples who wish it should have sovereignty, self-determination and independence. It's NORMAL. It is the basis for our world's system of government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Anyone with a functioning brain knows that (Saudi) Arabia is Arabs’ homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They have 22 or 23 homelands.  How many homelands do the Arabs need?
Click to expand...


Arab palestine? No p in Arabic


----------



## ForeverYoung436

JoelT1 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Except for the Palestinians. They got the boot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Anyone with a functioning brain knows that (Saudi) Arabia is Arabs’ homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They have 22 or 23 homelands.  How many homelands do the Arabs need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab palestine? No p in Arabic
Click to expand...



They can't even pronounce the name of what they claim is their own country!  How fake is that?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course in their homeland.  I'm not suggesting Poland.
Click to expand...

You are not suggesting Jaffa.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course in their homeland.  I'm not suggesting Poland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
Click to expand...

ALL of Israel.
Feel free to return to where your ancestors came from.
I won't mind


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course in their homeland.  I'm not suggesting Poland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ALL of Israel.
> Feel free to return to where your ancestors came from.
> I won't mind
Click to expand...



Do you mean they should return to Arabia?  I agree.  Arabs to Arabia, and Jews to Judea.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You are not suggesting Jaffa.



Where exactly do you think I am suggesting?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where exactly do you think I am suggesting?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?


----------



## JoelT1

ForeverYoung436 said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know I support Arab Palestine as well as Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> But not in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Anyone with a functioning brain knows that (Saudi) Arabia is Arabs’ homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They have 22 or 23 homelands.  How many homelands do the Arabs need?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab palestine? No p in Arabic
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine referred to ancient Philistines, who were Greek. Maybe, Arabs descend from Gr
> 
> They can't even pronounce the name of what they claim is their own country!  How fake is that?
Click to expand...




P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where exactly do you think I am suggesting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews, about 2000 years ago. So, Jews are really palestinians and palestine is Jews’ home


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where exactly do you think I am suggesting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?
Click to expand...

The ARAB Palestinians keep demanding that the Jews return to where they came from.
The Jews have returned to where they came from.

Now....is the time for the Arabs, Palestinians or otherwise, to follow their own advise and RETURN to where THEY came from.

ARABIA


----------



## JoelT1

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not suggesting Jaffa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where exactly do you think I am suggesting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?
Click to expand...



Um, Arabs’ homeland is (Saudi) Arabia, not Israel Homeland of the Jewish People

Anyone with a functioning brain knows these basic facts


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> .,.,.,Prove Jordan has land. Or France.



Before entering the Land of Oz; I ask you, Shusha--- Show readers a map of "Israel" prior to 1947ad.
.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,

-


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> .,.,.,Prove Jordan has land. Or France.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before entering the Land of Oz; I ask you, Shusha--- Show readers a map of "Israel" prior to 1947ad.
> .,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Ancient Israel verified by archaeology The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Palestine never existed


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> Now....is the time for the Arabs, Palestinians or otherwise, to follow their own advise and RETURN to where THEY came from. ARABIA



You would think that the great Jewish leaders would be buried in their true homeland and maybe they were but having said that this place WAS NOT the land of "Israel"

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, _*which is beyond Jordan*_, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.
_
Beyond the Jorden river is not the claimed land of Israel​-​


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. Houses of Ancient Israel

Palestine never existed


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now....is the time for the Arabs, Palestinians or otherwise, to follow their own advise and RETURN to where THEY came from. ARABIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You would think that the great Jewish leaders would be buried in their true homeland and maybe they were but having said that this place WAS NOT the land of "Israel"
> 
> Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_
> 
> Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_
> 
> Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*
> 
> Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, _*which is beyond Jordan*_, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father.
> _
> Beyond the Jorden river is not the claimed land of Israel​-​
Click to expand...

The Land of Israel is NOT the Land of the Arabs, aka, Palestinians.

Arabian Peninsula is their ancient homeland where all of their Arab forefathers and mothers are buried.

And THAT, includes Mohammad himself.

Salam


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> Most of this posting is in the wrong thread. Discuss Jews not being indigenous of Ancient Canaan and show evidence of it.



(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.

(Gen 47:4 KJV)  They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the famine is sore in the land of Canaan: now therefore, we pray thee, let thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen.

(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:

(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.

(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.

The Jews left everything behind, abandoning all they had and "moved" to Egypt where they prospered and multiplied 
-


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed

Surprising Mosaics Revealed in Ancient Synagogue in Israel


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> .,.,.,Prove Jordan has land. Or France.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before entering the Land of Oz; I ask you, Shusha--- Show readers a map of "Israel" prior to 1947ad.
> .,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,.,.,.,waiting.,.,.waiting.,,..,.,.waiting.,.,..,.,
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Your point is....what?

That States are prohibited from existing unless one can produce a map prior to (insert number here)?  There is plenty of evidence of a national entity belonging to the Jewish people in antiquity.  Denying that is just plain silly.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most of this posting is in the wrong thread. Discuss Jews not being indigenous of Ancient Canaan and show evidence of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.
> 
> (Gen 47:4 KJV)  They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the famine is sore in the land of Canaan: now therefore, we pray thee, let thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen.
> 
> (Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:
> 
> (Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.
> 
> (Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.
> 
> The Jews left everything behind, abandoning all they had and "moved" to Egypt where they prospered and multiplied
> -
Click to expand...



They didn't prosper for long because they were then enslaved.  But they eventually returned to Canaan.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?



Are you suggesting that the Jewish people return to their home?  

Look, I think that both the Arab Palestinians should get (another) national home.  And I think Israel should have a national home.  You disagree with that because, as you stated, nations should not be based on peoplehood and no nation should be built around a peoples or their right to self-determination, sovereignty and independence.  

Which means that the Arab Palestinians have NO RIGHT to sovereignty.  You make the rules -- you live with them.


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed

Bible Scenes Uncovered in Ruins of Ancient Synagogue


----------



## jamesduncan

The Jews of the time buried their great leaders in their own land, or one would presume===

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite, _

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, _*which is beyond Jordan*_, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

_Genesis 50:13For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and_ buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.

Genesis 50:14 Af_ter burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._

The "land of Israel" was not mentioned because no such place existed at the time. The Jews were wonderers & had no homeland of their won.

such is life -


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed


----------



## montelatici

The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.



Palestine: Fake Roman name for Jews’ land. Palestine never existed


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.



Birdbrain: Jesus is King of Israel in the Bible. No mention of fake palestine, it didn’t exist


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.



Birdbrain: Was Jesus, called King of the Jews in the Bible, European? Hahaha!


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.



Unfortunately for you, you can’t monetize being an ignoramus on a messageboard You could make a fortune! LOL


----------



## Sixties Fan

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.


The Arabs of Arabia are 100% invaders.
The Hashemites are invaders.
The Husseinis are invaders.

Jews who left the land of Israel to live in Europe or anywhere else are the same as Hawaiians who go to live in Europe.

The Jews are indigenous of the Land of Israel .

The Hawaiians are indigenous of Hawaii.


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> The Jews that invaded Palestine were Europeans.



Birdbrain: Did Jesus, a devout Jew, establish his Jewish synagogue in Israel after arriving from Europe? LOLOL!  Synagogue - Magdala


----------



## abi

Toddsterpatriot said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> You talking about a region that had a bunch of Jews and zero Muslims?
> 
> 
> 
> There was no Islam at that point in history. That conversion was centuries later and most had already converted to Christianity prior to that. So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *
> So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
> *
> Excellent!
Click to expand...

Who ever argued that there weren't a bunch of Jews in Palestine?


----------



## frigidweirdo

Shusha said:


> Point 1.  "Referred to the area as Palestine".  Sure.  It has been referred to as a bunch of things over the past several thousand years.  Including Israel, Judea and Samaria.  The fact that a territory is referenced by a name does not grant sovereignty or create a state.  For example, there is a territory in the US called Appalachia.  It has been called that for hundreds of years.  Does that make it a State?  Does that reference give the people of Appalachia some sort of rights to sovereignty?  Of course not.  But what if the people of Appalachia wanted independence and self-determination and sovereignty?  How would that happen?  Just by calling themselves Appalachians?  Or does something else have to happen?
> 
> Point 2.  JC was NOT a Palestinian any more than Moses was an Ottoman.
> 
> Point 3.  She is a hypocrite when talks about denial of the existence of a people.  See point 2.  By labelling JC a Palestinian she is denying the reality of the time and the existence of his people and the sovereignty of the place he was living at the time.



No, power makes sovereignty, and often power comes from people trying to make their claim better than others.

Jesus wasn't Palestinian, he was a ROMAN I would guess, seeing as he lived under the Roman Empire. But does that mean that a Scottish person isn't Scottish because they live in the United Kingdom?


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed. 

Gallery: WHC 2015 – Beth She’arim Necropolis - a Landmark of Jewish Revival (Israel)


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> You talking about a region that had a bunch of Jews and zero Muslims?
> 
> 
> 
> There was no Islam at that point in history. That conversion was centuries later and most had already converted to Christianity prior to that. So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *
> So yes, there were a bunch of Jews in Palestine.
> *
> Excellent!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who ever argued that there weren't a bunch of Jews in Palestine?
Click to expand...


I thought the Muslim argument for a Jew free "Palestine" was that Jews were never there?
You know, that's why Muslims destroy Jewish artifacts they excavate on the Dome of the Rock, right?


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> [QUOTE="jThat States are prohibited from existing unless one can produce a map prior to (insert number here)?


----------



## jamesduncan

[QUOTE="Shusha, post: 18609716, member: 56341]That States are prohibited from existing unless one can produce a map prior to (insert number here)?[/QUOTE]

The "map" proves their existence. Without it; there is nothing to prove.


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> I would not go so far back as antiquity but I do agree the Jewish people go way back in history. They were; in ancient times a nomadic people living on the land.




We agree that the Jewish people go "way back in history" to ancient times and lived on that land.  

So what is your point in all this?  That people who go way back in history on a specific territory are prohibited from reconstituting their presence there?


----------



## jamesduncan

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That States are prohibited from existing unless one can produce a map prior to (insert number here)?
Click to expand...


----------



## jamesduncan

Look & look harder, no HARDER and still no land of Israel appears


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Look & look harder, no HARDER and still no land of Israel appears
> 
> View attachment 161083


And now... be honest and show the link to it so that we can see which year it is .


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people return to their home?
> 
> Look, I think that both the Arab Palestinians should get (another) national home.  And I think Israel should have a national home.  You disagree with that because, as you stated, nations should not be based on peoplehood and no nation should be built around a peoples or their right to self-determination, sovereignty and independence.
> 
> Which means that the Arab Palestinians have NO RIGHT to sovereignty.  You make the rules -- you live with them.
Click to expand...

The Palestinian citizens should have first dibs on Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Palestinians return to their homes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people return to their home?
> 
> Look, I think that both the Arab Palestinians should get (another) national home.  And I think Israel should have a national home.  You disagree with that because, as you stated, nations should not be based on peoplehood and no nation should be built around a peoples or their right to self-determination, sovereignty and independence.
> 
> Which means that the Arab Palestinians have NO RIGHT to sovereignty.  You make the rules -- you live with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian citizens should have first dibs on Palestine.
Click to expand...

Those would be the Palestinian Jews, otherwise  previously known as Judeans, and previously knows as Israelites.

Thank you


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look & look harder, no HARDER and still no land of Israel appears
> 
> View attachment 161083
> 
> 
> 
> And now... be honest and show the link to it so that we can see which year it is .
Click to expand...


Look Hard at these maps of old and NO Israel is found

*ancient egypt map - Google Search
*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not go so far back as antiquity but I do agree the Jewish people go way back in history. They were; in ancient times a nomadic people living on the land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We agree that the Jewish people go "way back in history" to ancient times and lived on that land.
> 
> So what is your point in all this?  That people who go way back in history on a specific territory are prohibited from reconstituting their presence there?
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> That people who go way back in history on a specific territory are prohibited from reconstituting their presence there?


That isn't the question.


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> Those would be the Palestinian Jews, otherwise  previously known as Judeans, and previously knows as Israelites.
> 
> Thank you



Look he recognizes "Palestine" as in "Palestinian Jews"

Thank you -


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look & look harder, no HARDER and still no land of Israel appears
> 
> View attachment 161083
> 
> 
> 
> And now... be honest and show the link to it so that we can see which year it is .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Look dard at these maps of old and NO Israel is found
> 
> *ancient egypt map - Google Search*
Click to expand...

That is because it is ANCIENT EGYPT, which has a long history, and that map is BEFORE the Nation of Israel came to exist.

There are so many other maps from the time, 3000 years ago, when Israel came to be.

Let us see our brave friend post one of them. 



DUH   !!!!!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those would be the Palestinian Jews, otherwise  previously known as Judeans, and previously knows as Israelites.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look he recognizes "Palestine" as in "Palestinian Jews"
> 
> Thank you -
Click to expand...

The only Palestinian Jews to exist were during the Mandate for Palestine post 1920.

Before that, they were known as Jews, Judeans, Israelites.

And the Arabs, were known as Arabs, and almost non existent before the Arab invasion of the 7th Century CE.


----------



## jamesduncan

Below are maps of ancient Palestine. Look hard, look wide, look deep and yet NO land of Israel exists

*ancient palestine - Google Search

-*


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> There are so many other maps from the time, 3000 years ago, when Israel came to be. Let us see our brave friend post one of them.



I have produced maps upon maps of Egypt of old & Palestine of old and yet your have produces nothing. I repeat; NOTHING

my patience is running out. Either produce the maps or concede no place called Israel existed.
The choice is your to make

-


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> jamesduncan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those would be the Palestinian Jews, otherwise  previously known as Judeans, and previously knows as Israelites.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look he recognizes "Palestine" as in "Palestinian Jews"
> 
> Thank you -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The only Palestinian Jews to exist were during the Mandate for Palestine post 1920.
> 
> Before that, they were known as Jews, Judeans, Israelites.
> 
> And the Arabs, were known as Arabs, and almost non existent before the Arab invasion of the 7th Century CE.
Click to expand...


bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,bla, bla,


----------



## jamesduncan

Ok, you win. I concede Jews were indigenous to Palestine.

Ok, you win. I concede Palestinians were indigenous to Palestine.

Ok, you win. I concede Arabs were indigenous to Palestine.

I leave you with that



bye -


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Ok, you win. I concede Jews were indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> Ok, you win. I concede Palestinians were indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> Ok, you win. I concede Arabs were indigenous to Palestine.
> 
> I leave you with that
> 
> 
> 
> bye -


Sad


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are so many other maps from the time, 3000 years ago, when Israel came to be. Let us see our brave friend post one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have produced maps upon maps of Egypt of old & Palestine of old and yet your have produces nothing. I repeat; NOTHING
> 
> my patience is running out. Either produce the maps or concede no place called Israel existed.
> The choice is your to make
> 
> -
Click to expand...



Your fixation on maps is the problem.  It is easy enough to find a map of ancient Israel.  Actually several, depending on the time frame in question.  Certainly as easy as it is to find a map of ancient Egypt.  The fact that someone can draw a map of a certain cultural group at a specific point in time is in no way indicative of current rights of indigenous populations.  

So what is your point?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinian citizens should have first dibs on Palestine.



But that would depend on how you define "Palestinian citizens" and whether or not you think the removal of a people from their ancestral and historical homeland negates their rights.


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> .,.,.,It is easy enough to find a map of ancient Israel.  Actually several, depending on the time frame in question.So what is your point?



*Judea* or *Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiː.ə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎‎, Standard _Yəhuda_, Tiberian _Yəhûḏāh_, Greek: Ἰουδαία, _Ioudaía_; Latin: _Iūdaea_, Arabic: يهودا‎‎, _Yahudia_) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of Canaan-Israel. The name originates from the Hebrew name "Yehudah", a son of the Jewish patriarch Jacob/Israel, and Yehudah's progeny forming the biblical Israelite tribe of Judah (Yehudah) and later the associated Kingdom of Judah, which the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia dates from 934 until 586 BCE.[2] The name of the region continued to be incorporated through the Babylonian conquest, Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods as Yehud, Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Judea, and consequently Herodian Judea and Roman Judea, respectively.

As a consequence of the Bar Kokhba revolt, in 135 CE the region was renamed and merged with Roman Syria to form _Syria Palaestina_ by the victorious Roman Emperor Hadrian. A large part of Judea was included in Jordanian West Bank between 1948 and 1967 (i.e., the "West Bank" of the Kingdom of Jordan).[3][4] The term _Judea_ as a geographical term was revived by the Israeli government in the 20th century as part of the Israeli administrative district name Judea and Samaria Area for the territory generally referred to as the West Bank.[5]


----------



## jamesduncan

25And you, *profane wicked prince of Israel*, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end,

26Thus says the Lord GOD; Remove the turban, and take off the crown: this shall not remain the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.

27I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he comes whose right it is; and I will give it to him.

31And I will pour out my indignation upon you, I will blow against you in the fire of my wrath, and deliver you into the hand of brutal men, skilful to destroy.

32You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the midst of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.

*According to a 2002 study by the *Jewish Agency*, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population

*The end is near unless they change their ways*​


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> 25And you, *profane wicked prince of Israel*, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end,
> 
> 26Thus says the Lord GOD; Remove the turban, and take off the crown: this shall not remain the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.
> 
> 27I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he comes whose right it is; and I will give it to him.
> 
> 31And I will pour out my indignation upon you, I will blow against you in the fire of my wrath, and deliver you into the hand of brutal men, skilful to destroy.
> 
> 32You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the midst of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.
> 
> *According to a 2002 study by the *Jewish Agency*, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population
> 
> *The end is near unless they change their ways*​


What do your Christian filled two posts have to do with who is indigenous to the Land of Israel where the Nation of Israel was founded and flourished for at least a thousand years ?

1600 years before there was an Arab invasion, which is where all the Arab Palestinian ancestors come from?


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> .,.,.,It is easy enough to find a map of ancient Israel.  Actually several, depending on the time frame in question.So what is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Judea* or *Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiː.ə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎‎, Standard _Yəhuda_, Tiberian _Yəhûḏāh_, Greek: Ἰουδαία, _Ioudaía_; Latin: _Iūdaea_, Arabic: يهودا‎‎, _Yahudia_) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of Canaan-Israel. The name originates from the Hebrew name "Yehudah", a son of the Jewish patriarch Jacob/Israel, and Yehudah's progeny forming the biblical Israelite tribe of Judah (Yehudah) and later the associated Kingdom of Judah, which the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia dates from 934 until 586 BCE.[2] The name of the region continued to be incorporated through the Babylonian conquest, Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods as Yehud, Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Judea, and consequently Herodian Judea and Roman Judea, respectively.
> 
> As a consequence of the Bar Kokhba revolt, in 135 CE the region was renamed and merged with Roman Syria to form _Syria Palaestina_ by the victorious Roman Emperor Hadrian. A large part of Judea was included in Jordanian West Bank between 1948 and 1967 (i.e., the "West Bank" of the Kingdom of Jordan).[3][4] The term _Judea_ as a geographical term was revived by the Israeli government in the 20th century as part of the Israeli administrative district name Judea and Samaria Area for the territory generally referred to as the West Bank.[5]
> 
> View attachment 161098
Click to expand...



Oh lookie  a map.  

So what is your point?


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> *The end is near unless they change their ways*​



Oh. THERE's your point. Same old antisemitic Xtian canard we've heard for two thousand years.

Yawn.


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Look & look harder, no HARDER and still no land of Israel appears
> 
> View attachment 161083



Ancient Israel The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Ancient Israel Merneptah Stele

Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture

Jesus King of Israel John 12:12 - 12:13

Jesus in the land of Israel Matthew 2:19 - 2:21

Jesus in the cities of Israel MATTHEW 10:23 KJV "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not..."

Palestine doesn’t appear in archaeology or the Bible, it never existed


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> 25And you, *profane wicked prince of Israel*, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end,
> 
> 26Thus says the Lord GOD; Remove the turban, and take off the crown: this shall not remain the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.
> 
> 27I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he comes whose right it is; and I will give it to him.
> 
> 31And I will pour out my indignation upon you, I will blow against you in the fire of my wrath, and deliver you into the hand of brutal men, skilful to destroy.
> 
> 32You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the midst of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.
> 
> *According to a 2002 study by the *Jewish Agency*, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population
> 
> *The end is near unless they change their ways*​



Rabbi Jesus King of the Jews


----------



## jamesduncan

> "JoelT1, post: 18618246, member: 66751"]Rabbi Jesus King of the Jews



Amazing, it was the Rabbi's that convinced the Romans to crucify Jesus who was at the time preaching verses from the Old Testament  showing the bad things the Jews were doing at the time.
It is befitting that the 6th Commandment states
*6 *_“You shall not murder._
And they did it anyway.

-


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Rabbi Jesus King of the Jews



Amazing, it was the Rabbi's that convinced the Romans to crucify Jesus who was at the time preaching verses from the Old Testament  showing the bad things the Jews did at the time.
It is befitting that the 6th Commandment states
*6 *_“You shall not murder._

And they did it anyway.

-


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> Oh. THERE's your point. Same old antisemitic Xtian canard we've heard for two thousand years.
> 
> Yawn.



When you folks have nothing to say they always resort to calling the accuser of anti-Semitism.

I guess I should take this as a compliment

-


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> Oh lookie  a map.
> 
> So what is your point?



The map is a fake​
-


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> What do your Christian filled two posts have to do with who is indigenous to the Land of Israel?



Nothing. I will see if I can delete the post



Sixties Fan said:


> where the Nation of Israel was founded and flourished for at least a thousand years ??



Wrong; the only place the Jews flourished was in Egypt.



Sixties Fan said:


> 1600 years before there was an Arab invasion, which is where all the Arab Palestinian ancestors come from?



There was no Arab invasion. The Arabs were always there and they remain there today.


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do your Christian filled two posts have to do with who is indigenous to the Land of Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing. I will see if I can delete the post
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> where the Nation of Israel was founded and flourished for at least a thousand years ??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong; the only place the Jews flourished was in Egypt.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1600 years before there was an Arab invasion, which is where all the Arab Palestinian ancestors come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was no Arab invasion. The Arabs were always there and they remain there today.
Click to expand...

Fascinating. So.......Arabia is not Arabia and the Arab clans/tribes do not come from there.

Because you say so.

And the ONLY place the Hebrews flourished, and apparently never came to be known as Israelites later on anywhere else.....was in Egypt.

So, are the descendants of these Hebrews who flourished ONLY in Egypt still there?

Are you saying that the Hebrews were indigenous of Egypt?


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh. THERE's your point. Same old antisemitic Xtian canard we've heard for two thousand years.
> 
> Yawn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you folks have nothing to say they always resort to calling the accuser of anti-Semitism.
> 
> I guess I should take this as a compliment
> 
> -
Click to expand...



Hardly. People are accused (accurately) of being antisemitic when they begin posting antisemitic canards and thousands year old demonizations of the Jews. 

You've used two in just your last couple posts:  that Jews must change their wicked ways and the the Jews caused the death of JC. 

That last seems especially ridiculous to me. Imagine a Xtian theology where JC didn't die and bring salvation.


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh lookie  a map.
> 
> So what is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The map is a fake​
> -
Click to expand...


The map of Judea at the first century CE is fake?  As in it never happened?

Good grief.


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> Wrong; the only place the Jews flourished was in Egypt



I take this to mean that the only way for Jews to flourish is to be slaves. Lovely.


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rabbi Jesus King of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing, it was the Rabbi's that convinced the Romans to crucify Jesus who was at the time preaching verses from the Old Testament  showing the bad things the Jews did at the time.
> It is befitting that the 6th Commandment states
> *6 *_“You shall not murder._
> 
> And they did it anyway.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


You’re allowed to be ignorant.

Romans crucified Jesus for political treason. 

Now, you know.


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> I take this to mean that the only way for Jews to flourish is to be slaves. Lovely.



(Gen 42:6 KJV)  And Joseph was the governor over the land, and he it was that sold to all the people of the land:

(Gen 42:25 KJV)  Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:

(Gen 45:20 KJV)  Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.

(Gen 45:21 KJV)  And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.

(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [*ISRAEL*] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.

(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.

(Gen 47:4 KJV)  They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the famine is sore in the land of Canaan: now therefore, we pray thee, let thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen.

(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:

(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.

(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.

Biblically speaking it is clear that they were not slaves. The slave excuse in now debunked



Sixties Fan said:


> So, are the descendants of these Hebrews who flourished ONLY in Egypt still there?.



NO, they ran away after Moses murders a man in the streets

_And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?_

_Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well._

-


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed.


----------



## jamesduncan

Shusha said:


> Hardly. People are accused (accurately) of being antisemitic when they begin posting antisemitic canards and thousands year old demonizations of the Jews.



I know a lot of Jews. Many are actors on TV and the movies and I enjoy what I see. In fact, I was circumcised when I was a baby. I understand that this is a Jewish tradition which makes me believe I am Jewish too. If my parents were alive I would ask them, but they are not. Again I have nothing against Jews but I do dislike liars and ones who twist the truth for self gain.


----------



## JoelT1

Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed
Rare Noah’s Ark Mosaic Discovered at Ancient Israeli Synagogue


----------



## abi

Look who reported Israel's birth:


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Look who reported Israel's birth:



Cool!
Do you have a list of the Muslim owners?
An example of Palestinian currency?
A list of Palestinian government officials?


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed
> 
> 
> View attachment 160903



You can make things up all day long and still, five lies later it's still a lie. "Israel" never existed. The Jews of old were nomadic sheep herders with no home of their own. They got there "Land of Israel" after WW2 because the Europeans didn't want them in their country and the Palestinians could not defend themselves so they said, why not dump them there-?

And so it was done

My bet is JoilT1 doesn't live there and hasn't even visited the place.
In some places they call this a back seat driver with three speeding tickets

-


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous People of Israel. And palestine never existed
> 
> 
> View attachment 160903
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can make things up all day long and still, five lies later it's still a lie. "Israel" never existed. The Jews of old were nomadic sheep herders with no home of their own. They got there "Land of Israel" after WW2 because the Europeans didn't want them in their country and the Palestinians could not defend themselves so they said, why not dump them there-?
> 
> And so it was done
> 
> My bet is JoilT1 doesn't live there and hasn't even visited the place.
> In some places they call this a back seat driver with three speeding tickets
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Palestine never existed.

Ancient Israel The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Ancient Israel Merneptah Stele

Ancient shekel of Israel Silver shekel of the First Jewish Revolt from Rome - Google Arts & Culture

Jesus King of Israel John 12:12 - 12:13

Jesus in the land of Israel Matthew 2:19 - 2:21

Jesus in the cities of Israel MATTHEW 10:23 KJV "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not..."


----------



## Shusha

jamesduncan said:


> The Jews of old were nomadic sheep herders with no home of
> their own.



Wow.  The lengths people will go to to deny the history of the Jews.  Hard to explain the City of David and the archaeological findings there if the Jewish people were only nomadic sheep herders.  Evidence of Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem.


----------



## jamesduncan

Yes, I read it all which was full o*f KILLING *and more* KILLING* which is what they know best.

Matthew 10:23 Context

20For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. 21And the brother *shall deliver up the brother to death,* *and the father the child*: and *the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death*. 22And ye shall be *hated* of all _men_ for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. 23*But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.*

(Exo 12:27 KJV)  That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD'S *passover,* *who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, *and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.
(Exo 12:28 KJV)  And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.
(Exo 12:29 KJV)  And it came to pass, that *at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.*

(Exo 12:30 KJV)  And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; *for there was not a house where there was not one dead.*

*Death—Death__Murder---Murder
Oh My Such Fun!!!!*​
*Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers*, *one a 15-year-old boy
Siege off Nablus
January, 2004
15 year old boy* who was *shot* while standing in front of his house. The sniper bulet hit Amjad *in the back. * He died on his way to the hospital. The second is  *Amer Kathym Arafat* who was also *shot in the back by a sniper bullet*. The third is *Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25*, who was also *shot in the back by a sniper.*
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm

* Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends. 
5 June 2004
*http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2785.shtml

*15 year old boy* &  Amer Kathym & Rouhi Hazem Shouman all* shot in the back by a sniper.*
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm

*An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was *killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends*
http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk

*IDF shoots 13-year-old girl in the back with 20 bullets * and then the *IDF commander goes over to the girl and shoots her again* to make sure she was dead
 Tue., October 05, 2004
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485274.html

*“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport." 
*http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html​
*JoelT1, *I am sure the above makes you Oh So Proud !!!!!!
*Manson* Family​


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Yes, I read it all which was full o*f KILLING *and more* KILLING* which is what they know best.
> 
> Matthew 10:23 Context
> 
> 20For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. 21And the brother *shall deliver up the brother to death,* *and the father the child*: and *the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death*. 22And ye shall be *hated* of all _men_ for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. 23*But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.*
> 
> (Exo 12:27 KJV)  That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD'S *passover,* *who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, *and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.
> (Exo 12:28 KJV)  And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.
> (Exo 12:29 KJV)  And it came to pass, that *at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.*
> 
> (Exo 12:30 KJV)  And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; *for there was not a house where there was not one dead.*
> 
> *Death—Death__Murder---Murder
> Oh My Such Fun!!!!*​
> *Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers*, *one a 15-year-old boy
> Siege off Nablus
> January, 2004
> 15 year old boy* who was *shot* while standing in front of his house. The sniper bulet hit Amjad *in the back. * He died on his way to the hospital. The second is  *Amer Kathym Arafat* who was also *shot in the back by a sniper bullet*. The third is *Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25*, who was also *shot in the back by a sniper.*
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> * Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends.
> 5 June 2004
> *http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2785.shtml
> 
> *15 year old boy* &  Amer Kathym & Rouhi Hazem Shouman all* shot in the back by a sniper.*
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> *An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was *killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends*
> http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk
> 
> *IDF shoots 13-year-old girl in the back with 20 bullets * and then the *IDF commander goes over to the girl and shoots her again* to make sure she was dead
> Tue., October 05, 2004
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485274.html
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."
> *http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html​
> *JoelT1, *I am sure the above makes you Oh So Proud !!!!!!​




Jesus King of the Jews


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Yes, I read it all which was full o*f KILLING *and more* KILLING* which is what they know best.
> 
> Matthew 10:23 Context
> 
> 20For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. 21And the brother *shall deliver up the brother to death,* *and the father the child*: and *the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death*. 22And ye shall be *hated* of all _men_ for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. 23*But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.*
> 
> (Exo 12:27 KJV)  That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD'S *passover,* *who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, *and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.
> (Exo 12:28 KJV)  And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.
> (Exo 12:29 KJV)  And it came to pass, that *at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.*
> 
> (Exo 12:30 KJV)  And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; *for there was not a house where there was not one dead.*
> 
> *Death—Death__Murder---Murder
> Oh My Such Fun!!!!*​
> *Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers*, *one a 15-year-old boy
> Siege off Nablus
> January, 2004
> 15 year old boy* who was *shot* while standing in front of his house. The sniper bulet hit Amjad *in the back. * He died on his way to the hospital. The second is  *Amer Kathym Arafat* who was also *shot in the back by a sniper bullet*. The third is *Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25*, who was also *shot in the back by a sniper.*
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> * Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends.
> 5 June 2004
> *http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2785.shtml
> 
> *15 year old boy* &  Amer Kathym & Rouhi Hazem Shouman all* shot in the back by a sniper.*
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> *An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was *killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends*
> http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk
> 
> *IDF shoots 13-year-old girl in the back with 20 bullets * and then the *IDF commander goes over to the girl and shoots her again* to make sure she was dead
> Tue., October 05, 2004
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485274.html
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."
> *http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html​
> *JoelT1, *I am sure the above makes you Oh So Proud !!!!!!
> *Manson* Family​


Amazing how you keep giving Israelis "qualities" found in every group of people.  Especially about defending themselves and protecting their homeland.

You will not find one tribe, group, clan, Nation which has not defended itself from others, or created oral or written tradition which has not included some mythical ideas.

You steal from the Hebrew Scriptures to excuse the absolutely worthless religion education you have received.

The world does not revolve around the Jewish people.
The world does not depend on peace due to any Jewish action.
The second coming will not be coming even if all Jews are killed or forced to convert to Christianity.

Keep reading your favorite comic books about Jews and Israel.

Your thinking is a prime evidence as to why the Jewish People/Nation had to become sovereign over their traditional ancient homeland, no matter what the size ended up being.  Just look at Jordan.  There is the rest of the Jewish homeland, stolen by the British to give to Arabs who were made to run for their lives out of THEIR ancient homeland in Arabia.

Your signature photo is absolute perfect in describing you.


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Jesus King of the Jews



Yes, one more "murder" you can be proud of.
Rabbi's convince the Romans to crucify Jesus
because He was preaching the old verses
revealing the bad things the Jews have done in the pasty.

So what do they doooo---- why have Him murdered Tooooo


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, one more "murder" you can be proud of.
> Rabbi's convince the Romans to crucify Jesus
> because He was preaching the old verses
> revealing the bad things the Jews have done in the pasty.
> 
> So what do they doooo---- why have Him murdered Tooooo
Click to expand...

Just remind us:

What is your beef with the Jewish people?

Are you on a Christian crusade against the Jews because the NT says they killed Jesus?

Anything else?


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus King of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, one more "murder" you can be proud of.
> Rabbi's convince the Romans to crucify Jesus
> because He was preaching the old verses
> revealing the bad things the Jews have done in the pasty.
> 
> So what do they doooo---- why have Him murdered Tooooo
Click to expand...


Birdbrain: Romans crucified Jesus, for sedition. Affirmed by Paul.


----------



## jamesduncan

Before responding to your triad, I must say that when I use the term "Jew" I am not talking about "all" Jews but only those who murder; i.e. who are Israelis not Jews. There is a difference between "Jews" and Israelis, a BIG difference



Sixties Fan said:


> Amazing how you keep giving Israelis "qualities" found in every group of people...



If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this 



Sixties Fan said:


> Especially about defending themselves and protecting their homeland..



Defending themselves by murdering children? If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this




Sixties Fan said:


> You steal from the Hebrew Scriptures to excuse the absolutely worthless religion education you have received..



You are right, Judaism is a worthless religion. No not even that, it is a cult.




Sixties Fan said:


> The world does not revolve around the Jewish people..



Thank God!!




Sixties Fan said:


> The world does not depend on peace due to any Jewish action..



Wrong!! Peace will not begin to envelope the world until there is peace in the Holly Land



Sixties Fan said:


> The second coming will not be coming..


It has already started. Open your eyes and you will see.



Sixties Fan said:


> even if all Jews are killed or forced to convert to Christianity..



The Jews are not going to be killed, they are just going to fade away into history

*..According to a 2002 study by the **Jewish Agency**, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population




Sixties Fan said:


> Your thinking is a prime evidence as to why the Jewish People/Nation had to become sovereign over their traditional ancient homeland, no matter what the size ended up being..



The Israelites NEVER had a traditional ancient homeland

Period


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews lived here 
Gallery: WHC 2015 – Beth She’arim Necropolis - a Landmark of Jewish Revival (Israel)


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Before responding to your triad, I must say that when I use the term "Jew" I am not talking about "all" Jews but only those who murder; i.e. who are Israelis not Jews. There is a difference between "Jews" and Israelis, a BIG difference
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing how you keep giving Israelis "qualities" found in every group of people...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Especially about defending themselves and protecting their homeland..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defending themselves by murdering children? If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You will not find one tribe, group, clan, Nation which has not defended itself from others, or created oral or written tradition which has not included some mythical ideas..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defending themselves by murdering children? If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You steal from the Hebrew Scriptures to excuse the absolutely worthless religion education you have received..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right, Judaism is a worthless religion. No not even that, it is a cult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world does not revolve around the Jewish people..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank God!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world does not depend on peace due to any Jewish action..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong!! Peace will not begin to envelope the world until there is peace in the Holly Land
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second coming will not be coming..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It has already started. Open your eyes and you will see.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> even if all Jews are killed or forced to convert to Christianity..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Jews are not going to be killed, they are just going to fade away into history
> 
> *..According to a 2002 study by the **Jewish Agency**, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your thinking is a prime evidence as to why the Jewish People/Nation had to become sovereign over their traditional ancient homeland, no matter what the size ended up being..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Israelites NEVER had a traditional ancient homeland
> 
> Period
Click to expand...


Jesus King of Israel in the Bible


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> Before responding to your triad, I must say that when I use the term "Jew" I am not talking about "all" Jews but only those who murder; i.e. who are Israelis not Jews. There is a difference between "Jews" and Israelis, a BIG difference
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing how you keep giving Israelis "qualities" found in every group of people...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Especially about defending themselves and protecting their homeland..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Defending themselves by murdering children? If this helps you sleep at night keep telling yourself this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You steal from the Hebrew Scriptures to excuse the absolutely worthless religion education you have received..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are right, Judaism is a worthless religion. No not even that, it is a cult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world does not revolve around the Jewish people..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank God!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The world does not depend on peace due to any Jewish action..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong!! Peace will not begin to envelope the world until there is peace in the Holly Land
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second coming will not be coming..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It has already started. Open your eyes and you will see.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> even if all Jews are killed or forced to convert to Christianity..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Jews are not going to be killed, they are just going to fade away into history
> 
> *..According to a 2002 study by the **Jewish Agency**, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your thinking is a prime evidence as to why the Jewish People/Nation had to become sovereign over their traditional ancient homeland, no matter what the size ended up being..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Israelites NEVER had a traditional ancient homeland
> 
> Period
Click to expand...

All you have written is absolute nonsense mainly because you have pulled ALL of it from conspiracy theory sites which or even the NT which is full of conspiracy theories about Jews and Judaism because it does not FIT what Christianity was created for.

But....regardless of all of that.....

YOU ARE ON THE WRONG THREAD  !!!!!

This one is about DISCUSSING, and not attacking as you do, who are the indigenous people of the land.

And regardless of your endless tirades, the indigenous people are not going to change.

They are acknowledged even by Muslims and Arabs, including those who call themselves Palestinians.

They are the Jewish People, with a 3800 year presence on the land.

Deny all you want, because of the learned hatred of Jews you have been about all of your life.

It will never make one iota of difference as to who are the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, also known as the Land of Israel, you recognize the land or the people or not.

Am Israel Chai


----------



## JoelT1

Jesus, called King of Israel and King of the Jews in the Bible, worshipped here 
Synagogue - Magdala


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> What is your beef with the Jewish people?



I have said it before & I will say it again; I have nothing against the Jewish people



Sixties Fan said:


> Are you on a Christian crusade against the Jews because the NT says they killed Jesus?



No, not even close



Sixties Fan said:


> Anything else?



Yes, I want the world Jewish community to gather together and convince the Israelis' to change their ways and embrace the stranger as the Lord instructed them to do !! Only they can make this happen.

 (Deu 1:16 KJV)  And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
(Deu 10:19 KJV)  Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
 (Deu 24:19 KJV)  When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.
(Deu 24:20 KJV)  When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the *strange*r, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
(Deu 24:21 KJV)  When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
 (Jer 7:6 KJV)  If ye oppress not the *stranger*, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:
 (Jer 22:3 KJV)  Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the* stranger*, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
 (Ezek 22:7 KJV)  In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst of thee have they dealt by oppression with the *stranger*: in thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow.
(Zec 7:10 KJV)  And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the *stranger*, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.
(Exo 22:21 KJV)  Thou shalt neither vex a *stranger*, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
(Exo 23:9 KJV)  Also thou shalt not oppress a *stranger*: for ye know the heart of a stranger, *seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.*
 (Lev 19:34 KJV)  But the* stranger* that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
(Lev 25:35 KJV)  And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a* stranger*, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.
(Deu 1:16 KJV)  And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
 (Deu 10:18 KJV)  He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the* stranger*, in giving him food and raiment.

(Deu 10:19 KJV)  Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

Above is what the Lord told them to do and you know what they have done and continue to do even today.​


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews lived here
Huqoq Excavation Project


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Birdbrain: Romans crucified Jesus, for sedition. Affirmed by Paul.



If this helps you sleep at night then keep telling yourself this and have peaceful dreams from sun set to sunrise


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews worshipped here

Surprising Mosaics Revealed in Ancient Synagogue in Israel


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Birdbrain: Romans crucified Jesus, for sedition. Affirmed by Paul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this helps you sleep at night then keep telling yourself this and have peaceful dreams from sun set to sunrise
Click to expand...


Ancient Jews lived here


----------



## jamesduncan

I Googled “Israelis killing children”

About 537,000 results (0.39 seconds)


*Search Results*

These are the Palestinian children killed by Israel in 2016 | The ...

_https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/.../these-are-palestinian-children-killed-israel-2016_

Jan 27, 2017 - Thirty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* by *Israeli* soldiers, police and armed civilians during the year, all but four of the deadly incidents ...

Invisible killings: Israel's daily toll of Palestinian children | The ...

_https://electronicintifada.net/content/invisible-killings-israels-daily-toll...children/4263_

Convincing the *Israeli* adults in control of this weaponry in civilian areas that they should not be using it to *kill children* who are merely stone throwers should not ...

Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months | News | Al Jazeera

_www.aljazeera.com/.../israel-killed-25-palestinian-children-months-16051414083314..._

May 14, 2016 - Twenty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-*Israeli* attacks and the number detained was ...

One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years ...

_One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years: statistics..._

 “The International Day for the Protection of *Children* is on June 1,” said a spokesman, “but Palestinian *children* are still subject to attacks by the *Israelis* and ...

Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000 – Middle ...

_Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000..._

Jun 1, 2017 - *Israel* has *killed* more than 3,000 *children* since 28 September 2000 when the Second Intifada began until the end of April 2017, a new report ...

Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia

_Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia_

*Children* in the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict refers to the impact of the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict .... Though *Israeli children* were *killed* in the conflict during the decades prior, the first acts of

NOTE: The above is only a portion of the results found


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews wrote these Scrolls

Dead Sea Scrolls – Cultural Institute


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> I Googled “Israelis killing children”
> 
> About 537,000 results (0.39 seconds)
> 
> 
> *Search Results*
> 
> These are the Palestinian children killed by Israel in 2016 | The ...
> 
> _https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/.../these-are-palestinian-children-killed-israel-2016_
> 
> Jan 27, 2017 - Thirty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* by *Israeli* soldiers, police and armed civilians during the year, all but four of the deadly incidents ...
> 
> Invisible killings: Israel's daily toll of Palestinian children | The ...
> 
> _https://electronicintifada.net/content/invisible-killings-israels-daily-toll...children/4263_
> 
> Convincing the *Israeli* adults in control of this weaponry in civilian areas that they should not be using it to *kill children* who are merely stone throwers should not ...
> 
> Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months | News | Al Jazeera
> 
> _www.aljazeera.com/.../israel-killed-25-palestinian-children-months-16051414083314..._
> 
> May 14, 2016 - Twenty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-*Israeli* attacks and the number detained was ...
> 
> One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years ...
> 
> _One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years: statistics..._
> 
> “The International Day for the Protection of *Children* is on June 1,” said a spokesman, “but Palestinian *children* are still subject to attacks by the *Israelis* and ...
> 
> Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000 – Middle ...
> 
> _Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000..._
> 
> Jun 1, 2017 - *Israel* has *killed* more than 3,000 *children* since 28 September 2000 when the Second Intifada began until the end of April 2017, a new report ...
> 
> Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia
> 
> _Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia_
> 
> *Children* in the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict refers to the impact of the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict .... Though *Israeli children* were *killed* in the conflict during the decades prior, the first acts of
> 
> NOTE: The above is only a portion of the results found


There is a site for everything your sick mind wants to find.

WRONG  THREAD  !!!!


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews lived here


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> I Googled “Israelis killing children”
> 
> About 537,000 results (0.39 seconds)
> 
> 
> *Search Results*
> 
> These are the Palestinian children killed by Israel in 2016 | The ...
> 
> _https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/.../these-are-palestinian-children-killed-israel-2016_
> 
> Jan 27, 2017 - Thirty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* by *Israeli* soldiers, police and armed civilians during the year, all but four of the deadly incidents ...
> 
> Invisible killings: Israel's daily toll of Palestinian children | The ...
> 
> _https://electronicintifada.net/content/invisible-killings-israels-daily-toll...children/4263_
> 
> Convincing the *Israeli* adults in control of this weaponry in civilian areas that they should not be using it to *kill children* who are merely stone throwers should not ...
> 
> Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months | News | Al Jazeera
> 
> _www.aljazeera.com/.../israel-killed-25-palestinian-children-months-16051414083314..._
> 
> May 14, 2016 - Twenty-five Palestinian *children* were *killed* in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-*Israeli* attacks and the number detained was ...
> 
> One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years ...
> 
> _One Palestinian child killed every 3 days by Israel for 13 years: statistics..._
> 
> “The International Day for the Protection of *Children* is on June 1,” said a spokesman, “but Palestinian *children* are still subject to attacks by the *Israelis* and ...
> 
> Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000 – Middle ...
> 
> _Report: Israel killed 3,000 Palestinian children since 2000..._
> 
> Jun 1, 2017 - *Israel* has *killed* more than 3,000 *children* since 28 September 2000 when the Second Intifada began until the end of April 2017, a new report ...
> 
> Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia
> 
> _Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia_
> 
> *Children* in the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict refers to the impact of the *Israeli*–Palestinian conflict .... Though *Israeli children* were *killed* in the conflict during the decades prior, the first acts of
> 
> NOTE: The above is only a portion of the results found



Jesus, King of the Jews and King of Israel in the Bible, worshipped here
Synagogue - Magdala


----------



## jamesduncan

*It is time to put to rest
where was the true homeland of the Jews
It was Egypt*​
 (Gen 41:39 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:

(Gen 41:40 KJV)  Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.

(Gen 41:41 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.

(Gen 41:42 KJV)  And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;

(Gen 41:46 KJV)  And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt.

(Gen 42:1 KJV)  Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another?

 (Gen 42:5 KJV)  And the sons of Israel came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan.

(Gen 42:25 KJV)  Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:

(Gen 45:20 KJV)  *Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.*​
(Gen 45:21 KJV)  *And the children of Israel did so*: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.

(Gen 47:1 KJV)  *Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*

(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.

(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:

(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.

(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and *gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land*, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.

*The Myth has been busted!!!!
-*​


----------



## Sixties Fan

jamesduncan said:


> *It is time to put to rest
> where was the true homeland of the Jews
> It was Egypt*​
> (Gen 41:39 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:
> 
> (Gen 41:40 KJV)  Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.
> 
> (Gen 41:41 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Gen 41:42 KJV)  And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;
> 
> (Gen 41:46 KJV)  And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Gen 42:1 KJV)  Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, Why do ye look one upon another?
> 
> (Gen 42:5 KJV)  And the sons of Israel came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan.
> 
> (Gen 42:25 KJV)  Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:
> 
> (Gen 45:20 KJV)  *Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.*​
> (Gen 45:21 KJV)  *And the children of Israel did so*: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.
> 
> (Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [*ISRAEL*] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.
> 
> (Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:
> 
> (Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.
> 
> (Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and *gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land*, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.
> 
> *The Myth has been busted!!!!*​


And of course you skipped the whole story of Abraham and his G-D sending him to Canaan and promising that land to his future generations.

Or, "never mind" why they ended up in Egypt for sometime, and then for a longer time.

Or, "never mind" that it came the time when they HAD TO LEAVE and return to the land promised to them.

AND they did return.  AND they made it into their homeland.
AND they called it ISRAEL.  AND King David and King Solomon and all others, etc, etc, etc, etc.....


As I said.....there is a site, or book, or interpretation, or delegitimization 
against the Jewish Nation out there for you, and by golly (!!!!!)  you do find each and every one of them.


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews wrote the Bible here

The Hebrew Bible | The Story of the Jews | PBS


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> There is a site for everything your sick mind wants to find.
> 
> WRONG  THREAD  !!!!


*
~~~~~~Wrong~~~~~~*
The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
I just proved that it is the Palestinians who are indigenous to PALESTINE
The Jews were indigenous to EGYPT​Next -


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> And of course you skipped the whole story of Abraham and his G-D sending him to Canaan and promising that land to his future generations.



Please get a grip, Canaan is NOT the present land unlawfully occupied & called Israel -


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews worshipped here 

Bible Scenes Uncovered in Ruins of Ancient Synagogue


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a site for everything your sick mind wants to find.
> 
> WRONG  THREAD  !!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *
> ~~~~~~Wrong~~~~~~*
> The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
> I just proved that it is the Palestinians who are indigenous to PALESTINE
> The Jews were indigenous to EGYPT​Next -
Click to expand...


History Lesson: Palestine, foreign Roman name imposed on indigenous Jews’ land


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a site for everything your sick mind wants to find.
> 
> WRONG  THREAD  !!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *
> ~~~~~~Wrong~~~~~~*
> The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
> I just proved that it is the Palestinians who are indigenous to PALESTINE
> The Jews were indigenous to EGYPT​Next -
Click to expand...


Jesus “King of Israel” in the Bible. No mention of palestine, it never existed


----------



## jamesduncan

Sixties Fan said:


> Or, "never mind" that it came the time when they HAD TO LEAVE and return to the land promised to them.]



The Bible is very clear on why they had to leave. And low and behold it was because of the *MURDERING* that they cannot stop doing~~~~~

_And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: _*and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*_, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, _*and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*_, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow? _

_Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. _*But Moses fled.,.,.,.,.,.,

& he took all his followers with him to find new killing fields *
-


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> History Lesson: Palestine, foreign Roman name imposed on indigenous Jews’ land


----------



## JoelT1

Jesus walked in the land of Israel, in the Bible. No mention of palestine never existed.


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> History Lesson: Palestine, foreign Roman name imposed on indigenous Jews’ land
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 162250
Click to expand...


History Lesson: Romans impose the foreign name “palestine” on Jews’ land


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> History Lesson: Palestine, foreign Roman name imposed on indigenous Jews’ land
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 162250
Click to expand...


Jesus spoke of the cities of Israel, in the Bible. No mention of palestine, it never existed.


----------



## jamesduncan

B.T.W., 

JoelT1, this is for you~~

I heard that the mosaic you keep reposting was the floor of a community bathroom and all who entered pissed on it.

-


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews lived here


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1, we can go around and around on this until the ice sheets cover North America so I leave you with this~~

◄ Ezekiel 21:32 ►

_You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the middle of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it._

 
Amen -


----------



## JoelT1

Ancient Jews lived here

Gallery: WHC 2015 – Beth She’arim Necropolis - a Landmark of Jewish Revival (Israel)


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1, we can go around and around on this until the ice sheets cover North America so I leave you with this~~
> 
> ◄ Ezekiel 21:32 ►
> 
> _You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the middle of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it._
> 
> 
> Amen -




Jesus “King of Israel”


----------



## JoelT1

jamesduncan said:


> JoelT1, we can go around and around on this until the ice sheets cover North America so I leave you with this~~
> 
> ◄ Ezekiel 21:32 ►
> 
> _You shall be for fuel to the fire; your blood shall be in the middle of the land; you shall be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it._
> 
> 
> Amen -



Palestine never existed.


----------



## abi

What was that citizenship order from 1925? Oh yeah, the:

Palestinian Citizenship Order, 1925 - Wikipedia


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> What was that citizenship order from 1925? Oh yeah, the:
> 
> Palestinian Citizenship Order, 1925 - Wikipedia



_The law was required by Article 7 of the British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument), which stated: "The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine."_


----------



## Hollie

abi said:


> What was that citizenship order from 1925? Oh yeah, the:
> 
> Palestinian Citizenship Order, 1925 - Wikipedia



You either carelessly (or deliberately), cut and pasted from wiki, not understanding that editing occurs, when the obvious approach should have been to reference the original document.


Mandate for Palestine - The Palestine Order in LoN Council - Mandatory order (10 August 1922)

WHEREAS the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them;


Note the paragraph:

“to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them;”

What do you think that means?


----------



## montelatici

"From there they marched against Egypt: and when they were in the part of Syria called Palestine, Psammetichus king of Egypt met them and persuaded them with gifts and prayers to come no further." (Herodotus, Hist. 1.105.1)


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> "From there they marched against Egypt: and when they were in the part of Syria called Palestine, Psammetichus king of Egypt met them and persuaded them with gifts and prayers to come no further." (Herodotus, Hist. 1.105.1)



Birdbrain: Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek. 

Israel, the indigenous name of the land, existed long before he was born The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


----------



## jamesduncan

JoelT1 said:


> Israel, the indigenous name of the land, existed long before he was born The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris



You have been brain washed, gullible or just refuse to admit to the truth, the choice is yours to make.

(Genesis 32:28 KJV) _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Iacob, but Israel*: for as a prince hast thou power with God, and with men, and hast preuailed._

(Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, *when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings*: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._

(Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._

(Ezek 36:32 KJV)_ Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._

why they were scattered and then gathered for judgement


 (Jer 24:9 KJV) _And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them._

(Ezekiel 21:32) _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered*: for I the LORD have spoken it. _

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, *which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.*_

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.
_
BTW Israel as a state NEVER existed before 1947ad


----------



## JoelT1

*Ancient Jews lived, worshipped and died here*


----------



## JoelT1

*Ancient Jews lived here*
Gallery: WHC 2015 – Beth She’arim Necropolis - a Landmark of Jewish Revival (Israel)


----------



## montelatici

JoelT1 said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "From there they marched against Egypt: and when they were in the part of Syria called Palestine, Psammetichus king of Egypt met them and persuaded them with gifts and prayers to come no further." (Herodotus, Hist. 1.105.1)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Birdbrain: Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek.
> 
> Israel, the indigenous name of the land, existed long before he was born The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris
Click to expand...


"Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek."

So what?


----------



## JoelT1

montelatici said:


> JoelT1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "From there they marched against Egypt: and when they were in the part of Syria called Palestine, Psammetichus king of Egypt met them and persuaded them with gifts and prayers to come no further." (Herodotus, Hist. 1.105.1)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Birdbrain: Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek.
> 
> Israel, the indigenous name of the land, existed long before he was born The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Herodotus was Greek and wrote in Greek."
> 
> So what?
Click to expand...


Damn, you’re stupid! Herodotus was Greek and referred to locations in a foreign language.

Israel existed 700+ years before Herodotus and Israel is the indigenous name Merneptah Stele


----------



## abi

There were no Palestinians?

The society was founded on 31 March 1805, with its first meeting of 13 members taking place on 24 April 1805, at which it was decided with no further explanation that the Syrian Society "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
Palestine Association - Wikipedia

1805... Hmmmm?


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> There were no Palestinians?
> 
> The society was founded on 31 March 1805, with its first meeting of 13 members taking place on 24 April 1805, at which it was decided with no further explanation that the Syrian Society "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
> Palestine Association - Wikipedia
> 
> 1805... Hmmmm?


From Your link:

The *Palestine Association*, formerly the *Syrian Society*, was formed in 1805 by William Richard Hamilton to promote the study of the geography, natural history, antiquities and anthropology of Palestine and the surrounding areas.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again conflating a geographic area with a non-existent people.


----------



## abi

Yes, and 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality.

"shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> Yes, and 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality.
> 
> "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*



Yes it was *British *association, if You ever care to read Your own link.
You have no more knowledge than that young brainwashed child.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> There were no Palestinians?
> 
> The society was founded on 31 March 1805, with its first meeting of 13 members taking place on 24 April 1805, at which it was decided with no further explanation that the Syrian Society "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
> Palestine Association - Wikipedia
> 
> 1805... Hmmmm?



Look at all the Muslim founders.........


----------



## abi

rylah said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality.
> 
> "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it was *British *association, if You ever care to read Your own link.
> You have no more knowledge than this young brainwashed child.
Click to expand...

What part of 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality are you stumbling over?

"shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality.
> 
> "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it was *British *association, if You ever care to read Your own link.
> You have no more knowledge than this young brainwashed child.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What part of 1805, long before zionism, they changed their name to reflect the reality are you stumbling over?
> 
> "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"*
Click to expand...


What part of - goegraphy, British organization, and no Arabs - don't You understand.

*What part of Arabs declaring they're Syrians don't You understand?*


----------



## abi

In 1805, they admitted it in their declaration:
"shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"
*





Can you relate? LOL, sorry, but look what you are doing here.


----------



## rylah

abi said:


> In 1805, they admitted it in their declaration:
> "shall henceforth be denominated *The Palestine Association"
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you relate? LOL, sorry, but look what you are doing here.



They were British, the organization was British.
Arabs started calling themselves "Palestinians" only 160 years after that, and some 50 years after they officially proclaimed to be Syrian Nationals.


----------



## Shusha

There is a Pacific Northwest Association of Pathologists.  That doesn't mean that the Pacific Northwest is a sovereign nation.  Its just a geographical term.


----------



## GHook93

She is probably a stupid twat just like you


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## GHook93

This is how women are treated in Islam


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## fanger




----------



## Toddsterpatriot

fanger said:


>



But her ankle was visible. Allah says she should be raped.


----------



## fanger

You hear voices?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

fanger said:


> You hear voices?



Allah, speaking to the faithful......


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Palestine (now called Israel) is the homeland for the Jewish people


Then who built the wall that Joshua and his people brought down by blowing their trumpets? I will give you a hint. They were not Jews!


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine (now called Israel) is the homeland for the Jewish people
> 
> 
> 
> Then who built the wall that Joshua and his people brought down by blowing their trumpets? I will give you a hint. They were not Jews!
Click to expand...


Now, now.  What ever happened to not bringing up biblical stories as historical documents?  Play by your own rules, now.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Now, now. What ever happened to not bringing up biblical stories as historical documents? Play by your own rules, now.


Fair, but the historical evidence that other people were there first is undeniable. I'm pretty sure, if you were to be honest, you would admit this.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, now. What ever happened to not bringing up biblical stories as historical documents? Play by your own rules, now.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair, but the historical evidence that other people were there first is undeniable. I'm pretty sure, if you were to be honest, you would admit this.
Click to expand...


If those "other people" showed up, I would gladly give them a piece of the territory.  (Though that is unlikely given that they were proto-Jews).


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

P F Tinmore said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can she tell us why there were no Americans in 1500?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good question. What were native Americans called before it was America? Were they a different people? Did they just not exist?
Click to expand...


Mohawks, Sioux, Cherokee, Shawnee, Navaho, Utes, Seminoles, etc. etc.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> If those "other people" showed up, I would gladly give them a piece of the territory. (Though that is unlikely given that they were proto-Jews).


Historically, maybe (big maybe), bionically not.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have SO not left this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care. The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What now, Teddy? Be specific, what have I not addressed that is on topic? And watch the video again if you must. What claims did she make that you take issue with. If you follow the rules and stay on topic, I will stop thinking of you as a troll.
> 
> *Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?*
> 
> Come on now, this is simple stuff and it is verified historical fact. The denial must stop to even begin to discuss a solution. Let the narrative be damned and focus on what we know.
Click to expand...


So you are claiming that "Palestine" is a Greek word?

That would be quite impossible and had to have been translated from some other language, like Latin shortly afterward.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, now. What ever happened to not bringing up biblical stories as historical documents? Play by your own rules, now.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair, but the historical evidence that other people were there first is undeniable. I'm pretty sure, if you were to be honest, you would admit this.
Click to expand...


*Fair, but the historical evidence that other people were there first is undeniable.
*
The people who were there first......weren't Muslims.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> I have been doping some fact checking. So far she is 100% correct.
> 
> 1) The *Palestine* Exploration Fund (PEF) was founded under the royal patronage of Queen Victoria in *1865*...
> The Palestine Exploration Fund: History
> 
> 2) Ariel Sharon or Ariel Scheinermann was born on February 26, 1928 in Kfar Malal, *Palestine.*
> 
> 3)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are these facts somehow not clear?



Read the document pictured in your #2.  It says "Trans-Jordan".


----------



## abi

Toddsterpatriot said:


> The people who were there first......weren't Muslims.


When Todd and I agree, we must be on to something.



Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have SO not left this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care. The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What now, Teddy? Be specific, what have I not addressed that is on topic? And watch the video again if you must. What claims did she make that you take issue with. If you follow the rules and stay on topic, I will stop thinking of you as a troll.
> 
> *Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?*
> 
> Come on now, this is simple stuff and it is verified historical fact. The denial must stop to even begin to discuss a solution. Let the narrative be damned and focus on what we know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you are claiming that "Palestine" is a Greek word?
> 
> That would be quite impossible and had to have been translated from some other language, like Latin shortly afterward.
Click to expand...


Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?

Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle referred to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?"


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people who were there first......weren't Muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> When Todd and I agree, we must be on to something.
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have SO not left this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care. The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What now, Teddy? Be specific, what have I not addressed that is on topic? And watch the video again if you must. What claims did she make that you take issue with. If you follow the rules and stay on topic, I will stop thinking of you as a troll.
> 
> *Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?*
> 
> Come on now, this is simple stuff and it is verified historical fact. The denial must stop to even begin to discuss a solution. Let the narrative be damned and focus on what we know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you are claiming that "Palestine" is a Greek word?
> 
> That would be quite impossible and had to have been translated from some other language, like Latin shortly afterward.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle referred to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?"
Click to expand...


*When Todd and I agree, we must be on to something.
*
Yup. Jews were there before Muslims.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people who were there first......weren't Muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> When Todd and I agree, we must be on to something.
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have SO not left this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fair, but you have refused to answer direct questions that lead to your narrative coming undone.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence of JC.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just false, and I'll just let you do your own research here as I really don't care. The point though is still that Bethlehem existed in Palestine for centuries prior to when Christ is believed to have been born, k?
> 
> 
> 
> teddyearp said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am fairly curious as to why you did not address anything else in my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What now, Teddy? Be specific, what have I not addressed that is on topic? And watch the video again if you must. What claims did she make that you take issue with. If you follow the rules and stay on topic, I will stop thinking of you as a troll.
> 
> *Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle refereed to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?*
> 
> Come on now, this is simple stuff and it is verified historical fact. The denial must stop to even begin to discuss a solution. Let the narrative be damned and focus on what we know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you are claiming that "Palestine" is a Greek word?
> 
> That would be quite impossible and had to have been translated from some other language, like Latin shortly afterward.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you deny that in 450 BC, Herodotus referred to the area between Egypt and Phoenicia as Palestine?
> 
> Do you further deny that around 340 BC, Aristotle referred to the Dead Sea as "a lake in Palestine?"
Click to expand...


Did Herodotus and Aristotle speak English you dumb ass?

Repeating the same lie will not make it true.  The word "Palestine" did not exist at that time, no matter how hard you try to say otherwise.  It was translated from whatever the Greeks called that area.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine (now called Israel) is the homeland for the Jewish people
> 
> 
> 
> Then who built the wall that Joshua and his people brought down by blowing their trumpets? I will give you a hint. They were not Jews!
Click to expand...


They weren't Muslims either dumb ass!


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If those "other people" showed up, I would gladly give them a piece of the territory. (Though that is unlikely given that they were proto-Jews).
> 
> 
> 
> Historically, maybe (big maybe), bionically not.
Click to expand...


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Look who reported Israel's birth:




You will notice that it is not written in Arabic, dumb ass!


----------



## abi

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Did Herodotus and Aristotle speak English you dumb ass?
> 
> Repeating the same lie will not make it true. The word "Palestine" did not exist at that time, no matter how hard you try to say otherwise. It was translated from whatever the Greeks called that area.


THAT is some impressive denial.



Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> They weren't Muslims either dumb ass!


Of course not, but became Muslim.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did Herodotus and Aristotle speak English you dumb ass?
> 
> Repeating the same lie will not make it true. The word "Palestine" did not exist at that time, no matter how hard you try to say otherwise. It was translated from whatever the Greeks called that area.
> 
> 
> 
> THAT is some impressive denial.
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> They weren't Muslims either dumb ass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not, but became Muslim.
Click to expand...


It is not an impressive denial,  It's a historical fact, dumb ass!

How do you know they all became Muslim if you are constantly denying historical facts?  I am sure there were Christians and Jews that also became Muslim when given the choice to convert or die.  Don't you?


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Of course not, but became Muslim.



And now they can all become Jewish (again).  Shall we do the 'convert or die' thing?  Or the 'come to the dark side, we have cookies' thing?


----------



## abi

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> It is not an impressive denial, It's a historical fact, dumb ass!
> 
> How do you know they all became Muslim if you are constantly denying historical facts? I am sure there were Christians and Jews...


Yes, historical facts, before they were Muslim they were Christians and Jews. 



Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> that also became Muslim when given the choice to convert or die. Don't you?


Yes, agreed, but many simply chose Christianity and many simply chose Islam.


----------



## Shusha

Wait, even better....we have donuts.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

abi said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not an impressive denial, It's a historical fact, dumb ass!
> 
> How do you know they all became Muslim if you are constantly denying historical facts? I am sure there were Christians and Jews...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, historical facts, before they were Muslim they were Christians and Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> that also became Muslim when given the choice to convert or die. Don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, agreed, but many simply chose Christianity and many simply chose Islam.
Click to expand...


Why do you keep acknowledging that I am right, yet you apparently don't learn anything from it?


----------



## Indeependent

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not an impressive denial, It's a historical fact, dumb ass!
> 
> How do you know they all became Muslim if you are constantly denying historical facts? I am sure there were Christians and Jews...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, historical facts, before they were Muslim they were Christians and Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> that also became Muslim when given the choice to convert or die. Don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, agreed, but many simply chose Christianity and many simply chose Islam.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do you keep acknowledging that I am right, yet you apparently don't learn anything from it?
Click to expand...

Because his mullah pays him to do that.


----------



## abi

Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.

Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia

What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.

So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?

Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia

*...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20

Food for thought?


----------



## TNHarley

I have seen plenty of archeological evidence that would link the Jew stories to Israel.
Personally, i dont give a shit. The Jews are there now and thats what matters. Is this America or Is this land broken up into Indian Tribes? What about all the other conquered Nations?


----------



## abi

The Scriptures treat Israel as a secondary *kingdom of no importance*, a place of incorrigible sinners, whereas Judah is considered the great and just kingdom whose capital is Jerusalem, where King Solomon established a splendid temple during the glorious era of the united monarchy. *Finkelstein is dubious about the existence of this great united monarchy.*

*"There is no archaeological evidence for it,"* he says. "This is something unexampled in history. I don't think there is any other place in the world where there was a city with such a wretched material infrastructure but which succeeded in creating such a sweeping movement in its favor as Jerusalem, which even in its time of greatness *was a joke in comparison to the cities of Assyria, Babylon or Egypt.* It was a typical mountain village. There is *no magnificent finding, no gates of Nebuchadnezzar, no Assyrian reliefs, no Egyptian temples - nothing.* Even the temple couldn't compete with the temples of Egypt and their splendor."
read more: Grounds for disbelief


----------



## MJB12741

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?




Well, you see Abi, the Bible is just a book of fairy tales, written by Jews & Christians.  And if don't believe me, just ask any Palestinian supporter.


----------



## Shusha

Sigh, abi.  What is your goal here?  To "prove" that the Jewish people have no history and no homeland?  

There is mountains of evidence that the Jewish people originated on that territory and have lived in it ever since.  Anyone with a bone of honesty in them would know that.  Out of curiosity, what evidence would you accept as "proof" of the Jewish people's history in that land?  Because it certainly appears so far that you are willing to stick your fingers in your ears and babble, "I can't hear you" and completely ignore reality.  What would it take, then, for you to acknowledge Jewish history in that land?


----------



## Hollie

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?





abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?



What Zionists were going crazy?

Do you really think references to wiki are to be taken seriously?


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Because it certainly appears so far that you are willing to stick your fingers in your ears and babble, "I can't hear you" and completely ignore reality.


Isn't that what you just did... and do constantly?


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because it certainly appears so far that you are willing to stick your fingers in your ears and babble, "I can't hear you" and completely ignore reality.
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that what you just did... and do constantly?
Click to expand...


Oh please, the OP is easy enough to refute.  There is no point if you are just going to ignore it, though.  What criteria would convince you that the Jewish people have a history in that land?


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Oh please, the OP is easy enough to refute


It isn't. It has been out for years and has yet to be refuted. You should read his whole book instead of basing your belief on, well, a belief.

Please refute what you can, though, I'm very interested.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please, the OP is easy enough to refute
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't. It has been out for years and has yet to be refuted. You should read his whole book instead of basing your belief on, well, a belief.
> 
> Please refute what you can, though, I'm very interested.
Click to expand...


I read his book years ago.  I know all of the definitive findings which prove them wrong.  I understand how you've twisted the narrative.  None of that matters if you won't accept any evidence.  So....what evidence will you accept?


----------



## MJB12741

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please, the OP is easy enough to refute
> 
> 
> 
> It isn't. It has been out for years and has yet to be refuted. You should read his whole book instead of basing your belief on, well, a belief.
> 
> Please refute what you can, though, I'm very interested.
Click to expand...


Have you read my book titled Palestinian Contributions To Peace, Mankind & Civilization?


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> I read his book years ago. I know all of the definitive findings which prove them wrong. I understand how you've twisted the narrative. None of that matters if you won't accept any evidence. So....what evidence will you accept?


Show me the evidence and let's go from there. I call your bluff.


----------



## Shusha

2700 year old inscription written in proto-Hebrew found in Jerusalem.  Proves the Jewish people were extant in Jerusalem nearly three thousand years ago.  So, we done?


----------



## MJB12741

Shusha said:


> 2700 year old inscription written in proto-Hebrew found in Jerusalem.  Proves the Jewish people were extant in Jerusalem nearly three thousand years ago.  So, we done?




YEP!  That does it. Boy I'll bet Abi has you Zionists shakin' in your boots & praying he will be tossed off this board or just please leave us with all his wisdom & well documented facts.  Oh  Lord  I think I love him.  Seriously everyone, how can we get  him to post here more often.  Heh  Heh!


----------



## Shusha

I could find an entire Jewish population which has remained hidden in Judean desert caves for 3000 years, reciting the Shema (in Hebrew) twice daily, and she still wouldn't believe that the Jewish people have a history there.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> 2700 year old inscription written in proto-Hebrew found in Jerusalem. Proves the Jewish people were extant in Jerusalem nearly three thousand years ago. So, we done?


You mean this?






And I am snickering at proto-Hebrew. Can you translate?



Shusha said:


> I could find an entire Jewish population which has remained hidden in Judean desert caves for 3000 years, reciting the Shema (in Hebrew) twice daily, and she still wouldn't believe that the Jewish people have a history there.


I would, have a link? That would really be great.


----------



## Shusha

Snicker all you want.  Do you accept it as evidence or not?   If not, why not?


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Snicker all you want. Do you accept it as evidence or not? If not, why not?


It exists, but you haven't explained what you think it proves nor why.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Snicker all you want. Do you accept it as evidence or not? If not, why not?
> 
> 
> 
> It exists, but you haven't explained what you think it proves nor why.
Click to expand...


Actually, I have.  It demonstrates that the Jewish people were extant in Jerusalem nearly 3000 years ago.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Actually, I have. It demonstrates that the Jewish people were extant in Jerusalem nearly 3000 years ago.


It doesn't, but to the point you had asked prior.

The temple was totally destroyed in 70 AD, we agree there, right?

The hill called Zion and Jerusalem, the building there, that is to say, the temple, the Holy of Holies, the Altar, and whatever else was there dedicated to the glory of God *have been utterly removed...*
*Eusebius*

I never understood why the wall can’t just be from a Roman fort.

It [Jerusalem] is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing left but that monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those (Romans) that hath destroyed it, *which still dwells upon its ruins. *
*Eleazer Ben Jair (Commander at Masada)*

Now as to the Tower of Antonia, it might seem to be composed of several cities. For if we go up to this Tower of Antonia, we gain the city since we shall then be upon *the top of the hill. *
*Josephus*


----------



## Shusha

Abi, what is your point with this thread?  This thread originated because I called for mutual recognition on another thread.  What are you trying to prove on this thread?  

That the Jewish people have no history there?  That the Jewish people had a history there but were successfully invaded, conquered and expelled?  That the Jewish people are faking our own history?  What?


----------



## abi

I am not trying to prove anything. I am learning. I like to learn things, I'm a history nerd. But, ultimately, this may clear up the whole issue in Jerusalem.

Because, what if you are wrong and the temple was never there?

*David then took up residence in the fortress and called it the City of David. He built up the area around it, from the terraces inward. 10 And he became more and more powerful, because the Lord God Almighty was with him.
2 Samuel 5-9/10

And Gad came that day to David, and said unto him: 'Go up, rear an altar unto the LORD in the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite.' 
2 Samuel 24-18

Then Solomon began to build the house of the LORD at Jerusalem in mount Moriah, where [the LORD] appeared unto David his father; for which provision had been made in the Place of David, in the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.
2 Chronicles 3-1

Doesn’t it make more sense that the temple was actually in the City of David as discussed in the Torah?*


----------



## Shusha

Well, aside from your rule that we are not to use biblical stories as an historical reference, who cares?  There is ample proof that a Jewish society existed in Jerusalem for roughly 3000 years.  What is your point?


----------



## Kondor3

abi said:


> ...Food for thought?


Indeed. *Vae victis*. Think on _that_.


----------



## abi

Shusha said:


> Well, aside from your rule that we are not to use biblical stories as an historical reference, who cares? There is ample proof that a Jewish society existed in Jerusalem for roughly 3000 years. What is your point?


The whole temple mount issue can be put to rest. How can you not see that? If the wall is from a Roman fort, and the temple was actually somewhere else, then the zionists can just build it there. What today is where the city of David was? Is it not already a settlement controlled by zionists?


----------



## Boston1

OK I don't believe in the dogma either but that doesn't negate the fact that if you read the rest of that book you'll find they CONFIRM that the Judaic people were descendant of the Hyksos who had lived in that area since at least the early bronze age.

Cherry picking facts doesn't work in climate science and it doesn't work in anti semitic diatribe either.

PS I don't recall these mythical "zionists" you mention being enraged. As I recall the work was well accepted as a proof the Judaic people had existed in that exact area for "time immemorial" ;-)


----------



## Roudy

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?


Interesting you mention archeology, Jews have thousands of artifacts and archeological sites that prove beyond a doubt that the land belonged to Jews.  In other words, Jewish ties to the land are not only spiritual and cultural, but most importantly the PHYSICAL evidence is overwhelming.

 On the other hand, there is not aota of evidence pointing to this fictional Palestinian land or Palestinian people.   Nada, nil, kaput, zero, zip, butcus.


----------



## Coyote

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?




That doesn't really change anything - for example, they never dispute the Jews; historic ties to Israel.  Most of the stories are the mythology of an ancient people, a mixture of fact and fiction.  Whether they were a small tribal kingdom or a regional power hardly matters.


----------



## abi

Coyote said:


> That doesn't really change anything - for example, they never dispute the Jews; historic ties to Israel. Most of the stories are the mythology of an ancient people, a mixture of fact and fiction. Whether they were a small tribal kingdom or a regional power hardly matters.


Maybe, maybe not, but more importantly, their imagined third temple might not have to be built on the Mount. They might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.


----------



## Coyote

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't really change anything - for example, they never dispute the Jews; historic ties to Israel. Most of the stories are the mythology of an ancient people, a mixture of fact and fiction. Whether they were a small tribal kingdom or a regional power hardly matters.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, maybe not, but more importantly, their imagined third temple might not have to be built on the Mount. They might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.
Click to expand...


In the end what difference does it make?  These are events that occurred over three thousand years ago.  What matters is what people believe.

Why do you work so hard at disenfranchising the Jewish people from their heritage?


----------



## abi

Coyote said:


> In the end what difference does it make? These are events that occurred over three thousand years ago. What matters is what people believe.


You don't see why it is important to know if there ever was a Jewish temple there? You don't see how this can end a huge part of the problem?



Coyote said:


> Why do you work so hard at disenfranchising the Jewish people from their heritage?


That is in your fantasy. I want peace. This is one path to beginning that process.


----------



## Yarddog

abi said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read his book years ago. I know all of the definitive findings which prove them wrong. I understand how you've twisted the narrative. None of that matters if you won't accept any evidence. So....what evidence will you accept?
> 
> 
> 
> Show me the evidence and let's go from there. I call your bluff.
Click to expand...



Where exactly do you say Jews come from then?  They pre- date any Muslim country or city existing to day and actually they lived ALL over the Middle east for centuries from Tunisia to Yemen. SO maybe we can say all of the ME is jewish homeland since we cant seem to nail it down here.


----------



## Coyote

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the end what difference does it make? These are events that occurred over three thousand years ago. What matters is what people believe.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't see why it is important to know if there ever was a Jewish temple there? You don't see how this can end a huge part of the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you work so hard at disenfranchising the Jewish people from their heritage?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That is in your fantasy. I want peace. This is one path to beginning that process.*
Click to expand...


Abi, I don't get it.  You threads almost entirely are based on delegitimizing the Jews - questioning their history, their existence, their beliefs, their identity.  How is that a path towards the process of peace?

As far as I can tell, that path usually only leads towards the deliberate destruction of a people.  First you remove their identity, then you take away their history, then you take away their future.  It's being done to the Palestinians - the relentless arguments that they are not a "real" people, that they are just Jordanian Arabs, that they have no roots.  And here you are doing it to the Jews.

This is supposed to promote peace?


----------



## fncceo

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?



Oh no!  I've seen the light ... all the Jews are gonna pack their bags and get out of the Promised Land...






Well ... maybe not ...


----------



## abi

Coyote said:


> Abi, I don't get it. You threads almost entirely are based on delegitimizing the Jews - questioning their history, their existence, their beliefs, their identity. How is that a path towards the process of peace?


That isn't, but I don't do that. You and Shusha (your sock?) constantly create these same straw men to argue with.



Coyote said:


> As far as I can tell, that path usually only leads towards the deliberate destruction of a people. First you remove their identity, then you take away their history, then you take away their future. It's being done to the Palestinians - the relentless arguments that they are not a "real" people, that they are just Jordanian Arabs, that they have no roots. And here you are doing it to the Jews.


I am not doing that to Jews (see above). And the Jewish people will be fine regardless of the horror the Palestinians have suffered at the hands of the zionists for decades.



Coyote said:


> This is supposed to promote peace?


Yes, as I explained, they might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.

We actually might be able to end this by simply looking at the facts.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

The Bible (both the Hebrew and Christian parts of it) can be divided into 2 categories (possible myths and fact-based).  Ppl can say that the stories of the Garden of Eden, Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel are myths.  But that a Jewish kingdom existed in the Middle East cannot be refuted.  Plenty of archaeology points to that fact.  For instance, there is the Mesha Stone, where the king of Moab speaks of his battles against Omri, king of Israel.  Josephus and the New Testament attest to the fact there there was a Kingdom of Judea, however big or small it was.  Have you ever gone to the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, a Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition, or walked thru the Western Wall tunnels, which point directly to the Temples that once stood there?  I would guess that the answers to all of these questions are "no."  Even your historical quotes by ppl saying, "The Jewish kingdom is no more" means that there must've been a Jewish kingdom there sometime.  So what exactly is your point in all this?


----------



## Roudy

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Abi, I don't get it. You threads almost entirely are based on delegitimizing the Jews - questioning their history, their existence, their beliefs, their identity. How is that a path towards the process of peace?
> 
> 
> 
> That isn't, but I don't do that. You and Shusha (your sock?) constantly create these same straw men to argue with.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I can tell, that path usually only leads towards the deliberate destruction of a people. First you remove their identity, then you take away their history, then you take away their future. It's being done to the Palestinians - the relentless arguments that they are not a "real" people, that they are just Jordanian Arabs, that they have no roots. And here you are doing it to the Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not doing that to Jews (see above). And the Jewish people will be fine regardless of the horror the Palestinians have suffered at the hands of the zionists for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is supposed to promote peace?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, as I explained, they might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.
> 
> We actually might be able to end this by simply looking at the facts.
Click to expand...

Hold what water, blabbermouth?  It is a historical fact that when Muslims invaded and conquered lands, they always either tore down religious sites and, or changed it into their mosque.  Take a look around the world and you will evidence of that. The Sofia mosque in Turkey and so many Churches in Spain, and in the ME in Egypt , Lebanon etc. which used to all be Christian lands at one point.

Speaking of myths....Let us know when you have evidence that Muhammad's spirit rode on a flying donkey to a mosque in Jerusalem after he died.


----------



## Roudy

fncceo said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh no!  I've seen the light ... all the Jews are gonna pack their bags and get out of the Promised Land...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well ... maybe not ...
Click to expand...

Maybe the one on the right is going away anyway. any day now she will be diagnosed with melanoma.


----------



## abi

ForeverYoung436 said:


> The Bible (both the Hebrew and Christian parts of it) can be divided into 2 categories (possible myths and fact-based).  Ppl can say that the stories of the Garden of Eden, Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel are myths.  But that a Jewish kingdom existed in the Middle East cannot be refuted.  Plenty of archaeology points to that fact.  For instance, there is the Mesha Stone, where the king of Moab speaks of his battles against Omri, king of Israel.  Josephus and the New Testament attest to the fact there there was a Kingdom of Judea, however big or small it was.  Have you ever gone to the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, a Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition, or walked thru the Western Wall tunnels, which point directly to the Temples that once stood there?  I would guess that the answers to all of these questions are "no."  Even your historical quotes by ppl saying, "The Jewish kingdom is no more" means that there must've been a Jewish kingdom there sometime.  So what exactly is your point in all this?


Do you understand the difference between your post and this discussion?

What if the Jews are praying at a wall that was the wall of a Roman fort? What if the temple was actually close by in the City of David as the Torah and archeologists suggest?


----------



## Coyote

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Abi, I don't get it. You threads almost entirely are based on delegitimizing the Jews - questioning their history, their existence, their beliefs, their identity. How is that a path towards the process of peace?
> 
> 
> 
> That isn't, but I don't do that. You and Shusha (your sock?) constantly create these same straw men to argue with.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I can tell, that path usually only leads towards the deliberate destruction of a people. First you remove their identity, then you take away their history, then you take away their future. It's being done to the Palestinians - the relentless arguments that they are not a "real" people, that they are just Jordanian Arabs, that they have no roots. And here you are doing it to the Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not doing that to Jews (see above). And the Jewish people will be fine regardless of the horror the Palestinians have suffered at the hands of the zionists for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is supposed to promote peace?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, as I explained, they might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.
> 
> We actually might be able to end this by simply looking at the facts.
Click to expand...


Religion is not about facts but about belief.  Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief.  Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.


----------



## abi

Coyote said:


> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.


I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.

Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.
> 
> 
> 
> I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.
> 
> Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.
Click to expand...


Good.  Abandon your belief that there is little connection of the Jewish people to that land and that the Jewish people invent history in contravention of facts.  For truth and peace.


----------



## Two Thumbs

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?


3 historians disagree with thousands historians.


do the math


----------



## Shusha

abi said:


> Yes, as I explained, they might have created this whole mess for nothing. Their claims that Muslims built their temple on top of Jewish ones do not appear to hold water. They very well might have been praying at a wall that was actually just a wall of their Roman conquerors. The irony, I know.
> 
> We actually might be able to end this by simply looking at the facts.



You DO realize that its not the wall that is the focus of Jewish prayer, right?  Jews gather at the wall for prayer partly because Jews are prevented from praying elsewhere.  (A violation of human rights).  In times past Jews have gathered for prayer in other places.  The focus for prayer is, always has been, the Holy of Holies.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.
> 
> 
> 
> I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.
> 
> Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.
Click to expand...



Sucks for you that the Jews have a tremendous historical connection to Israel.  It would be more convenient for you if there were little or no connection or history between the Jewish People and Israel...but as the soldiers of Israel say,  "Masada shall not fall again!"


----------



## OldLady

abi said:


> The Scriptures treat Israel as a secondary *kingdom of no importance*, a place of incorrigible sinners, whereas Judah is considered the great and just kingdom whose capital is Jerusalem, where King Solomon established a splendid temple during the glorious era of the united monarchy. *Finkelstein is dubious about the existence of this great united monarchy.*
> 
> *"There is no archaeological evidence for it,"* he says. "This is something unexampled in history. I don't think there is any other place in the world where there was a city with such a wretched material infrastructure but which succeeded in creating such a sweeping movement in its favor as Jerusalem, which even in its time of greatness *was a joke in comparison to the cities of Assyria, Babylon or Egypt.* It was a typical mountain village. There is *no magnificent finding, no gates of Nebuchadnezzar, no Assyrian reliefs, no Egyptian temples - nothing.* Even the temple couldn't compete with the temples of Egypt and their splendor."
> read more: Grounds for disbelief


Sounds to me as if this guy Finkelstein has an agenda.
There is layer upon layer of holy ruins beneath Jerusalem, and particularly under The Dome of the Rock.  Digs aren't allowed there.   Did he sift the sands of the entire desert to "prove" the Israeli's didn't pass through there?
So what if it wasn't as big as Egypt's temples?  WTF was as big as those?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

OldLady said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Scriptures treat Israel as a secondary *kingdom of no importance*, a place of incorrigible sinners, whereas Judah is considered the great and just kingdom whose capital is Jerusalem, where King Solomon established a splendid temple during the glorious era of the united monarchy. *Finkelstein is dubious about the existence of this great united monarchy.*
> 
> *"There is no archaeological evidence for it,"* he says. "This is something unexampled in history. I don't think there is any other place in the world where there was a city with such a wretched material infrastructure but which succeeded in creating such a sweeping movement in its favor as Jerusalem, which even in its time of greatness *was a joke in comparison to the cities of Assyria, Babylon or Egypt.* It was a typical mountain village. There is *no magnificent finding, no gates of Nebuchadnezzar, no Assyrian reliefs, no Egyptian temples - nothing.* Even the temple couldn't compete with the temples of Egypt and their splendor."
> read more: Grounds for disbelief
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds to me as if this guy Finkelstein has an agenda.
> There is layer upon layer of holy ruins beneath Jerusalem, and particularly under The Dome of the Rock.  Digs aren't allowed there.   Did he sift the sands of the entire desert to "prove" the Israeli's didn't pass through there?
> So what if it wasn't as big as Egypt's temples?  WTF was as big as those?
Click to expand...


And let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the Hebrews didn't wander the desert for 40 years.  That still has no bearing on the fact that there was a Judean Kingdom.


----------



## Shusha

ForeverYoung436 said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Scriptures treat Israel as a secondary *kingdom of no importance*, a place of incorrigible sinners, whereas Judah is considered the great and just kingdom whose capital is Jerusalem, where King Solomon established a splendid temple during the glorious era of the united monarchy. *Finkelstein is dubious about the existence of this great united monarchy.*
> 
> *"There is no archaeological evidence for it,"* he says. "This is something unexampled in history. I don't think there is any other place in the world where there was a city with such a wretched material infrastructure but which succeeded in creating such a sweeping movement in its favor as Jerusalem, which even in its time of greatness *was a joke in comparison to the cities of Assyria, Babylon or Egypt.* It was a typical mountain village. There is *no magnificent finding, no gates of Nebuchadnezzar, no Assyrian reliefs, no Egyptian temples - nothing.* Even the temple couldn't compete with the temples of Egypt and their splendor."
> read more: Grounds for disbelief
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds to me as if this guy Finkelstein has an agenda.
> There is layer upon layer of holy ruins beneath Jerusalem, and particularly under The Dome of the Rock.  Digs aren't allowed there.   Did he sift the sands of the entire desert to "prove" the Israeli's didn't pass through there?
> So what if it wasn't as big as Egypt's temples?  WTF was as big as those?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the Hebrews didn't wander the desert for 40 years.  That still has no bearing on the fact that there was a Judean Kingdom.
Click to expand...



The Palestinian mentality, in their rush to disenfranchise the Jewish people, make the error that if one thing is brought under question that the entire story fails.  But the simple truth is that there is mountains of evidence of Jewish presence in that land for 3000 years.  Denying that simply truth demonstrates that it is not grounded in fact or evidence but in undermining and disenfranchising the Jewish people.  

It doesn't matter what evidence we present -- people invested in denying reality are going to continue to deny reality.


----------



## Coyote

abi said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.
> 
> 
> 
> I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.
> 
> Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.
Click to expand...

But it isnt simple facts.  There are no simple facts available from thousands of years ago.  Much is guesswork on how to interpret tje evidence found in archaeology, historical narratives, etc.  There is often dosagreement among them.  

You are taking the work of two people and presenting it as fact and sufficient reason for a people to abandon some of the central tenets of their faith.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.
> 
> 
> 
> I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.
> 
> Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But it isnt simple facts.  There are no simple facts available from thousands of years ago.  Much is guesswork on how to interpret tje evidence found in archaeology, historical narratives, etc.  There is often dosagreement among them.
> 
> You are taking the work of two people and presenting it as fact and sufficient reason for a people to abandon some of the central tenets of their faith.
Click to expand...


Also not accurately representing the work of the two people.


----------



## teddyearp

Abi, thank you so much.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religion is not about facts but about belief. Even assuming what you are saying is factual, that is not going to change thousands of years of history and belief. Your idea of a path to peace would seem to be Jews giving up what the believe and quietly leaving it all to the Muslims rather than a mutual acceotance and tolerance of each oters rights to worship.
> 
> 
> 
> I have said from the start that when the narrative is proven false, change the narrative, not the facts.
> 
> Beliefs are fine, but if understanding simple facts can lead to peace, I would chose to abandon my beliefs for the sake of both truth and peace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But it isnt simple facts.  There are no simple facts available from thousands of years ago.  Much is guesswork on how to interpret tje evidence found in archaeology, historical narratives, etc.  There is often dosagreement among them.
> 
> You are taking the work of two people and presenting it as fact and sufficient reason for a people to abandon some of the central tenets of their faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also not accurately representing the work of the two people.
Click to expand...

It is cherry picked, unsurprisingly.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Much of the archaeology centers around the question of how grand the kingdom of David and Solomon was.  But, as Jews, we just finished celebrating the festival of Hanukkah.  There is absolutely no doubt at all that the Maccabean Hasmonean Kingdom of Judea existed.  So it's no use trying to rewrite history that is very well documented.  You can argue about the veracity of the Garden of Eden's existence, but not Judea's existence.


----------



## abi

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Much of the archaeology centers around the question of how grand the kingdom of David and Solomon was. But, as Jews, we just finished celebrating the festival of Hanukkah. There is absolutely no doubt at all that the Maccabean Hasmonean Kingdom of Judea existed. So it's no use trying to rewrite history that is very well documented. You can argue about the veracity of the Garden of Eden's existence, but not Judea's existence.


But if the Jews have been praying at the wrong wall, well then, problem solved. At least a major one regarding the Mount.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Shusha has been asking about this and as biblical stories are central to the zionist narrative, I  thought I'd give it a shot. Does this offer the Palestinian people any hope? I guess it depends if we can put science ahead of biblical tales, thus being able to change the narrative... and no, not an easy ask.
> 
> Back in 2002, two archeologists, Israel Finkelstein from Israel and Neil Asher Silberman from America, but who studied archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published a book that had the zionists going crazy because both of these men were highly respected in their field.
> Israel Finkelstein - Wikipedia
> Neil Asher Silberman - Wikipedia
> 
> What is strange is that this was not the first time that this information had been published. Their work actually replicated prior work that was done by another Israeli, Ze'ev Herzog, who published many of the same findings in 1999.
> 
> So, what are these findings and why did the zionists become enraged?
> 
> Herzog cites evidence supporting that *"the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. *Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that *the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.* And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the god of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that *the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai".*
> Ze'ev Herzog - Wikipedia
> 
> *...many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts...*
> https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869136&tag=ff0d01-20
> 
> Food for thought?


*2002*?...hilarious.
They have been finding *tons* of evidence all around the Temple Mount in the last few years, *jerkwad*.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> *2002*?...hilarious.
> They have been finding *tons* of evidence all around the Temple Mount in the last few years, *jerkwad*.


But there is no evidence that either temple was there and all the evidence points to that being a wall of a Roman fortress. If there were those temples, they were likely close in the City of David.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of the archaeology centers around the question of how grand the kingdom of David and Solomon was. But, as Jews, we just finished celebrating the festival of Hanukkah. There is absolutely no doubt at all that the Maccabean Hasmonean Kingdom of Judea existed. So it's no use trying to rewrite history that is very well documented. You can argue about the veracity of the Garden of Eden's existence, but not Judea's existence.
> 
> 
> 
> But if the Jews have been praying at the wrong wall, well then, problem solved. At least a major one regarding the Mount.
Click to expand...

We pray all over the world.
Is my shul not being on The Temple Mount not a valid place in which to pray?


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> *2002*?...hilarious.
> They have been finding *tons* of evidence all around the Temple Mount in the last few years, *jerkwad*.
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no evidence that either temple was there and all the evidence points to that being a wall of a Roman fortress. If there were those temples, they were likely close in the City of David.
Click to expand...

There's tons of evidence you Jew hating POS.
But since the only site you are allowed to visit is FuckTheJews.org you'll never know.
And I'm not going to spoonful an asshole like you.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> We pray all over the world.
> Is my shul not being on The Temple Mount not a valid place in which to pray?


But if the Jews have been praying at the wrong wall, well then, problem solved. At least a major one regarding the Mount.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> There's tons of evidence you Jew hating POS.
> But since the only site you are allowed to visit is FuckTheJews.org you'll never know.
> And I'm not going to spoonful an asshole like you.


You are funny. I was using only Jewish sources and even the bible. Go read the thread before you blow a gasket.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> We pray all over the world.
> Is my shul not being on The Temple Mount not a valid place in which to pray?
> 
> 
> 
> But if the Jews have been praying at the wrong wall, well then, problem solved. At least a major one regarding the Mount.
Click to expand...

The Western Wall is not the Temple Wall and we've known this since time immemorial you dunce.
It's simply the closest thing to the Temple Mount that is "Occupied" by a religion that has no Scriptural connection to the Mount.
But's that just fine to a Jew hater like you.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's tons of evidence you Jew hating POS.
> But since the only site you are allowed to visit is FuckTheJews.org you'll never know.
> And I'm not going to spoonful an asshole like you.
> 
> 
> 
> You are funny. I was using only Jewish sources and even the bible. Go read the thread before you blow a gasket.
Click to expand...

You were using a Jewish source found on a Jew hating site that has already been disproven in 2017.
The digs in the last several years have already gone 18 street levels below ground.
You are such a lying POS.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> The Western Wall is not the Temple Wall and we've known this since time immemorial you dunce.


Oh, cool, I keep hearing the Muslims built all that stuff 1000 years ago on top of Jewish temples. Please alert your zionists. We can end this madness.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Western Wall is not the Temple Wall and we've known this since time immemorial you dunce.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, cool, I keep hearing the Muslims built all that stuff 1000 years ago on top of Jewish temples. Please alert your zionists. We can end this madness.
Click to expand...

The Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, the Muslims.
Yes, all of your friends *invaded* Israel and that's fine because they weren't and aren't JOOOOS.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Western Wall is not the Temple Wall and we've known this since time immemorial you dunce.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, cool, I keep hearing the Muslims built all that stuff 1000 years ago on top of Jewish temples. Please alert your zionists. We can end this madness.
Click to expand...

How does it feel knowing there's not a damn thing you can do about justice finally being done.
Must hurt like a bitch.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> The Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, the Muslims.
> Yes, all of your friends *invaded* Israel and that's fine because they weren't and aren't JOOOOS.


I am just talking about the temple mount now and resolving this major issue.


----------



## abi

Indeependent said:


> How does it feel knowing there's not a damn thing you can do about justice finally being done.
> Must hurt like a bitch.


What justice? You just said it was not the wall of the temple.


----------



## fncceo

abi said:


> I am just talking about the temple mount now and resolving this major issue.



Not a major issue at all. It’s our wall now. 

Suck it.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, the Muslims.
> Yes, all of your friends *invaded* Israel and that's fine because they weren't and aren't JOOOOS.
> 
> 
> 
> I am just talking about the temple mount now and resolving this major issue.
Click to expand...

The issue has been resolved like every other issue you have brought up in vain.
Your mullah just pays you to post bullshit all day.


----------



## Indeependent

abi said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does it feel knowing there's not a damn thing you can do about justice finally being done.
> Must hurt like a bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> What justice? You just said it was not the wall of the temple.
Click to expand...

Why would that matter?
The Temple Mount is currently held by an invader and that fact doesn't seem to bother your Muslim conscious.
I forgot, Muslims don't have a conscious, just an Avoid Beheading Tax.


----------



## flacaltenn

abi said:


> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.



This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.

So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.

So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.

*Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..


----------



## P F Tinmore

flacaltenn said:


> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
Click to expand...




flacaltenn said:


> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.


The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.

Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
Click to expand...

1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?

Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .

Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?

I would like to see any and all sources to that.

Can you come up with anything before WWI ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
Click to expand...

Google.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Google.
Click to expand...

I thought so.  I got the answer before and that is why I brought up all of the above.

You are still hoping to attract some flies


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abi said:
> 
> 
> 
> This claim I have seen so oft-repeated appears to be simply that. It is a claim that was popularized in a propaganda video put out by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a bonus, another young lady comes on to explain the claim that the six day war was fought in self defense. It is only six minutes long and I would love the opportunity for academic discussion of these topics. For example, if something is factually incorrect, please state why, and post a source for the correction. Thanks in advance for any help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Google.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought so.  I got the answer before and that is why I brought up all of the above.
> 
> You are still hoping to attract some flies
Click to expand...

Do you think I work for you?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is really simple.  The REGION of Palestine never HAD a central govt. Never had an Army. Never had a single titular leader. So there were folks that were INDIGENOUS to the area that NEVER exerted the energy to become a state or a nation. They lived for CENTURIES at the whims of various external rulers and empires.* OR EVEN -- likely under the rule of the JEWISH kings of Israel -- way back when.. *The REGION of Palestine spent very little of the last 2400 years under ANY FORM of local control. They were Romans or Ottomans or Brits or subjects of King Solomon for that matter. IN BETWEEN empires there was either chaos like the Crusades, or semi peace consisting of VERY sparse and distributed local or tribal govt.
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> So when the property came BACK on the market after WW2 -- it was divided. And the rest is the MODERN history of "palestinians"..  Tune in NEXT week for the FUTURE of the Palestinian people in the Holy Land.
> 
> *Anyone got a list of the ancient great LEADERS and RULERS of Palestine?* Didn't think so. See??  I can get just as snarky as the propaganda babes in that OP video..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So -- Palestinians are indigenous people to that region. No doubt. But they never LOST a country or a nation or even a central local govt in the process. You MIGHT say -- they never "developed" the property as MILLENIA whizzed by their covered heads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Google.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought so.  I got the answer before and that is why I brought up all of the above.
> 
> You are still hoping to attract some flies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think I work for you?
Click to expand...

Sorry, all positions are filled


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The lack of development is a common colonial thing. The Palestinians had a functioning society with homes, farms, and businesses. Distribution systems to get products to market. They produced a surplus of food that was exported to other countries. They had a positive balance of trade in international markets.
> 
> Since Israel, we now have two countries on welfare.
> 
> 
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Google.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought so.  I got the answer before and that is why I brought up all of the above.
> 
> You are still hoping to attract some flies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think I work for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, all positions are filled
Click to expand...

So if you want to know, look it up yourself. But you don't really want to know so I won't waste my time.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1300 years of Palestinian Arabs living in the region known as Palestine (since 135 CE), and they were under colonial "thing" all of that time?
> 
> Oh, wait, you are speaking only about the end of the 19th century, or early 20th century when the whole region was controlled by the Ottoman Empire and THEY decided what was what .
> 
> Other countries?   Exporting?  International Market? Before WWI  ?
> 
> I would like to see any and all sources to that.
> 
> Can you come up with anything before WWI ?
> 
> 
> 
> Google.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought so.  I got the answer before and that is why I brought up all of the above.
> 
> You are still hoping to attract some flies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think I work for you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, all positions are filled
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if you want to know, look it up yourself. But you don't really want to know so I won't waste my time.
Click to expand...

Did you misread or totally fail to read my post?
I already looked the answer up, once.

I know the answer.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Pictures speak a thousand words:

A Tour of the Holy Land 1831-1910


----------



## montelatici

Documentary films are even better:


----------



## Sixties Fan

People who consume the news today about the Middle East would be very surprised to learn many of the facts brought up in the book. (Readers of this site know all of this.)

For example, Arabs hardly ever referred to the area as "Palestine," calling it "Southern Syria."





And the Arabs in the region likewise didn't call themselves Palestinians, but (at best) Southern Syrians:






Arabs from Palestine and Syria were dead set against "Palestine" being separated from Syria.

(full article online)

British Naval analysis in 1943: No such thing as Palestinians or Palestinian nationalism ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## montelatici

*PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*

Now facts:

*HAIFA, 1920*
The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:


Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
Opposed Jewish immigration.
Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.





Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.

Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online


----------



## P F Tinmore

montelatici said:


> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online





montelatici said:


> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.


RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
Click to expand...


Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.


----------



## montelatici

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
Click to expand...


It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
Click to expand...


As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.

Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.


----------



## montelatici

rylah said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
Click to expand...


Much as you would like to believe that Zionist bullshit, only the Bedouins in Palestine have a discernible amount of Arabian DNA.  The Palestinians are overwhelmingly the descendants of the people that have always lived on Palestine, as is the case in almost all parts of the world.  They are descendants of people of various religions that converted to Christianity after Christianity became the state religion of Rome.  Those already not Christians converted from paganism (Roman religions), Judaism, Samaritanism  and of other religions before it became dangerous to not be a Christian.  You may be unaware of the fact that the first Christians once practiced Judaism.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Who Truly Occupies Whom?


----------



## montelatici

rylah said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
Click to expand...


Having lived as a child and worked as an adult in Arab-speaking and Arabian countries I can confirm that you are full of crap.  An Egyptian (or Palestinian) has almost nothing in common with a Saudi except for religion and language (only if they are educated and both speak formal Arabic).  While I was stationed in Saudi Arabia as a young army officer (U.S. Army) we had many Palestinians working for us as third country nationals (TCNs) who handled much of the clerical work.  They were very western compared to the Saudis.  They wore western clothes (no thobes) and in private would agree with us that the Saudis were extremely strange and backward people.  As a kid in Tunisia (my dad was military attache' there) the Tunisians were also far more western and generically mediteranean than any Arabian/Bedouin.  In Palestine the Arabians are the Bedouins, who don't consider themselves Palestinians.  In all places where the Arabians ruled, the local people would imitate the culture of the ruling Arabians, even claim some familial ties to the Arabians.  That is true in all societies that were under foreign rule.  The Romanians today claim to be descendants of the Romans that ruled Dacia for a time.  In fact, though the language is a Latin derivative, Romanians have very little Roman ancestry.  Your dog won't hunt.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Having lived as a child and worked as an adult in Arab-speaking and Arabian countries I can confirm that you are full of crap.  An Egyptian (or Palestinian) has almost nothing in common with a Saudi except for religion and language (only if they are educated and both speak formal Arabic).  While I was stationed in Saudi Arabia as a young army officer (U.S. Army) we had many Palestinians working for us as third country nationals (TCNs) who handled much of the clerical work.  They were very western compared to the Saudis.  They wore western clothes (no thobes) and in private would agree with us that the Saudis were extremely strange and backward people.  As a kid in Tunisia (my dad was military attache' there) the Tunisians were also far more western and generically mediteranean than any Arabian/Bedouin.  In Palestine the Arabians are the Bedouins, who don't consider themselves Palestinians.  In all places where the Arabians ruled, the local people would imitate the culture of the ruling Arabians, even claim some familial ties to the Arabians.  That is true in all societies that were under foreign rule.  The Romanians today claim to be descendants of the Romans that ruled Dacia for a time.  In fact, though the language is a Latin derivative, Romanians have very little Roman ancestry.  Your dog won't hunt.
Click to expand...


rylah has some knowledge of these things, being Israeli and having lived in the Mideast, unlike Tinmore who has never set foot there.  During my travels in Israel, I've also met some Arabs.  Somewhat Westernized, but still Arabs.  Why does the Palestinian Charter make such a big point of saying that Palestinians are part of the larger Arab Nation, instead of emphasizing their individuality?  They can't even wait to get to that point.  It's in the very first paragraph (I think in the first sentence, if I'm not mistaken).


----------



## montelatici

Being Israeli means he knows nothing of these things, seeing things from only one point of view.  Having lived in the Arabic-speaking world as a child and an adult as an American, I have a much better perspective.

The Palestinians Charter caters to and solicits solidarity from the Arabic speaking world. There similar instances of charters/constitutions e.g. pan-slavism (Yugoslavia), similar movements among Spanish-speaking nations, etc.  It didn't mean the Croats and Serbs (who speak the same language) lacked individuality as was later found out.


----------



## admonit

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In Palestine the Arabians are the Bedouins, who don't consider themselves Palestinians.
Click to expand...

That's what you say.
And this is what Palestinians say:
"The Palestinians are the Arabs"
A Document of General Principles and Policies


----------



## Sixties Fan

Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..





In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.

(full article online)

Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”


----------



## ForeverYoung436

What do you say about Shirley Temper, monte and Jose, after your endless pictures of Jarrod Kushner and other Jews who don't look so "Semitic"?  When I mentioned that I once spoke with a blond Palestinian man, you guys didn't believe me...but you can't deny the picture of that girl above.


----------



## Mindful




----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”


FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
Click to expand...

You continue to not know the meaning of Indigenous Jews and insist on the redefined meaning of it.......for dummies.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You continue to not know the meaning of Indigenous Jews and insist on the redefined meaning of it.......for dummies.
Click to expand...

And some people say that Palestinians must be brown Arabs.

The whole argument is stupid.

My question is why none of those Jews in the DoI were native Jews. The whole government was foreigners.


----------



## montelatici

ForeverYoung436 said:


> What do you say about Shirley Temper, monte and Jose, after your endless pictures of Jarrod Kushner and other Jews who don't look so "Semitic"?  When I mentioned that I once spoke with a blond Palestinian man, you guys didn't believe me...but you can't deny the picture of that girl above.



Why wouldn't Palestinians have blonde blue-eyed people?  Some are descendants of Europeans.  Romans and the Crusaders.


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Much as you would like to believe that Zionist bullshit, only the Bedouins in Palestine have a discernible amount of Arabian DNA.  The Palestinians are overwhelmingly the descendants of the people that have always lived on Palestine, as is the case in almost all parts of the world.  They are descendants of people of various religions that converted to Christianity after Christianity became the state religion of Rome.  Those already not Christians converted from paganism (Roman religions), Judaism, Samaritanism  and of other religions before it became dangerous to not be a Christian.  You may be unaware of the fact that the first Christians once practiced Judaism.
Click to expand...


Not only the Bedouins migrated into the region. There Kurdish soldiers who were left in thousands, most permanently in Hebron. There was a wide variety of Arabian tribes that took part in the invasions and never ending wars. There're whole communities of Egyptian descendants of soldiers and workers that added to to the demographics just prior 1st Zionist immigration. There're Sudanese, Greeks, Afghani/Circasians... You name it.

And this was just in the modern time. There was so much population exchange, and migration documented even by Palestinian sources that it's unbelievable that one can still claim this. 
Your static model is lunacy. Only small communities like the Palestinian Jews, one that kept a continuous presence and the indigenous culture could keep to their roots during the numerous invasions, wars and migrations that brought foreign people.


----------



## Mindful

montelatici said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you say about Shirley Temper, monte and Jose, after your endless pictures of Jarrod Kushner and other Jews who don't look so "Semitic"?  When I mentioned that I once spoke with a blond Palestinian man, you guys didn't believe me...but you can't deny the picture of that girl above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why wouldn't Palestinians have blonde blue-eyed people?  Some are descendants of Europeans.  Romans and the Crusaders.
Click to expand...


I've seen them. Around Nazareth market. Red heads with freckles too.

But they were *Arabs.*


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
Click to expand...


Actually, Levant before the Muslim invasion was predominantly European. With each invasion, cultural and military there was a period of demographic exchange.

The average Palestinian Arab is as much an (i)migrants as the average US citizen.


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PALESTINE ARAB CONGRESS*
> 
> Now facts:
> 
> *HAIFA, 1920*
> The third congress opened on 4 December. It was attended by 36 delegates, including Sheik Suleiman al-Taji Al-Faruqi and head of the Catholic community Bullus Shehadeh. The congress was opened by Haifa's mufti, Muhammad Murad. Recently deposed mayor of Jerusalem Musa al-Husayni was elected president and chairman of the nine-member executive committee, a post he held until his death in 1934. The congress called for Palestine to be ruled under identical terms as those of the Mandate of Iraq, with a parliament elected by a one-citizen-one-vote system. Other resolutions:
> 
> 
> Called for Palestine to be part of the independent Arab state promised in the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence. Calls for unity with Syria were dropped, since the area was now under French control.
> Condemned the notion of a homeland for the Jewish people.
> Objected to the recognition of the Hebrew as an official language.
> Opposed Jewish immigration.
> Declared the British administration illegal, since the League of Nations had not yet reached a decision about the status of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some delegates, such as Daoud Isa, complained that the congress was not sufficiently radical. After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition. The British claim that the congress was not representative led to a broad campaign by the Muslim-Christian Associations to raise public awareness.
> 
> Palestine Arab Congress | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> After the congress the executive committee met British High Commissioner Herbert Samuel, who insisted that they accept British policy on the Jewish national homeland to receive official recognition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> RoccoR take note. The Palestinians had to buy into the settler colonial project to be recognized. You have always falsely portrayed the Palestinians on this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You notice there's no notice of "Palestinians" even in the 3rd* Arab congress*?
> It's very convenient to portray Arabian tribes as indigenous while neglecting Palestinian Jews who lived there longer.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's the Palestine "Arab" Congress, not "Arabian".  You confuse Arabic speaking people, who adopted the language of the Arabian rulers with Arabians.  They are descended from people who were predominately Christians before the Arabian invasion, hence the participation of the remaining unconverted Christian Palestinians in the Palestine Congresses. Your old dog won't hunt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as this is what You'd like to believe, the reality is that  Arabian tribal culture is at the center of Arab street in Palestine exactly like in Yemen. With villages like Nabi Saleh where only the Tamimi tribe lives, and elections for tribal leaders independent from political parties.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs keep to their Arabian roots and traditions very openly, just not in English.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Having lived as a child and worked as an adult in Arab-speaking and Arabian countries I can confirm that you are full of crap.  An Egyptian (or Palestinian) has almost nothing in common with a Saudi except for religion and language (only if they are educated and both speak formal Arabic).  While I was stationed in Saudi Arabia as a young army officer (U.S. Army) we had many Palestinians working for us as third country nationals (TCNs) who handled much of the clerical work.  They were very western compared to the Saudis.  They wore western clothes (no thobes) and in private would agree with us that the Saudis were extremely strange and backward people.  As a kid in Tunisia (my dad was military attache' there) the Tunisians were also far more western and generically mediteranean than any Arabian/Bedouin.  In Palestine the Arabians are the Bedouins, who don't consider themselves Palestinians.  In all places where the Arabians ruled, the local people would imitate the culture of the ruling Arabians, even claim some familial ties to the Arabians.  That is true in all societies that were under foreign rule.  The Romanians today claim to be descendants of the Romans that ruled Dacia for a time.  In fact, though the language is a Latin derivative, Romanians have very little Roman ancestry.  Your dog won't hunt.
Click to expand...


Yaalla Lawrence of Arabia halas with this pretentious BS.
Tunisian indigenous tribes don't bear Arabian names like the tribes in Palestine.

 Mind You, we're talking about Asia. not Africa..."shirts and stuff in the 20th century"


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> Being Israeli means he knows nothing of these things, seeing things from only one point of view.  Having lived in the Arabic-speaking world as a child and an adult as an American, I have a much better perspective.
> 
> The Palestinians Charter caters to and solicits solidarity from the Arabic speaking world. There similar instances of charters/constitutions e.g. pan-slavism (Yugoslavia), similar movements among Spanish-speaking nations, etc.  It didn't mean the Croats and Serbs (who speak the same language) lacked individuality as was later found out.


What does "Slavenism" has to do with indigenous people of the Levant??

This is exactly the Western arrogant hypocrisy that I'm talking about, You want to squeeze people into Your own categories. They don't work.

 Why? Because if You had any idea or respect for the indigenous people ANYWHERE, not only the Jews would've been helped to create a state but also Kurds, Druze and the bigger Arab confederations of tribes (to whom Arab tribes in Palestine also relate Abbas Tamimi, Shamar etc.) instead of squeezing them like a can of TUNA FISH into those idiotic borders ever created in history.

Tribes in Iraq:

















... look where the Tamimi tribe is indigenous to and holds lands for centuries before arriving in Palestine. And I didn't even start with their state in the Gulf.

And as always- I don't mean to disenfranchise Arab rights, they  have a longstanding presence everywhere in the region. But Westerners don't understand pan-Arab imperialism, and  see imaginary borders instead of natural ones, out of arrogance, on account of the many indigenous people in the region.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
Click to expand...



*Daniel Oster* - signed the Declaration, 1st Knesset and mayor of Jerusalem, husband of Julia Meni native of Hebron.
*Rabbi Yaakov Meir* -native Jerusalemite, was the 1st Rishon LeZion, and head of Chief Rabbinate of future State of Israel. Husband to Rachel of the Itzhaki family.
*Ben Zion Meir Chai Uziel* - native Jerusalemite, 1st Rishon LeZion and Chief rabbi of the State of Israel.
*Israel Rokah *- mayor of Tel-Aviv and 1st Knesset, at the time he was the 10th generation of a family that lived in Jerusalem and owned lands in Jaffa.
*Yosef Sapir - *1st  Knesset., native of Jerusalem of a peasant family which owned lands, his wife is daughter of Rabbi S.Z. Cohen Shapira.
*Tawfik Toubi -* 1st Knesset .
*Seif el-Din el-Zoubi - *1st Knesset.
*Amin-Salim Jarjora - * 1st Knesset
*Eliyahu Elyashar - *native Jerusalemite descendant of Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, 1st Knesset.


Q. I hear this narrative all the time, however I don't see Americans having any objection to having a  foreign immigrant govt. Did You guys question only Obama or anyone else of all the others if they were cough..cough... "native"...US presidents?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *Daniel Oster* - signed the Declaration, 1st Knesset and mayor of Jerusalem, husband of Julia Meni native of Hebron.
> *Rabbi Yaakov Meir* -native Jerusalemite, was the 1st Rishon LeZion, and head of Chief Rabbinate of future State of Israel. Husband to Rachel of the Itzhaki family.
> *Ben Zion Meir Chai Uziel* - native Jerusalemite, 1st Rishon LeZion and Chief rabbi of the State of Israel.
> *Israel Rokah *- mayor of Tel-Aviv and 1st Knesset, at the time he was the 10th generation of a family that lived in Jerusalem and owned lands in Jaffa.
> *Yosef Sapir - *1st  Knesset., native of Jerusalem of a peasant family which owned lands, his wife is daughter of Rabbi S.Z. Cohen Shapira.
> *Tawfik Toubi -* 1st Knesset .
> *Seif el-Din el-Zoubi - *1st Knesset.
> *Amin-Salim Jarjora - * 1st Knesset
> *Eliyahu Elyashar - *native Jerusalemite descendant of Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, 1st Knesset.
> 
> 
> Q. I hear this narrative all the time, however I don't see Americans having any objection to having a  foreign immigrant govt. Did You guys question only Obama or anyone else of all the others if they were cough..cough... "native"...US presidents?
Click to expand...

Category:Signatories of the Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *Daniel Oster* - signed the Declaration, 1st Knesset and mayor of Jerusalem, husband of Julia Meni native of Hebron.
> *Rabbi Yaakov Meir* -native Jerusalemite, was the 1st Rishon LeZion, and head of Chief Rabbinate of future State of Israel. Husband to Rachel of the Itzhaki family.
> *Ben Zion Meir Chai Uziel* - native Jerusalemite, 1st Rishon LeZion and Chief rabbi of the State of Israel.
> *Israel Rokah *- mayor of Tel-Aviv and 1st Knesset, at the time he was the 10th generation of a family that lived in Jerusalem and owned lands in Jaffa.
> *Yosef Sapir - *1st  Knesset., native of Jerusalem of a peasant family which owned lands, his wife is daughter of Rabbi S.Z. Cohen Shapira.
> *Tawfik Toubi -* 1st Knesset .
> *Seif el-Din el-Zoubi - *1st Knesset.
> *Amin-Salim Jarjora - * 1st Knesset
> *Eliyahu Elyashar - *native Jerusalemite descendant of Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, 1st Knesset.
> 
> 
> Q. I hear this narrative all the time, however I don't see Americans having any objection to having a  foreign immigrant govt. Did You guys question only Obama or anyone else of all the others if they were cough..cough... "native"...US presidents?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Category:Signatories of the Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


Hard to fit that narrative huh... mind You I didn't even look beyond the 1st Knesset or the Moyal and Aboulafia families in the Knesset. Virtually all of those who opposed the govt were Ashkenazic immigrants.

*Rabbi Yaakov Meir* -native Jerusalemite, was the 1st Rishon LeZion, and head of Chief Rabbinate of future State of Israel. Husband to Rachel of the Itzhaki family.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Be that as it may, this photo of Ahed “Shirley Temper” Tamimiin court gives me some satisfaction – not just because she has been indicted for assault, but because if you had to pick the one person in the photo who looks the least Middle Eastern..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case you are wondering, Shirley looks the way she does because she is likely a “Bushnak”, a descendant of Bosnian Muslims who emigrated to Palestine in the times of the Ottoman empire.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Wanna Play “Who’s Indigenous?”
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Not one was a native Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *Daniel Oster* - signed the Declaration, 1st Knesset and mayor of Jerusalem, husband of Julia Meni native of Hebron.
> *Rabbi Yaakov Meir* -native Jerusalemite, was the 1st Rishon LeZion, and head of Chief Rabbinate of future State of Israel. Husband to Rachel of the Itzhaki family.
> *Ben Zion Meir Chai Uziel* - native Jerusalemite, 1st Rishon LeZion and Chief rabbi of the State of Israel.
> *Israel Rokah *- mayor of Tel-Aviv and 1st Knesset, at the time he was the 10th generation of a family that lived in Jerusalem and owned lands in Jaffa.
> *Yosef Sapir - *1st  Knesset., native of Jerusalem of a peasant family which owned lands, his wife is daughter of Rabbi S.Z. Cohen Shapira.
> *Tawfik Toubi -* 1st Knesset .
> *Seif el-Din el-Zoubi - *1st Knesset.
> *Amin-Salim Jarjora - * 1st Knesset
> *Eliyahu Elyashar - *native Jerusalemite descendant of Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar, 1st Knesset.
> 
> 
> Q. I hear this narrative all the time, however I don't see Americans having any objection to having a  foreign immigrant govt. Did You guys question only Obama or anyone else of all the others if they were cough..cough... "native"...US presidents?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Category:Signatories of the Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


*Seif el-Din el-Zoubi* .....BTW it's the same infamous Zoubi family, in the Knesset today that on one side promotes Israel while on the organizes riots. Nevertheless good money






El-Zoubi was born in 1913 in Nazareth, where he attended high school. During the British Mandate of Palestine, he was active in the Haganah, and later received the Fighter of the State Decoration. From 1959 to 1974 he was the mayor of Nazareth.

In 1949 he was elected to the Knesset as the leader of the Democratic List of Nazareth. He was re-elected in 1951 on the Democratic List for Israeli Arabs, and 1955, but resigned from the Knesset on 13 February 1956. In 1959 he became mayor of Nazareth, holding the post until 1965, when he returned to the Knesset on the Progress and Development list, which briefly merged into Cooperation and Development before regaining its independence. He was re-elected in 1969 elections, and in 1971 became mayor of Nazareth again, holding the post until 1974. After re-election in 1973, el-Zoubi was appointed Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q. Still can't find a native govt. in the US?


----------



## montelatici

List of Native Americans in the United States Congress - Wikipedia


----------



## rylah

*Palestinian Jews - Eliyahu Elyashar






In 1938 he became a member of the Sephardi Community Committee in Jerusalem, and also served as a member of its presidium. In 1942 he was elected its president. In the same year he started publishing and editing the weekly newspaper Hed HaMizrah, which he continued to do until 1952.[2]

A member of the Jewish National Council, he was amongst the leadership of the Haganah in Jerusalem and served as a member of the Defence Committee of the Provisional State Council after Israeli independence.[2] In the first Knesset elections in 1949 he was placed second on the Sephardim and Oriental Communities list, and became a Knesset member when the party won four seats. He headed the party for the 1951 elections, in which it won two seats. Shortly after the elections the party merged into the General Zionists.




*

*Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar* (1 June 1817 – 21 July 1906), also known as Yisa Berakhah, was a 19th-century Sephardirabbi in Palestine. He became Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Palestine in 1893.

He was born in Safed to the Elyashar family, a prominent Sephardi rabbinical family which had been in Palestine for centuries. His father, rabbi Eliezer Yeruham Elyashar, was a shochet. In 1853 he was appointed _dayan_ in Jerusalem and became head of the _beth din_ in 1869. In 1893 he became the _Rishon LeZion_ or Sephardi chief rabbi of Palestine. Rabbi Shmuel Salant was the chief rabbi of the Ashkenazi community at the time and they enjoyed very warm relations and collaborated on various issues affecting the entire Jewish settlement in Palestine.

Elyashar wrote thousands of responses to questions from Ashkenazim and Sephardim throughout the world, most of which were published in the Questions and Responsa "_Maase Ish_".[1]

The Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Shaul is named after Elyashar.[2]

Some of his descendants have since changed the English spelling of the last name from Elyashar to Eliashar.


----------



## Sixties Fan

I just found an intriguing book called "Stirring Times: Or, Records from Jerusalem Consular Chronicles of 1853 to 1856" written by the British consul to Jerusalem at the time. While there are many travelogues from that time period, all of those are necessarily dependent on information from guides and others. This book, however, is really source material on how things were at that time.

The author, James Finn, devoted a chapter on the Jews of Jerusalem and other towns, and it is fascinating in its detail and uncovering facts that are little known today. This post will focus on what Finn has to say about Jewish/Muslim relations at the time.

It is hardly the harmonious pre-Zionist existence that Muslims will have you believe.

(full article online)

Jewish relations with Muslims in Palestine in the 1850s ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

Many Christians in Palestine were at least as hostile to Jews as the Muslims were, as we see from these extracts from "Stirring Times: Or, Records from Jerusalem Consular Chronicles of 1853 to 1856" , which include blood libels:

(full article online)

Jewish relations with Christians in Palestine in the 1840s - 50s ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Well, I took a DNA test, since Ashkenaz Jews are often called "foreigners" to Israel.  The results were VERY interesting, although it was a bit hard to wade thru the scientific jargon, and science is not my best subject.  BTW, both my parents were Polish Jews.  So, bottom line:  Even though the test determined that I was 100% European, certain "markers" indicate that my ancestors came from the Middle East originally, most likely from an area around Syria.  So there you have it:  European Jews are not "Khazars" or Italians.  My ancestors originally came from an area around Syria, as I knew all along, even without a DNA test.  In fact, despite my white-as-a-ghost appearance, the test determined I was more closely related genetically to the Middle Easterners of today, rather than to the Europeans of today.


----------



## frigidweirdo

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Well, I took a DNA test, since Ashkenaz Jews are often called "foreigners" to Israel.  The results were VERY interesting, although it was a bit hard to wade thru the scientific jargon, and science is not my best subject.  BTW, both my parents were Polish Jews.  So, bottom line:  Even though the test determined that I was 100% European, certain "markers" indicate that my ancestors came from the Middle East originally, most likely from an area around Syria.  So there you have it:  European Jews are not "Khazars" or Italians.  My ancestors originally came from an area around Syria, as I knew all along, even without a DNA test.  In fact, despite my white-as-a-ghost appearance, the test determined I was more closely related genetically to the Middle Easterners of today, rather than to the Europeans of today.



Now the question is, are native of the area?


----------



## Sixties Fan

frigidweirdo said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I took a DNA test, since Ashkenaz Jews are often called "foreigners" to Israel.  The results were VERY interesting, although it was a bit hard to wade thru the scientific jargon, and science is not my best subject.  BTW, both my parents were Polish Jews.  So, bottom line:  Even though the test determined that I was 100% European, certain "markers" indicate that my ancestors came from the Middle East originally, most likely from an area around Syria.  So there you have it:  European Jews are not "Khazars" or Italians.  My ancestors originally came from an area around Syria, as I knew all along, even without a DNA test.  In fact, despite my white-as-a-ghost appearance, the test determined I was more closely related genetically to the Middle Easterners of today, rather than to the Europeans of today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now the question is, are native of the area?
Click to expand...

He is more a Native of the area than all the Arabs who came from Arabia originally.  

Obsessing over who is "born" in any place is not good for one's health.

None of the Europeans or Asians who have been born in the Americas since the 1600s can claim to be the Natives of the Americans, even if the word native is sometimes used to denote someone who was born in a certain place.

The First Nations of any place in the Americas, Australia, etc continue to be the Indigenous people of those places, just as the Jewish Nation People are the indigenous people of the Ancient Land of Canaan, later known as Israel and Judea.  And later the name changed to Syria Palestinia by the Romans in order to stop the Jewish revolts against them.

"Born in the USA" does not make one a Native or Indigenous of that area of the world.  Not now, not ever.

Born in the region of Palestine, also does not make anyone a Native or Indigenous of that area.

The meaning of Native and Indigenous continues to be the same and continues to refer to a certain people/tribes/nations, from a certain time, who lived, or continued to live in an area of the world where they created the culture and language which remained in that area.

That is the case of the Jewish Tribes/People/Nation in ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea - Palestinian region, and now (part of it) known as Israel again.

The Indigenous People/Nation are sovereign of part of their ancient homeland, again.


----------



## Shusha

Terms like "native" and "indigenous" never refer to individuals.  They refer to the collective -- the culture which developed _in situ.  _It is the collective which holds the rights -- not individuals.  It has nothing at all to do with any individual's genetic make-up, birthplace, migration or anything else that is specific to that individual.  The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the individual is recognized as part of the collective, as decided through self-identification and group acceptance by that collective.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Terms like "native" and "indigenous" never refer to individuals.  They refer to the collective -- the culture which developed _in situ.  _It is the collective which holds the rights -- not individuals.  It has nothing at all to do with any individual's genetic make-up, birthplace, migration or anything else that is specific to that individual.  The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the individual is recognized as part of the collective, as decided through self-identification and group acceptance by that collective.





Shusha said:


> The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the individual is recognized as part of the collective, as decided through self-identification and group acceptance by that collective.


That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.



So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
Click to expand...

The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
Click to expand...


They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
Click to expand...

Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
Click to expand...


When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
Click to expand...


The _Tinmore Vortex_

If the Jewish people were not accepted as Arab-Moslem (academic), why would they identify as Arab-Moslem "Pal'istanians"?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
Click to expand...


Why then Arabs in 1919 identified as Syrian *Arabs, *
while Jews established a bank, press and an orchestra bearing the name "Palestinian"?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is pretty much the same everywhere. People who moved to Palestine and identified as Palestinian and were accepted as Palestinians became Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?
Click to expand...

Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> 
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.
Click to expand...


Explain, because each time You use the term "Palestinian" it is when You claim Jews do not belong, not the people of the place.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.



What is "Palestinian"?  

You are using a label while failing to be clear about its meaning.  Either being "Palestinian" means to be one of the distinct cultures developed in situ in the territory in question, in which case the Jewish people were most CERTAINLY being "Palestinian" or being "Palestinian" means something specifically Arab, in which case I remind you the Jewish people are not obligated to adopt another culture in order to be considered indigenous, as that re-defines the word, or you think being "Palestinian" has some sort of third meaning, in which case please elaborate for clarity.


----------



## JakeStarkey

What is wrong with you numbskulls?

The Jews are not going anywhere.  The so-called Palestinians, oth?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.



What defines a "Palestinian" then?  You've already stated that it is not dependent on immigration, on religion or on (Arab) ethnicity.  So what defines a "Palestinian" in the context of nativeness or indigeneity?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Explain, because each time You use the term "Palestinian" it is when You claim Jews do not belong, not the people of the place.
Click to expand...

It is not my fault that they kept themselves out of that loop.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you will cut out all this nonsense about colonialists and foreign invaders, then?
> 
> 
> 
> The colonialists did not self identify as Palestinian and were not accepted as Palestinian. They kept themselves out of that loop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.
Click to expand...


Nonsense. Arabs- islamics have only allowed kuffar to "fit in fine" when Arabs-islamics are in a position of oppressive majority. At no time in islamist history have the kuffar been treated as equals.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What defines a "Palestinian" then?  You've already stated that it is not dependent on immigration, on religion or on (Arab) ethnicity.  So what defines a "Palestinian" in the context of nativeness or indigeneity?
Click to expand...

You already did.


Shusha said:


> The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the individual is recognized as part of the collective, as decided through self-identification and group acceptance by that collective.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They had another loop -- their own culture _in situ_.  They are not required to adopt another culture, even if you want to argue that Arab Palestine is also a distinct culture _in situ_.
> 
> 
> 
> Their bad. They went to Palestine and shunned everything Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When You say "Palestinian" You mean Arab?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. Not all Palestinians are Arab or Muslim. They fit in fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Explain, because each time You use the term "Palestinian" it is when You claim Jews do not belong, not the people of the place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not my fault that they kept themselves out of that loop.
Click to expand...


And now in English please.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You already did.
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the individual is recognized as part of the collective, as decided through self-identification and group acceptance by that collective.
Click to expand...


Excellent.  We agree.

So, enough talk about foreigners and invaders.  The Jewish people, we agree, are all part of a singular collective based on shared cultural identity, self-identification and group acceptance, regardless of the specific features they hold as individuals.  Therefore, as a singular collective made up of a group which shares a culture developed _in situ, _the Jewish people -- in their entirety -- must be considered indigenous to that land.

We are done here.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore

*Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎ 

The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew: מִדְבַּר יְהוּדָה‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.







Q.Why do Arabs still call it the "Jewish Desert"?


----------



## Sixties Fan

The reason that Bellerose matters is because he encourages a widening of our understanding of the conflict.

By rightfully insisting upon the indigeneity of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel he forces an expansion of the conversation both geographically and historically.

This is not a fight merely between Israelis and Arabs residing within the Jewish home. This is a fight between the indigenous Jewish population and their former Arab and Muslim conquerors who have yet to give up on reinstating theo-political domination. This makes it a struggle between the tiny Jewish minority in the Middle East and the far larger Arab and Muslim populations that surround them.

That is the obvious implication of insisting upon Jewish indigeneity because the very idea of Jewish indigeneity to the Land of Israel contradicts Arab and Muslim imperial ambitions within the Jewish home.
It is inescapable.

(full article online)

Acknowledging Ryan Bellerose  (Michael Lumish) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

“Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.

“Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”

In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.

*Who Are the Palestinians?*
As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”

There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.

The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:

”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.

”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.

”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.

Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.

The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.

(full article online)

Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian


----------



## theliq

Sixties Fan said:


> “Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.
> 
> “Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”
> 
> In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.
> 
> *Who Are the Palestinians?*
> As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”
> 
> There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.
> 
> The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:
> 
> ”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.
> 
> ”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.
> 
> ”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.
> 
> The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian


If by your analogy there has never been a Palestine but a Semitic Palestinian People,then surely Non Semitic Converts Jew=Boy Zionist Terrorists,certainly have no claim to this land


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> “Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.
> 
> “Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”
> 
> In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.
> 
> *Who Are the Palestinians?*
> As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”
> 
> There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.
> 
> The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:
> 
> ”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.
> 
> ”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.
> 
> ”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.
> 
> The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian


Yet another post denying the Palestinians their existence.  Particularly ironic from someone who supports another people who suffer from the the same arguments that they are not a real people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> “Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.
> 
> “Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”
> 
> In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.
> 
> *Who Are the Palestinians?*
> As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”
> 
> There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.
> 
> The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:
> 
> ”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.
> 
> ”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.
> 
> ”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.
> 
> The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian
> 
> 
> 
> Yet another post denying the Palestinians their existence.  Particularly ironic from someone who supports another people who suffer from the the same arguments that they are not a real people.
Click to expand...

You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.

Jews accepted partitioning the rest of the Mandate into two states.
The Muslims do not.
And it happened twice, in 1937 and in 1947.
And the refusal to allow Israel to exist continues to this day.

You do not understand that, and I have no doubt that you and many others will continue to never understand what the facts of history are.

Therefore we do not try much anymore, we simply do everything we can to support and protect Israel, which has every right to exist
as the only Jewish State in the world in what was finally allowed to be a Jewish State after 7 Arab countries wanted to blow it to smithereens not once, twice, three times, but on a continuous basis.

Who is denying who's right to live in peace, and who is doing everything to try to stop those people from finishing what the  Nazi Holocaust started with all the help from the Muslim haters of Jews to put an end to every Jew in existence on this planet.

Yes, the Muslims had every plan for building concentration camps post WWII German victory and put all Jews living in the region of Palestine and the Arab countries in them.

NOT denying that the Arabs who call themselves as Palestinians have the right to their own State, but calling them on their endless lies about being there for million of years, and that the Jews are the invading colonizers from the 19th century.


Many Arab Muslims are doing it, but you are set on denying the truth coming out of them?

Work on that.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> “Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.
> 
> “Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”
> 
> In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.
> 
> *Who Are the Palestinians?*
> As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”
> 
> There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.
> 
> The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:
> 
> ”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.
> 
> ”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.
> 
> ”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.
> 
> The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian
> 
> 
> 
> Yet another post denying the Palestinians their existence.  Particularly ironic from someone who supports another people who suffer from the the same arguments that they are not a real people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.
> 
> Jews accepted partitioning the rest of the Mandate into two states.
> The Muslims do not.
> And it happened twice, in 1937 and in 1947.
> And the refusal to allow Israel to exist continues to this day.
> 
> You do not understand that, and I have no doubt that you and many others will continue to never understand what the facts of history are.
> 
> Therefore we do not try much anymore, we simply do everything we can to support and protect Israel, which has every right to exist
> as the only Jewish State in the world in what was finally allowed to be a Jewish State after 7 Arab countries wanted to blow it to smithereens not once, twice, three times, but on a continuous basis.
> 
> Who is denying who's right to live in peace, and who is doing everything to try to stop those people from finishing what the  Nazi Holocaust started with all the help from the Muslim haters of Jews to put an end to every Jew in existence on this planet.
> 
> Yes, the Muslims had every plan for building concentration camps post WWII German victory and put all Jews living in the region of Palestine and the Arab countries in them.
> 
> NOT denying that the Arabs who call themselves as Palestinians have the right to their own State, but calling them on their endless lies about being there for million of years, and that the Jews are the invading colonizers from the 19th century.
> 
> 
> Many Arab Muslims are doing it, but you are set on denying the truth coming out of them?
> 
> Work on that.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians are now a people.  Their ties to the region go way back.  Every people starts somewhere some time to claim an identity.  The aguement that they are just foreign Arabs is no different than those claiming Jews are just foreign Europeans.  

Who is denying who’s right to live in place?  I am saying they BOTH have that right and it can be extended with out having to deny either one their rights as a people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> “Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.
> 
> “Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”
> 
> In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.
> 
> *Who Are the Palestinians?*
> As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad, speaking on Al-Hekma TV, said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”
> 
> There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.
> 
> The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:
> 
> ”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.
> 
> ”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population,” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.
> 
> ”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than *one million years*,* Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”*.
> 
> The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Analysis: There is No Palestinian Nation, Says Arab Historian
> 
> 
> 
> Yet another post denying the Palestinians their existence.  Particularly ironic from someone who supports another people who suffer from the the same arguments that they are not a real people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.
> 
> Jews accepted partitioning the rest of the Mandate into two states.
> The Muslims do not.
> And it happened twice, in 1937 and in 1947.
> And the refusal to allow Israel to exist continues to this day.
> 
> You do not understand that, and I have no doubt that you and many others will continue to never understand what the facts of history are.
> 
> Therefore we do not try much anymore, we simply do everything we can to support and protect Israel, which has every right to exist
> as the only Jewish State in the world in what was finally allowed to be a Jewish State after 7 Arab countries wanted to blow it to smithereens not once, twice, three times, but on a continuous basis.
> 
> Who is denying who's right to live in peace, and who is doing everything to try to stop those people from finishing what the  Nazi Holocaust started with all the help from the Muslim haters of Jews to put an end to every Jew in existence on this planet.
> 
> Yes, the Muslims had every plan for building concentration camps post WWII German victory and put all Jews living in the region of Palestine and the Arab countries in them.
> 
> NOT denying that the Arabs who call themselves as Palestinians have the right to their own State, but calling them on their endless lies about being there for million of years, and that the Jews are the invading colonizers from the 19th century.
> 
> 
> Many Arab Muslims are doing it, but you are set on denying the truth coming out of them?
> 
> Work on that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are now a people.  Their ties to the region go way back.  Every people starts somewhere some time to claim an identity.  The aguement that they are just foreign Arabs is no different than those claiming Jews are just foreign Europeans.
> 
> Who is denying who’s right to live in place?  I am saying they BOTH have that right and it can be extended with out having to deny either one their rights as a people.
Click to expand...

Israel does not deny that now they are a national people.  Israel has recognized it publicly.
Their ties go way back to when they invaded the region.  They never claimed an identity until the Jews earned legally the right to re-create their nation on their own ancient Jewish land.

No one is arguing that they are "just" foreigners, we are arguing exactly the Arab Palestinian versions that all Jews who built Israel are actually Europeans with no ties to the ancient homeland of the Jews. One can find those denials of Jewish identity and more everywhere on Palestinian media, and all the other Muslim medias  as well.

You responded to an article where Arab Muslims themselves acknowledge that the Palestinian identity is nothing more but an excuse to destroy Israel.


But acknowledge that .....you simply are not able to do so.

Deal with the Palestinians and all other Arab Muslims and Christians inability to accept Jewish sovereignty near them, simply because some in Islam consider the whole area Islamic territory, never to become a sovereign part of any non Muslim State.

I continue not to see any outcries from 1925 on that the Hashemite Arab clan having just moved from Arabia got 78% of the promised Jewish homeland under the Mandate for Palestine.

I am waiting for all of those Palestinians to start a war against Jordan any time now.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.


Are you implying that every time a new flag flies over city hall that the entire population moves out and an entire new population moves in?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you implying that every time a new flag flies over city hall that the entire population moves out and an entire new population moves in?
Click to expand...

Wow, one of the dumbest paragraphs you have ever posted.

Hurray !!!


----------



## Coyote

ll''''


Sixties Fan said:


> Israel does not deny that now they are a national people.  Israel has recognized it publicly.
> Their ties go way back to when they invaded the region.  They never claimed an identity until the Jews earned legally the right to re-create their nation on their own ancient Jewish land.



Israel denies their ties -* it's right there in your narrative *claiming that they are they were invaders, when in fact they descended from earlier people's mixed with people's of successive invasions.  And the claim that they descend from migrants coming to Israel for work, and relatively recent Arab invaders is everywhere in the Israeli text books, etc.  They refuse to grant them their ties to older people's.



> *No one is arguing that they are "just" foreigners*, we are arguing exactly the Arab Palestinian versions that all Jews who built Israel are actually Europeans with no ties to the ancient homeland of the Jews. One can find those denials of Jewish identity and more everywhere on Palestinian media, and all the other Muslim medias  as well.



Yes, *they do it all the time here*.  The frequent argument is that they are squatters, invaders, send them all to (pick the Arab state of choice).  It's the mirror image of the "Jews are Eurpeans" argument.  *But you don't notice it.*



> You responded to an article where Arab Muslims themselves acknowledge that the Palestinian identity is nothing more but an excuse to destroy Israel.



Some more to think on:

Who are the Palestinians? | IMEU
_The Palestinians are the *native inhabitants *of the land of Palestine. *They are descendants of the many waves of invaders who settled Palestine through the ages.* Following the seventh-century Islamic conquest of the region by peoples originating in the Arabian Peninsula, *Palestinians gradually adopted Arabic language and culture. Most also became Muslim, although Christian and Jewish communities that had resided in Palestine since the birth of those religions remained. *


Palestinian national identity began to emerge in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, partly reflecting the spread of European ideas of nationalism to the region, and partly as a response to early Zionist colonization - that is, European Jewish settlement for the purpose of establishing a Jewish state or homeland in Palestine. _​
The lost Palestinian Jews - *A Jewish Historian on Palestinians*
_After years of research, Misinai says that he can declare with certainty that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews. "And what's more, about half of them know it," he says. Not only that, many Palestinians retain Jewish customs, including mourning rituals, lighting Shabbat or memorial candles and even wearing tefillin. While the common wisdom among many Israelis is that the group that calls itself "Palestinian" is a motley collection of Arabs from various parts of the Middle East who immigrated to the Land of Israel following the employment opportunities provided by Jews, *Misinai says that the vast majority of today's Palestinians are descended from the remnants of Jewish families who managed to avoid being deported over the past 2,000 years, or returned to their lands after they were exiled*, as the Jews in the Holy Land suffered blow after blow - from the Roman destruction of the Temple to the Crusades to famine, poverty and war throughout the Middle Ages._​
or...

Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots



> But acknowledge that .....you simply are not able to do so.
> 
> Deal with the Palestinians and all other Arab Muslims and Christians inability to accept Jewish sovereignty near them, simply because some in Islam consider the whole area Islamic territory, never to become a sovereign part of any non Muslim State.



Everyone must accept each other, and their rights to *peaceful *coexistence, freedom, equality and the freedom to define their own destiny.  I expect the same conduct from the Palestinians as from the Israeli's, and agree it is very lopsided right now both in behavior (from the Palestinians) and power (in terms of the Israeli's).  But that doesn't mean denying a people a RIGHT to their history - whether Jewish or Palestinian and just because the Muslims are doing it to the Jews does not mean it is ok to do it to the Palestinians.



> I continue not to see any outcries *from 1925* on that the Hashemite Arab clan having just moved from Arabia got 78% of the promised Jewish homeland under the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> I am waiting for all of those Palestinians to start a war against Jordan any time now.



You realize that is almost a century ago? 

Also, the Mandate promised nothing to the Jews or the Arabs.  It was simply an agreement among foreign powers.  I believe  RoccoR explained it best but it was a long ago thread and I can't find it.


----------



## danielpalos

A Dey seems appropriate for this type of dilemma. 

A Delyicate of Palestine would not need to quibble about it.


----------



## danielpalos

A Dey, as lord Temporal (and spiritual), really can ensure Order over Chaos by proclaiming that all the People of Palestine, may render their problems unto Him.

What emir, could say the same.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are not capable of understanding what even Arab Muslims say about the existence of a different entity, nationality, called "Palestinians" as opposed to Arabs living in a region referred to by some people as Palestine, after they invaded in the 7th century.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you implying that every time a new flag flies over city hall that the entire population moves out and an entire new population moves in?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, one of the dumbest paragraphs you have ever posted.
> 
> Hurray !!!
Click to expand...

Clearly my post went right over your head.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> ll''''
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not deny that now they are a national people.  Israel has recognized it publicly.
> Their ties go way back to when they invaded the region.  They never claimed an identity until the Jews earned legally the right to re-create their nation on their own ancient Jewish land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel denies their ties -* it's right there in your narrative *claiming that they are they were invaders, when in fact they descended from earlier people's mixed with people's of successive invasions.  And the claim that they descend from migrants coming to Israel for work, and relatively recent Arab invaders is everywhere in the Israeli text books, etc.  They refuse to grant them their ties to older people's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *No one is arguing that they are "just" foreigners*, we are arguing exactly the Arab Palestinian versions that all Jews who built Israel are actually Europeans with no ties to the ancient homeland of the Jews. One can find those denials of Jewish identity and more everywhere on Palestinian media, and all the other Muslim medias  as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, *they do it all the time here*.  The frequent argument is that they are squatters, invaders, send them all to (pick the Arab state of choice).  It's the mirror image of the "Jews are Eurpeans" argument.  *But you don't notice it.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You responded to an article where Arab Muslims themselves acknowledge that the Palestinian identity is nothing more but an excuse to destroy Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some more to think on:
> 
> Who are the Palestinians? | IMEU
> _The Palestinians are the *native inhabitants *of the land of Palestine. *They are descendants of the many waves of invaders who settled Palestine through the ages.* Following the seventh-century Islamic conquest of the region by peoples originating in the Arabian Peninsula, *Palestinians gradually adopted Arabic language and culture. Most also became Muslim, although Christian and Jewish communities that had resided in Palestine since the birth of those religions remained. *
> 
> 
> Palestinian national identity began to emerge in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, partly reflecting the spread of European ideas of nationalism to the region, and partly as a response to early Zionist colonization - that is, European Jewish settlement for the purpose of establishing a Jewish state or homeland in Palestine. _​
> The lost Palestinian Jews - *A Jewish Historian on Palestinians*
> _After years of research, Misinai says that he can declare with certainty that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews. "And what's more, about half of them know it," he says. Not only that, many Palestinians retain Jewish customs, including mourning rituals, lighting Shabbat or memorial candles and even wearing tefillin. While the common wisdom among many Israelis is that the group that calls itself "Palestinian" is a motley collection of Arabs from various parts of the Middle East who immigrated to the Land of Israel following the employment opportunities provided by Jews, *Misinai says that the vast majority of today's Palestinians are descended from the remnants of Jewish families who managed to avoid being deported over the past 2,000 years, or returned to their lands after they were exiled*, as the Jews in the Holy Land suffered blow after blow - from the Roman destruction of the Temple to the Crusades to famine, poverty and war throughout the Middle Ages._​
> or...
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But acknowledge that .....you simply are not able to do so.
> 
> Deal with the Palestinians and all other Arab Muslims and Christians inability to accept Jewish sovereignty near them, simply because some in Islam consider the whole area Islamic territory, never to become a sovereign part of any non Muslim State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone must accept each other, and their rights to *peaceful *coexistence, freedom, equality and the freedom to define their own destiny.  I expect the same conduct from the Palestinians as from the Israeli's, and agree it is very lopsided right now both in behavior (from the Palestinians) and power (in terms of the Israeli's).  But that doesn't mean denying a people a RIGHT to their history - whether Jewish or Palestinian and just because the Muslims are doing it to the Jews does not mean it is ok to do it to the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I continue not to see any outcries *from 1925* on that the Hashemite Arab clan having just moved from Arabia got 78% of the promised Jewish homeland under the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> I am waiting for all of those Palestinians to start a war against Jordan any time now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You realize that is almost a century ago?
> 
> Also, the Mandate promised nothing to the Jews or the Arabs.  It was simply an agreement among foreign powers.  I believe  RoccoR explained it best but it was a long ago thread and I can't find it.
Click to expand...

You have not read the Mandate in order to post your last paragraph.

I will not bother again explaining who is who and what is what.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ll''''
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not deny that now they are a national people.  Israel has recognized it publicly.
> Their ties go way back to when they invaded the region.  They never claimed an identity until the Jews earned legally the right to re-create their nation on their own ancient Jewish land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel denies their ties -* it's right there in your narrative *claiming that they are they were invaders, when in fact they descended from earlier people's mixed with people's of successive invasions.  And the claim that they descend from migrants coming to Israel for work, and relatively recent Arab invaders is everywhere in the Israeli text books, etc.  They refuse to grant them their ties to older people's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *No one is arguing that they are "just" foreigners*, we are arguing exactly the Arab Palestinian versions that all Jews who built Israel are actually Europeans with no ties to the ancient homeland of the Jews. One can find those denials of Jewish identity and more everywhere on Palestinian media, and all the other Muslim medias  as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, *they do it all the time here*.  The frequent argument is that they are squatters, invaders, send them all to (pick the Arab state of choice).  It's the mirror image of the "Jews are Eurpeans" argument.  *But you don't notice it.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You responded to an article where Arab Muslims themselves acknowledge that the Palestinian identity is nothing more but an excuse to destroy Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some more to think on:
> 
> Who are the Palestinians? | IMEU
> _The Palestinians are the *native inhabitants *of the land of Palestine. *They are descendants of the many waves of invaders who settled Palestine through the ages.* Following the seventh-century Islamic conquest of the region by peoples originating in the Arabian Peninsula, *Palestinians gradually adopted Arabic language and culture. Most also became Muslim, although Christian and Jewish communities that had resided in Palestine since the birth of those religions remained. *
> 
> 
> Palestinian national identity began to emerge in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, partly reflecting the spread of European ideas of nationalism to the region, and partly as a response to early Zionist colonization - that is, European Jewish settlement for the purpose of establishing a Jewish state or homeland in Palestine. _​
> The lost Palestinian Jews - *A Jewish Historian on Palestinians*
> _After years of research, Misinai says that he can declare with certainty that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from the Jews. "And what's more, about half of them know it," he says. Not only that, many Palestinians retain Jewish customs, including mourning rituals, lighting Shabbat or memorial candles and even wearing tefillin. While the common wisdom among many Israelis is that the group that calls itself "Palestinian" is a motley collection of Arabs from various parts of the Middle East who immigrated to the Land of Israel following the employment opportunities provided by Jews, *Misinai says that the vast majority of today's Palestinians are descended from the remnants of Jewish families who managed to avoid being deported over the past 2,000 years, or returned to their lands after they were exiled*, as the Jews in the Holy Land suffered blow after blow - from the Roman destruction of the Temple to the Crusades to famine, poverty and war throughout the Middle Ages._​
> or...
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But acknowledge that .....you simply are not able to do so.
> 
> Deal with the Palestinians and all other Arab Muslims and Christians inability to accept Jewish sovereignty near them, simply because some in Islam consider the whole area Islamic territory, never to become a sovereign part of any non Muslim State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone must accept each other, and their rights to *peaceful *coexistence, freedom, equality and the freedom to define their own destiny.  I expect the same conduct from the Palestinians as from the Israeli's, and agree it is very lopsided right now both in behavior (from the Palestinians) and power (in terms of the Israeli's).  But that doesn't mean denying a people a RIGHT to their history - whether Jewish or Palestinian and just because the Muslims are doing it to the Jews does not mean it is ok to do it to the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I continue not to see any outcries *from 1925* on that the Hashemite Arab clan having just moved from Arabia got 78% of the promised Jewish homeland under the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> I am waiting for all of those Palestinians to start a war against Jordan any time now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You realize that is almost a century ago?
> 
> Also, the Mandate promised nothing to the Jews or the Arabs.  It was simply an agreement among foreign powers.  I believe  RoccoR explained it best but it was a long ago thread and I can't find it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have not read the Mandate in order to post your last paragraph.
> 
> I will not bother again explaining who is who and what is what.
Click to expand...


Post #404
The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## danielpalos

Maybe the UN should create a Deylicate in Palestine.


----------



## Coyote

Per Rocco's post, which I linked to above:



> Well a lot of people have muddled the waters on this. This is the short answer. You can skip the background "COMMENT", as it evolved,
> 
> The Mandate did not promise anything to either the Arabs or Jewish. The Mandate was technically a record of the Agreement between the various Allied Powers AND a directive issued by the Allied Powers to the British, as the Mandatory, as to the fundamentals of what in the broad sense needed to be done. It was not written or use as an authority for either the Arab or the Jews. The Mandate did not, even once, speak directly to either the Arabs or the Jews. It was mandate _(an official record of direction and guidance)_ speaking from the Allied Powers to the British. Neither the Arabs or the Jewish were parties to the Mandate, and nor did the Mandate actually direct, command, promise, or impose guidance upon either the Arabs or the Jewish.



Rocco and I may not agree on everything - but he damn sure knows what he is talking about.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Per Rocco's post, which I linked to above:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well a lot of people have muddled the waters on this. This is the short answer. You can skip the background "COMMENT", as it evolved,
> 
> The Mandate did not promise anything to either the Arabs or Jewish. The Mandate was technically a record of the Agreement between the various Allied Powers AND a directive issued by the Allied Powers to the British, as the Mandatory, as to the fundamentals of what in the broad sense needed to be done. It was not written or use as an authority for either the Arab or the Jews. The Mandate did not, even once, speak directly to either the Arabs or the Jews. It was mandate _(an official record of direction and guidance)_ speaking from the Allied Powers to the British. Neither the Arabs or the Jewish were parties to the Mandate, and nor did the Mandate actually direct, command, promise, or impose guidance upon either the Arabs or the Jewish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco and I may not agree on everything - but he damn sure knows what he is talking about.
Click to expand...


Rocco and I agree on nearly everything.  And I think I understand what he means here.  (Hopefully, he'll come along and clarify if I'm wrong.)

In the technical sense, he is correct that the Mandate did not make a statement of intent ("promise") directly to the Arab or Jewish people.  Nor were either Parties to the agreement.

BUT the Mandate absolutely did RECOGNIZE the existing rights of the Jewish people, and provided for Jewish immigration and for Jewish Agencies to take a governmental role in the development of the territory.


----------



## danielpalos

Why is there any Chaos instead of Order in that area?


----------



## RoccoR

RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ Shusha, Coyote, _et al,_

I thank both of you for the kind words. BUT, there are one more core issues that are not a central issue in itself but has come to orbit the nucleus of the central issues in the debates or discussions. That is "RIGHTS."

Shusha said: ↑
In the technical sense, he is correct that the Mandate did not make a statement of intent ("promise") directly to the Arab or Jewish people. Nor were either Parties to the agreement.

BUT the Mandate absolutely did RECOGNIZE the existing rights of the Jewish people, and provided for Jewish immigration and for Jewish Agencies to take a governmental role in the development of the territory.​*(OBSERVATION)*

In 1920, the San Remo Conference the terminology was:

•  "The historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine"  →
•  "Grounds for _(a practical basis for)_ reconstituting their national home"  →
•  "Civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"  →​
This was the common language used in the documentation of the Council of the League and the Allied Powers.  The language is duplicated in the Mandate...  

The rights in the Treaty of Lausanne have to do with two principles:

•  The right to opt for Turkish nationality.
•  The right to assume the nationality of the new national authority.
•  The equality between the Musims and non-muslims in matters of Civil and Religious rights.​
And of course within the Treaty are the formal abolition of all rights and privileges in the future and governance of the territories outside Turkey.

*(COMMENT)*

The common thread here is that the obligations in the treaty comes in two flavors: 

•  Obligations commitments between the Members of the Alied Powers.
•  Obligations commitments between an Allied Power and a group of Allied owers.
•  Obligations commitments between the Allied Powers and the Turkish Republic.​
While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."  Under the principle of equality (both then and now there is no difference between the "Civil and Religious Rights" Muslim and Non-Muslim _(in fact - it can be extrapolated to cover any belief system)_.

In the case of what we call Palestine (that of the Arab - Israeli Conflict), the rights to the future of the territories were to be settled by the (Allied Powers) parties concerned; not including the Jewish or Arab People.

While there was an "intent" on the part of the Allied Powers; prior to the UNSCOP Recommendations of 1947, the shape of the intent was never really articulated well.  And that ambiguity allowed every faction to place their own interpretation on the issue. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## danielpalos

It should already be established, from a scientific perspective.

We are simply, quibbling about why there are so many problems in the Middle East; and, what it could possibly take, to establish Order over Chaos in that area.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Per Rocco's post, which I linked to above:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well a lot of people have muddled the waters on this. This is the short answer. You can skip the background "COMMENT", as it evolved,
> 
> The Mandate did not promise anything to either the Arabs or Jewish. The Mandate was technically a record of the Agreement between the various Allied Powers AND a directive issued by the Allied Powers to the British, as the Mandatory, as to the fundamentals of what in the broad sense needed to be done. It was not written or use as an authority for either the Arab or the Jews. The Mandate did not, even once, speak directly to either the Arabs or the Jews. It was mandate _(an official record of direction and guidance)_ speaking from the Allied Powers to the British. Neither the Arabs or the Jewish were parties to the Mandate, and nor did the Mandate actually direct, command, promise, or impose guidance upon either the Arabs or the Jewish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco and I may not agree on everything - but he damn sure knows what he is talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the technical sense, he is correct that the Mandate did not make a statement of intent ("promise") directly to the Arab or Jewish people.  Nor were either Parties to the agreement.
Click to expand...

If repeating 4 times "establishment of the Jewish national home" doesn't make a statement of intent, then what does?


----------



## admonit

RoccoR said:


> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."


The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."



Yeah, no.  

The recognition of the historic connection does not exist in a vacuum,as though it had no meaning, even within the context of the Mandate document itself.  If the only thing that was recognized was a historic connection with no further extrapolations of what that MEANT there would have been no need for further mention of the Jewish people.  

But the Jewish people are mentioned throughout the document.


_in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people

and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country

political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home,

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine

The Zionist organization ...  shall be recognised as such agency ... to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home

shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, 


_


----------



## P F Tinmore

admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
Click to expand...

The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  admonit,  et al,

The intent was unspoken; but understood between key Allied Powers.   SHORT ANSWER:  No itis not all that clear.



admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

A "historic connection" does not mean a contemporary.  The Hashemites have a much - much closer historic connection _(20th Century)_ to Mecca and Medina" through the Shiehk/King Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  But that does not mean the House of Saud that currently reigning over Saudi Arabia has some duty to give it back or reconstitute the Kingdom of the Hadjaz.

"Grounds" _(reason)_ for or practical basis for "reconstitution" _(rebuilding the ancient government)_ is a concept and not an imperative. 

What you should have quoted is the plain intent and objective:  "adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment _(create with some permanency)_ in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  This is only unambiguous to the extent that the phrase → "national home"  _(in contemporary times)_ can take many forms. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, _et al,_

Well ---- No!  This is not correct.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.


*(COMMENT)*

There is nothing that dictated the final territorial disposition.  In 1922/1923 the view was very different that do the Arab Palestinians view today.  And in that limited but altered Arab Palestinian view, they dod not include Trans-Jordan.



			
				Mandate for Palestine  First Annual Report 31 Devember 1923 said:
			
		

> 4. In this agreement the term "Palestine" shall include Transjordania, and the Government of Syria agrees to establish bonded stores in Damascus to deal with goods breaking bulk in that town in transit for Transjordania.



Very early on, the Allied Powers earmarked territory for Kingdoms.  One of those Kingdoms (≈ 77% of the territory under the Mandate, was to become Jordan.  Almost at the outset, the British installed the Emir.



			
				The Hasemite Kingdom of Jordan History Site said:
			
		

> Emir Abdullah soon succeeded in loosening the British mandate over Transjordan with an Anglo-Transjordanian treaty. On May 15, 1923, Britain formally recognized the Emirate of Transjordan as a state under the leadership of Emir Abdullah.
> •••
> On March 22, 1946, Abdullah negotiated a new Anglo-Transjordanian treaty, ending the British mandate and gaining full independence for Transjordan.
> SOURCE:  The Making of Transjordan



I always thought it was strange that the Arab-Palestinians of Jordan have known all this time that the claim → that the Arab Palestinians were alloted less territory than the Jewish was completely wrong.  Yet the Arab-Palestinians were actually allocated much much more.  But so may promogate this misinformation, that now it is taken for fact.  It is a myth that will never change in their eyes.  But back in the 1920's to 1946, there was no misunderstanding.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al

Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?



P F Tinmore said:


> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.


*(COMMENT)*

Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.

Why was there a problem?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
Click to expand...

The problem is you do not understand what the Mandate for Palestine was for, what the British were there for.

Tell of any elections in Iraq, Syria or Lebanon when those countries became Independent or before they became Independent.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is you do not understand what the Mandate for Palestine was for, what the British were there for.
> 
> Tell of any elections in Iraq, Syria or Lebanon when those countries became Independent or before they became Independent.
Click to expand...


Where was I incorrect?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is you do not understand what the Mandate for Palestine was for, what the British were there for.
> 
> Tell of any elections in Iraq, Syria or Lebanon when those countries became Independent or before they became Independent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where was I incorrect?
Click to expand...

Tell me of the elections which occurred in the other three Mandates before they declared Independence.


----------



## percysunshine

Coyote said:


> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*



Well, the history of most of the planet goes back to the Pre-Cambrian when stromatolites were the semi-aquatic precursers of all life on earth. The stromatolites were indiginous to Palestine, as well as the rest of the planet. We all share their ancestry.

Stromatolite - Wikipedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is you do not understand what the Mandate for Palestine was for, what the British were there for.
> 
> Tell of any elections in Iraq, Syria or Lebanon when those countries became Independent or before they became Independent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where was I incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me of the elections which occurred in the other three Mandates before they declared Independence.
Click to expand...

Why? This is the Israel and Palestine forum.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administratonby the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is you do not understand what the Mandate for Palestine was for, what the British were there for.
> 
> Tell of any elections in Iraq, Syria or Lebanon when those countries became Independent or before they became Independent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where was I incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me of the elections which occurred in the other three Mandates before they declared Independence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why? This is the Israel and Palestine forum.
Click to expand...

Read your own post above.  It talks about elections in the Mandate for Palestine before 1948.

I am simply asking where were the elections before the Mandates for Syria, Lebanon and Iraq came to be independent of the Mandate for each one.

Fair question.


----------



## BlackSand

*"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*

The question isn't that hard to answer ...
What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.



*Ooops ... 
Pineapple*​*
.*​​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​



So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?

Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.

With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Why was there a problem?



Arab-Moslem intransigence.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab-Moslem intransigence.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians consistently pushed Britain for a representative government. Britain dragged its feet for 30 years. Why?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al

Not everyone in those years had this burning desire to capitulate to the will of a population → once in the domain of The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA); that would be a case of the tail wagging the dog.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administration by the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

You seem to think that there was some overriding imperative for the Allied Powers to establish another national home for the Arabs.  That is simply NOT the case.  It was → rather → an intention, a very openly stated intention, that the Allied Powers wanted to commission and "secure the establishment of the Jewish national home."

Now the Allied Powers were NOT ruthless.  The British Administration did establish an Arab State, mostly populated by Palestinians, that was more than three-times the size of the remaining territory between the Jordan River and the Sea.

The problem:  The greedy Arab Palestinians wanted the entirety of the remaining territory and claim that the Jewish population received more than the Arabs.   The proximate cause of the conflict is that the "selfishness" of the Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Not everyone in those years had this burning desire to capitulate to the will of a population → once in the domain of The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA); that would be a case of the tail wagging the dog.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> Now you would not be trying to intentionally mislead people; would you?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate was supposed to be a "one state solution." All of the People who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine (Muslims, Christians, and Jews) would be Palestinian citizens. Immigrant Jews could get Palestinian citizenship. Palestine would be an independent state.* As Palestinian citizens,* Jews would be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine as would all other Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Between 1920 and Civil Administration by the selected Allied Power  →  through to May 1948, "Palestine Citizenship," was to the Government of Palestine that was the British Civil Administration.  It was not an Arab Palestinian Government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Britain was supposed to render administrative assistance and advice to bring Palestine to independence. They could have been in and out if there in 10-15 years. They were there for 30 years and failed to establish a representative government. They could have held elections within a few years.
> 
> Why was there a problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You seem to think that there was some overriding imperative for the Allied Powers to establish another national home for the Arabs.  That is simply NOT the case.  It was → rather → an intention, a very openly stated intention, that the Allied Powers wanted to commission and "secure the establishment of the Jewish national home."
> 
> Now the Allied Powers were NOT ruthless.  The British Administration did establish an Arab State, mostly populated by Palestinians, that was more than three-times the size of the remaining territory between the Jordan River and the Sea.
> 
> The problem:  The greedy Arab Palestinians wanted the entirety of the remaining territory and claim that the Jewish population received more than the Arabs.   The proximate cause of the conflict is that the "selfishness" of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Oh jeese, more Israeli talking points.

Nice deflection though.


----------



## danielpalos

who cares; a dey would have solutions for the indigenous.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
Click to expand...

It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.

Why does recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders? It is like there can only be One indiginous group.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why doe recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders?
Click to expand...

Coyote,

Palestinian Arabs are what the word Arab says they are.

ARABS

From Arabia.

Therefore they cannot be indigenous of the ancient Land of Canaan as the Jewish People are.

The Arab extremist cannot accept that the Jews can have their own sovereign land On their own ancient homeland.

Jews have not taken one duma of Arab indigenous land, ever.
All of it is at the hands of the Saudis, Yemenites, UAE, Qatar, and all others who live in the Arabian Peninsula.

The extreme Muslim Arabs are intent is saying that Zionism is a European cause, even though it is not, never has been and the Jews from Europe are NOT Europeans.  They came from the land of Israel, ancient Canaan. And simply returned home, those who were away to recreate their Nation.

A Nation the Arab Muslims cannot stand to see that it still exists in Jewish hands.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why doe recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are what the word Arab says they are.
> 
> ARABS
> 
> From Arabia.
> 
> Therefore they cannot be indigenous of the ancient Land of Canaan as the Jewish People are.
> 
> The Arab extremist cannot accept that the Jews can have their own sovereign land On their own ancient homeland.
> 
> Jews have not taken one duma of Arab indigenous land, ever.
> All of it is at the hands of the Saudis, Yemenites, UAE, Qatar, and all others who live in the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> The extreme Muslim Arabs are intent is saying that Zionism is a European cause, even though it is not, never has been and the Jews from Europe are NOT Europeans.  They came from the land of Israel, ancient Canaan. And simply returned home, those who were away to recreate their Nation.
> 
> A Nation the Arab Muslims cannot stand to see that it still exists in Jewish hands.
Click to expand...

Arabs are not an exact definition.  They are defined by language and culture not blood. It isn’t much different then the English conquests and cultural domination of indiginous populations.

Arabs - Wikipedia

Today, "Arab" refers to a large number of people whose native regions form the Arab world due to the spread of Arabs and the Arabic language throughout the region during the early Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries *and the subsequent Arabisation of indigenous populations.[42]*

Arabs are a diverse group in terms of religious affiliations and practices. In the pre-Islamic era, most Arabs followed polytheistic religions. Some tribes had adopted Christianity or Judaism, and a few individuals, the hanifs, apparently observed monotheism.[50] Today, Arabs are mostly adherents of Islam, with sizable Christian minorities. [51] Mizrahi Jews, and historically the Sephardi, have an Arab identity. Arab Muslims primarily belong to the Sunni, Shiite, Ibadi, and Alawite denominations. Arab Christians generally follow one of the Eastern Christian Churches, such as the Greek Orthodox or Greek Catholic churches.[52] Other smaller minority religions are also followed, such as the Bahá'í Faith and Druze.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why doe recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are what the word Arab says they are.
> 
> ARABS
> 
> From Arabia.
> 
> Therefore they cannot be indigenous of the ancient Land of Canaan as the Jewish People are.
> 
> The Arab extremist cannot accept that the Jews can have their own sovereign land On their own ancient homeland.
> 
> Jews have not taken one duma of Arab indigenous land, ever.
> All of it is at the hands of the Saudis, Yemenites, UAE, Qatar, and all others who live in the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> The extreme Muslim Arabs are intent is saying that Zionism is a European cause, even though it is not, never has been and the Jews from Europe are NOT Europeans.  They came from the land of Israel, ancient Canaan. And simply returned home, those who were away to recreate their Nation.
> 
> A Nation the Arab Muslims cannot stand to see that it still exists in Jewish hands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are not an exact definition.  They are defined by language and culture not blood. It isn’t much different then the English conquests and cultural domination of indiginous populations.
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia
> 
> Today, "Arab" refers to a large number of people whose native regions form the Arab world due to the spread of Arabs and the Arabic language throughout the region during the early Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries *and the subsequent Arabisation of indigenous populations.[42]*
> 
> Arabs are a diverse group in terms of religious affiliations and practices. In the pre-Islamic era, most Arabs followed polytheistic religions. Some tribes had adopted Christianity or Judaism, and a few individuals, the hanifs, apparently observed monotheism.[50] Today, Arabs are mostly adherents of Islam, with sizable Christian minorities. [51] Mizrahi Jews, and historically the Sephardi, have an Arab identity. Arab Muslims primarily belong to the Sunni, Shiite, Ibadi, and Alawite denominations. Arab Christians generally follow one of the Eastern Christian Churches, such as the Greek Orthodox or Greek Catholic churches.[52] Other smaller minority religions are also followed, such as the Bahá'í Faith and Druze.
Click to expand...

I am sorry but.....

You are repeating Arab fiction. Some of it is correct, most of it is not.

It is absurd to say that the Mizrahi and Sephardi have an Arab identity. They never did, nor will they ever identify with the Arabs because they are NOT Arabs, they are Jews.  There is a huge difference between them, and 1300 years under Muslim Arab control would not ever turn the Jews into Arabs.

Only in fantasy land. 1001 Arabian Night Stories.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why doe recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are what the word Arab says they are.
> 
> ARABS
> 
> From Arabia.
> 
> Therefore they cannot be indigenous of the ancient Land of Canaan as the Jewish People are.
> 
> The Arab extremist cannot accept that the Jews can have their own sovereign land On their own ancient homeland.
> 
> Jews have not taken one duma of Arab indigenous land, ever.
> All of it is at the hands of the Saudis, Yemenites, UAE, Qatar, and all others who live in the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> The extreme Muslim Arabs are intent is saying that Zionism is a European cause, even though it is not, never has been and the Jews from Europe are NOT Europeans.  They came from the land of Israel, ancient Canaan. And simply returned home, those who were away to recreate their Nation.
> 
> A Nation the Arab Muslims cannot stand to see that it still exists in Jewish hands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are not an exact definition.  They are defined by language and culture not blood. It isn’t much different then the English conquests and cultural domination of indiginous populations.
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia
> 
> Today, "Arab" refers to a large number of people whose native regions form the Arab world due to the spread of Arabs and the Arabic language throughout the region during the early Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries *and the subsequent Arabisation of indigenous populations.[42]*
> 
> Arabs are a diverse group in terms of religious affiliations and practices. In the pre-Islamic era, most Arabs followed polytheistic religions. Some tribes had adopted Christianity or Judaism, and a few individuals, the hanifs, apparently observed monotheism.[50] Today, Arabs are mostly adherents of Islam, with sizable Christian minorities. [51] Mizrahi Jews, and historically the Sephardi, have an Arab identity. Arab Muslims primarily belong to the Sunni, Shiite, Ibadi, and Alawite denominations. Arab Christians generally follow one of the Eastern Christian Churches, such as the Greek Orthodox or Greek Catholic churches.[52] Other smaller minority religions are also followed, such as the Bahá'í Faith and Druze.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry but.....
> 
> You are repeating Arab fiction. Some of it is correct, most of it is not.
> 
> It is absurd to say that the Mizrahi and Sephardi have an Arab identity. They never did, nor will they ever identify with the Arabs because they are NOT Arabs, they are Jews.  There is a huge difference between them, and 1300 years under Muslim Arab control would not ever turn the Jews into Arabs.
> 
> Only in fantasy land. 1001 Arabian Night Stories.
Click to expand...

No.  I am not repeating fiction, and I have cited sources and reputable historians.  It is your choice as to what you believe, but I prefer to stick with facts.

Why is it so important to you that the Palestinians be nothing more than Arab invaders?  That kind of approach is no different than those who insist that Jews are Europeans thus not indiginous.


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....



My ancestors have lived here since before there was an United States of America ...
That's about as native American as you can get.

.​
.​


----------



## Sixties Fan

Mizrahi Jews | people


Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning



But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".

Invention of the Mizrahim


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim



Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.
Click to expand...

Again, you are neither Sephardi, nor Mizrahi, as some of us on the threads are.

Arabization is not the same as Being an indigenous Arab.

What it is, is assimilating some of the Arab culture, just as so many assimilate the American culture, or British culture, and become Americanized, or Anglophile.

Please, teach me how I am an Arab.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you are neither Sephardi, nor Mizrahi, as some of us on the threads are.
> 
> Arabization is not the same as Being an indigenous Arab.
> 
> What it is, is assimilating some of the Arab culture, just as so many assimilate the American culture, or British culture, and become Americanized, or Anglophile.
> 
> Please, teach me how I am an Arab.
Click to expand...


And just as the Palestinians assimilated Arab culture.

I don’t much care what you are other than a fellow human being, something that is frequently lost here in this frenzy to label people.  The Palestinians are not indiginous Arabs, something basic genetics shows,  like many cultures in the Arab World they are the descendants of prior people’s including Jews that were culturally Arabitized.  That doesn’t transform them into Arab invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you are neither Sephardi, nor Mizrahi, as some of us on the threads are.
> 
> Arabization is not the same as Being an indigenous Arab.
> 
> What it is, is assimilating some of the Arab culture, just as so many assimilate the American culture, or British culture, and become Americanized, or Anglophile.
> 
> Please, teach me how I am an Arab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And just as the Palestinians assimilated Arab culture.
> 
> I don’t much care what you are other than a fellow human being, something that is frequently lost here in this frenzy to label people.  The Palestinians are not indiginous Arabs, something basic genetics shows,  like many cultures in the Arab World they are the descendants of prior people’s including Jews that were culturally Arabitized.  That doesn’t transform them into Arab invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.
Click to expand...

You get an F in history and Genetics.

And that shall be the last of my posts on this subject with anyone who does not know what they are talking about when it comes to 
"Palestinians".

Thank you for the very illuminating discussion.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you are neither Sephardi, nor Mizrahi, as some of us on the threads are.
> 
> Arabization is not the same as Being an indigenous Arab.
> 
> What it is, is assimilating some of the Arab culture, just as so many assimilate the American culture, or British culture, and become Americanized, or Anglophile.
> 
> Please, teach me how I am an Arab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And just as the Palestinians assimilated Arab culture.
> 
> I don’t much care what you are other than a fellow human being, something that is frequently lost here in this frenzy to label people.  The Palestinians are not indiginous Arabs, something basic genetics shows,  like many cultures in the Arab World they are the descendants of prior people’s including Jews that were culturally Arabitized.  That doesn’t transform them into Arab invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You get an F in history and Genetics.
> 
> And that shall be the last of my posts on this subject with anyone who does not know what they are talking about when it comes to
> "Palestinians".
> 
> Thank you for the very illuminating discussion.
Click to expand...

You have yet to provide any information on genetics or ancient history, just insults.

Again I would ask why is it so important to you to deny Palestinians their history and secondly, what makes YOU any different from those denying Jews there history?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Mizrahi Jews | people
> 
> 
> Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning
> 
> 
> 
> But then, one can always go with Al Jazerra, which defines the Mizrahi Jews who lived in Arab conquered lands, long before the Arabs came to those lands,   as "Arabs".
> 
> Invention of the Mizrahim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again you don’t understand what Arab means.  Look up Arabization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you are neither Sephardi, nor Mizrahi, as some of us on the threads are.
> 
> Arabization is not the same as Being an indigenous Arab.
> 
> What it is, is assimilating some of the Arab culture, just as so many assimilate the American culture, or British culture, and become Americanized, or Anglophile.
> 
> Please, teach me how I am an Arab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And just as the Palestinians assimilated Arab culture.
> 
> I don’t much care what you are other than a fellow human being, something that is frequently lost here in this frenzy to label people.  The Palestinians are not indiginous Arabs, something basic genetics shows,  like many cultures in the Arab World they are the descendants of prior people’s including Jews that were culturally Arabitized.  That doesn’t transform them into Arab invaders from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You get an F in history and Genetics.
> 
> And that shall be the last of my posts on this subject with anyone who does not know what they are talking about when it comes to
> "Palestinians".
> 
> Thank you for the very illuminating discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have yet to provide any information on genetics or ancient history, just insults.
> 
> Again I would ask why is it so important to you to deny Palestinians their history and secondly, what makes YOU any different from those denying Jews there history?
Click to expand...

I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?

You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.

Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.

You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.

You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.

Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.

Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.

We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.

They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
-----------------------------------

When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.


In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine. 


The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.



Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies. 

For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine. 

*Truth routinely sacrificed  *
As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians." 


Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.

So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees." 


Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”

As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."

Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.

(full article online)

The truth about Palestine

-------------------
Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
But who is bothering to listen to them?


----------



## toobfreak

*Who is indigenous to the Palestinian region?*  That is a loaded question just by calling it Palestine.  2500 years ago, it was all part of the greater Persian Empire.  In the days of Christ, it was part of the Roman Empire.  Then it came under Alexander the Great.  Then is was controlled by the Ptolemic Empire.  Finally by 100BC, it came to be ruled as Judea.

Judea is the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of Canaan-Israel. The name originates from the Hebrew name "Yehudah", a son of the Jewish patriarch Jacob/Israel, and Yehudah's progeny forming the biblical Israelite tribe of Judah (Yehudah) and later the associated Kingdom of Judah, which the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia dates from 934 until 586 BCE. The name of the region continued to be incorporated through the Babylonian conquest, Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods as Yehud, Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Judea, and consequently Herodian Judea and Roman Judea, respectively.

As a consequence of the Bar Kokhba revolt, in 135 CE the region was renamed and merged with Roman Syria to form _Syria Palaestina_ by the victorious Roman Emperor Hadrian. A large part of Judea was included in Jordanian West Bank between 1948 and 1967 (i.e., the "West Bank" of the Kingdom of Jordan). The term _Judea_ as a geographical term was revived by the Israeli government in the 20th century as part of the Israeli administrative district name Judea and Samaria Area for the territory generally referred to as the West Bank.

The early history of Judah is uncertain; the Biblical account states that the Kingdom of Judah, along with the Northern Kingdom, was a successor to a united Kingdom of Israel, but modern scholarship generally holds that the united monarchy is ahistorical. Regardless, the Northern Kingdom was conquered into the Neo-Assyrian Empire in 720 BCE. The Kingdom of Judah remained nominally independent, but paid tribute to the Assyrian Empire from 715 and throughout the first half of the 7th century BCE, regaining its independence as the Assyrian Empire declined after 640 BCE, but after 609 again fell under the sway of imperial rule, this time paying tribute at first to the Egyptians and after 601 BCE to the Neo-Babylonian Empire, until 586 BCE, when it was finally conquered by Babylonia.  Judea is central to much of the narrative of the Torah, with the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob said to have been buried at Hebron in the Tomb of the Patriarchs.

So today, the question of who is "indigenous" to the region as a matter of being heir as rightful owners is both impossible and irrelevant.  It is a matter much like most of historical geography as a matter of who has the upper hand in claiming control of the region.  And that would be the Jews.  If they wanted, they could take all of Judea-Caanan tomorrow and obliterate the Arabs.  The UN offered an amicable settlement in 1947 that would have resolved the matter and left the Palestinians with 10X the land they hold today, and they DECLINED.  The Palestinians haven't the power to hold the land they have even now and survive at the willful discretion of the Israeli people who bow to international pressure to tolerate them even under constant threat and violence.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?



I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:

Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots

This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA

Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia

While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."

Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:

"*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]

George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:

"The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]

American historian Bernard Lewis writes:

"*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​

Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
_Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.

Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.


According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.


While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.



> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.



No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?



> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.



I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.



> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.



And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?



> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.



No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.



> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?



So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.  

Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?


*
Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia
> 
> While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."
> 
> Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:
> 
> "*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]
> 
> George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:
> 
> "The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]
> 
> American historian Bernard Lewis writes:
> 
> "*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​
> 
> Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
> Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
> _Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.
> 
> Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.
> 
> 
> According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.
> 
> 
> While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
> What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.
> 
> Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?
> 
> 
> *
> Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*
Click to expand...

Excellent post. 

As I have posted before, Palestine has been invaded, conquered, and occupied many times over the centuries. Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Those are the people who became Palestinians after WWI.

When people call the Palestinians Arabs it is like...no that is not true. It can't be true. History tells us something different.


----------



## admonit

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  admonit,  et al,
> 
> The intent was unspoken; but understood between key Allied Powers.   SHORT ANSWER:  No itis not all that clear.
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A "historic connection" does not mean a contemporary.
Click to expand...

If it were a "historical event", I would agree with you. But "connection" is not event, it's rather status in this case. The contemporary connection of the Jewish people to the land was obvious to the authors of the mandate, but it was important to underline the historical connection of Jews to Palestine.


> The Hashemites have a much - much closer historic connection _(20th Century)_ to Mecca and Medina" through the Shiehk/King Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  But that does not mean the House of Saud that currently reigning over Saudi Arabia has some duty to give it back or reconstitute the Kingdom of the Hadjaz.


A historical connection of a whole people to the land and an ancestral connections of a clan/dynasty to the place of its origin are not really comparable things.


> "Grounds" _(reason)_ for or practical basis for "reconstitution" _(rebuilding the ancient government)_ is a concept and not an imperative.
> 
> What you should have quoted is the plain intent and objective:  "adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment _(create with some permanency)_ in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  This is only unambiguous to the extent that the phrase → "national home"  _(in contemporary times)_ can take many forms.


I replied your assertion: "While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
My quote showed that these things present in the same statement and thus they are related to each other in the mandate.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  admonit,  et al,

I think that you are reading more than is there; and making a very broad assumption.



admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  admonit,  et al,
> 
> The intent was unspoken; but understood between key Allied Powers.   SHORT ANSWER:  No itis not all that clear.
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A "historic connection" does not mean a contemporary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it were a "historical event", I would agree with you. But "connection" is not event, it's rather status in this case. The contemporary connection of the Jewish people to the land was obvious to the authors of the mandate, but it was important to underline the historical connection of Jews to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemites have a much - much closer historic connection _(20th Century)_ to Mecca and Medina" through the Shiehk/King Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  But that does not mean the House of Saud that currently reigning over Saudi Arabia has some duty to give it back or reconstitute the Kingdom of the Hadjaz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A historical connection of a whole people to the land and an ancestral connections of a clan/dynasty to the place of its origin are not really comparable things.
> 
> 
> 
> "Grounds" _(reason)_ for or practical basis for "reconstitution" _(rebuilding the ancient government)_ is a concept and not an imperative.
> 
> What you should have quoted is the plain intent and objective:  "adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment _(create with some permanency)_ in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  This is only unambiguous to the extent that the phrase → "national home"  _(in contemporary times)_ can take many forms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I replied your assertion: "While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> My quote showed that these things present in the same statement and thus they are related to each other in the mandate.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There are only two sets of Rights mentioned in the Mandate; civil and relgious; excluding the mention of indeterminant right in Articles 13 and 14.  Back then (1922), the only other Rights are actually discretionary at the will of the Mandatory (Great Britain). 

The only "status" involved is the "political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Without regard to anything you interpret from the Mandate, it has no impact on today's current events.  There is not one single word that establishes an obligation or makes a commitment → that is enforceable by the Arab Palestinian.  And in the century between the Balfour Declaration and the Middle East of today, the composite community - the politics - and the effect of diplomacy has all evolved → morphing into something different.  Even the term "Palestine" has altered _(more than a couple of time)_ significantly since the Order in Council stipulated that: "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."

Like I said earlier in the thread → Israel is no more going to surrender any existing territory which the Israelis consider Sovern territory → any more than the Saudi's would surrender any part of the Hajez to the Hashemite King (hypothetical).  The "historic connection" recognized so long ago by the Allied Powers merely explains a piece of the reasoning used by the Allied Powers to come to the decision they made.  The phrase "Historical Connection" was never meant to be a shaft of twisting contention - or - a pivotal direction made by the Allied Powers; merely an explanation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why does recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders? It is like there can only be One indiginous group.
Click to expand...


It a simple answer.

Jewish indigenity is not based on creation of any new identity or narrative, or on denying Arabs their rights based on longstanding presence in the land.
While Palestinian narrative is a creation of a new entity, entirely based on denial of Jewish indigenous rights, and appropriation of other people's history.

One can see this in the use of the term Palestinian, which is used exclusively to refer to Arabs and exclude Jews. So let's call Arabs Arabs and Jews Jews as they do themselves.
Because frankly, You'll find more agreement when calling things as they are, rather than creating new identities for people that don't know what THE WORD even means.


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My ancestors have lived here since before there was an United States of America ...
> That's about as native American as you can get.
> 
> .​
> .​
Click to expand...


Really, which tribe?


----------



## yiostheoy

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  admonit,  et al,
> 
> I think that you are reading more than is there; and making a very broad assumption.
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  admonit,  et al,
> 
> The intent was unspoken; but understood between key Allied Powers.   SHORT ANSWER:  No itis not all that clear.
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A "historic connection" does not mean a contemporary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it were a "historical event", I would agree with you. But "connection" is not event, it's rather status in this case. The contemporary connection of the Jewish people to the land was obvious to the authors of the mandate, but it was important to underline the historical connection of Jews to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemites have a much - much closer historic connection _(20th Century)_ to Mecca and Medina" through the Shiehk/King Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  But that does not mean the House of Saud that currently reigning over Saudi Arabia has some duty to give it back or reconstitute the Kingdom of the Hadjaz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A historical connection of a whole people to the land and an ancestral connections of a clan/dynasty to the place of its origin are not really comparable things.
> 
> 
> 
> "Grounds" _(reason)_ for or practical basis for "reconstitution" _(rebuilding the ancient government)_ is a concept and not an imperative.
> 
> What you should have quoted is the plain intent and objective:  "adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment _(create with some permanency)_ in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  This is only unambiguous to the extent that the phrase → "national home"  _(in contemporary times)_ can take many forms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I replied your assertion: "While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> My quote showed that these things present in the same statement and thus they are related to each other in the mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are only two sets of Rights mentioned in the Mandate; civil and relgious; excluding the mention of indeterminant right in Articles 13 and 14.  Back then (1922), the only other Rights are actually discretionary at the will of the Mandatory (Great Britain).
> 
> The only "status" involved is the "political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
> 
> Without regard to anything you interpret from the Mandate, it has no impact on today's current events.  There is not one single word that establishes an obligation or makes a commitment → that is enforceable by the Arab Palestinian.  And in the century between the Balfour Declaration and the Middle East of today, the composite community - the politics - and the effect of diplomacy has all evolved → morphing into something different.  Even the term "Palestine" has altered _(more than a couple of time)_ significantly since the Order in Council stipulated that: "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."
> 
> Like I said earlier in the thread → Israel is no more going to surrender any existing territory which the Israelis consider Sovern territory → any more than the Saudi's would surrender any part of the Hajez to the Hashemite King (hypothetical).  The "historic connection" recognized so long ago by the Allied Powers merely explains a piece of the reasoning used by the Allied Powers to come to the decision they made.  The phrase "Historical Connection" was never meant to be a shaft of twisting contention - or - a pivotal direction made by the Allied Powers; merely an explanation.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The British Mandate is not really relevant anymore.


----------



## yiostheoy

admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  admonit,  et al,
> 
> The intent was unspoken; but understood between key Allied Powers.   SHORT ANSWER:  No itis not all that clear.
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> The wording in the mandate "*Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country*" is not clear enough?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A "historic connection" does not mean a contemporary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it were a "historical event", I would agree with you. But "connection" is not event, it's rather status in this case. The contemporary connection of the Jewish people to the land was obvious to the authors of the mandate, but it was important to underline the historical connection of Jews to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemites have a much - much closer historic connection _(20th Century)_ to Mecca and Medina" through the Shiehk/King Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  But that does not mean the House of Saud that currently reigning over Saudi Arabia has some duty to give it back or reconstitute the Kingdom of the Hadjaz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A historical connection of a whole people to the land and an ancestral connections of a clan/dynasty to the place of its origin are not really comparable things.
> 
> 
> 
> "Grounds" _(reason)_ for or practical basis for "reconstitution" _(rebuilding the ancient government)_ is a concept and not an imperative.
> 
> What you should have quoted is the plain intent and objective:  "adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment _(create with some permanency)_ in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."  This is only unambiguous to the extent that the phrase → "national home"  _(in contemporary times)_ can take many forms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I replied your assertion: "While it is clear, very clear, that the Allied Powers did recognize the historic connection, that is not necessarily the same thing as recognizing "existing rights of the Jewish people."
> My quote showed that these things present in the same statement and thus they are related to each other in the mandate.
Click to expand...

The Balfour Declaration got things rolling but it is not really relevant anymore.


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia
> 
> While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."
> 
> Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:
> 
> "*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]
> 
> George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:
> 
> "The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]
> 
> American historian Bernard Lewis writes:
> 
> "*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​
> 
> Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
> Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
> _Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.
> 
> Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.
> 
> 
> According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.
> 
> 
> While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
> What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.
> 
> Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?
> 
> 
> *
> Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*
Click to expand...

I do not believe the Palestinians (Phillistines) and the Jews have any common ancestry or DNA.

The Philistines were the Sea Peoples that left the Trojan War to pillage ancient Egypt and the Levant.

They are neither Jews nor Semitic.

They are ancient Greek and therefore Indo-European/Aryan.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why doe recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Coyote,
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are what the word Arab says they are.
> 
> ARABS
> 
> From Arabia.
> 
> Therefore they cannot be indigenous of the ancient Land of Canaan as the Jewish People are.
> 
> The Arab extremist cannot accept that the Jews can have their own sovereign land On their own ancient homeland.
> 
> Jews have not taken one duma of Arab indigenous land, ever.
> All of it is at the hands of the Saudis, Yemenites, UAE, Qatar, and all others who live in the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> The extreme Muslim Arabs are intent is saying that Zionism is a European cause, even though it is not, never has been and the Jews from Europe are NOT Europeans.  They came from the land of Israel, ancient Canaan. And simply returned home, those who were away to recreate their Nation.
> 
> A Nation the Arab Muslims cannot stand to see that it still exists in Jewish hands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are not an exact definition.  They are defined by language and culture not blood. It isn’t much different then the English conquests and cultural domination of indiginous populations.
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia
> 
> Today, "Arab" refers to a large number of people whose native regions form the Arab world due to the spread of Arabs and the Arabic language throughout the region during the early Muslim conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries *and the subsequent Arabisation of indigenous populations.[42]*
> 
> Arabs are a diverse group in terms of religious affiliations and practices. In the pre-Islamic era, most Arabs followed polytheistic religions. Some tribes had adopted Christianity or Judaism, and a few individuals, the hanifs, apparently observed monotheism.[50] Today, Arabs are mostly adherents of Islam, with sizable Christian minorities. [51] Mizrahi Jews, and historically the Sephardi, have an Arab identity. Arab Muslims primarily belong to the Sunni, Shiite, Ibadi, and Alawite denominations. Arab Christians generally follow one of the Eastern Christian Churches, such as the Greek Orthodox or Greek Catholic churches.[52] Other smaller minority religions are also followed, such as the Bahá'í Faith and Druze.
Click to expand...


Arabs and Palestinian 'arabized Jews', the indigenous people who never left the land are not called the same by the Arabs themselves, they were always identified separately.


----------



## P F Tinmore

yiostheoy said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia
> 
> While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."
> 
> Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:
> 
> "*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]
> 
> George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:
> 
> "The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]
> 
> American historian Bernard Lewis writes:
> 
> "*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​
> 
> Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
> Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
> _Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.
> 
> Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.
> 
> 
> According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.
> 
> 
> While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
> What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.
> 
> Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?
> 
> 
> *
> Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not believe the Palestinians (Phillistines) and the Jews have any common ancestry or DNA.
> 
> The Philistines were the Sea Peoples that left the Trojan War to pillage ancient Egypt and the Levant.
> 
> They are neither Jews nor Semitic.
> 
> They are ancient Greek and therefore Indo-European/Aryan.
Click to expand...

What difference does it make?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia
> 
> While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."
> 
> Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:
> 
> "*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]
> 
> George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:
> 
> "The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]
> 
> American historian Bernard Lewis writes:
> 
> "*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​
> 
> Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
> Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
> _Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.
> 
> Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.
> 
> 
> According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.
> 
> 
> While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
> What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.
> 
> Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?
> 
> 
> *
> Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not believe the Palestinians (Phillistines) and the Jews have any common ancestry or DNA.
> 
> The Philistines were the Sea Peoples that left the Trojan War to pillage ancient Egypt and the Levant.
> 
> They are neither Jews nor Semitic.
> 
> They are ancient Greek and therefore Indo-European/Aryan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What difference does it make?
Click to expand...

"Judea is not the land of Jews,
Arabia is not the land of Arabs."

What difference does it make that You call red blue, and blue red?


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> Really, which tribe?



American

.​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, which tribe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American
Click to expand...


Really ,so it were the Indigenous Native tribes that decided to rename their land into "America"?
What does the word mean in Indian?

This is funny how for Arabs to become indigenous people of Israel, whole histories of nations have to be rewritten just to fit the double standard and support the expansion of an Arabian empire.

I guess now we know why Arabs helped British invasion of the land...they were the middle eastern Americans, who inherited their indigenous status the same way British did in Americas.


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, which tribe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really ,so it were the Indigenous Native tribes that decided to rename their land into "America"?
> What does the word mean in Indian?
Click to expand...


Yeah ... They lived in this land they decided to name the United States of America.

One was an Indian ... A grandmother that lived in a teepee with a grandfather outside of Jamestown.
She was an American too.

.​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, which tribe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really ,so it were the Indigenous Native tribes that decided to rename their land into "America"?
> What does the word mean in Indian?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah ... They lived in this land they decided to name the United States of America.
> 
> One was an Indian ... A grandmother that lived in a teepee with a grandfather outside of Jamestown.
> She was an American too.
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


So  the Indians decide to name it USA? 
Really what is the meaning of the word in the language of the indigenous people?


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> So  the Indians decide to name it USA?
> Really what is the meaning of the word in the language of the indigenous people?



I can see why this is confusing to you ... 

You have some misconception as to a particular point in time you want to suggest someone decided to walk across a land and call it theirs.
What is the cutoff date you would like to apply for your specific handicapping requirements?

I was born here, my parent's parents were born here, their parents were born here, whose parents were born here to even more parents who were born here ...
And so on for centuries ... I am native to this land, wasn't born anywhere else ... I am not a native of anywhere else.

Now if you want to suggest that isn't true because you would like to apply some point in time where my ancestors spawned out of the primordial sludge ...
And walked across some other place ... Be specific as to what date someone has to be somewhere to meet your silly requirements.

Or, to a different extent ... What level of inbreeding is required to consider someone indigenous ... 

.​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So  the Indians decide to name it USA?
> Really what is the meaning of the word in the language of the indigenous people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can see why this is confusing to you ...
> 
> You have some misconception as to a particular point in time you want to suggest someone decided to walk across a land and call it theirs.
> What is the cutoff date you would like to apply for your specific handicapping requirements?
> 
> I was born here, my parent's parents were born here, their parents were born here, whose parents were born here to even more parents who were born here ...
> And so on for centuries ... I am native to this land, wasn't born anywhere else ... I am not a native of anywhere else.
> 
> Now if you want to suggest that isn't true because you would like to apply some point in time where my ancestors spawned out of the primordial sludge ...
> And walked across some other place ... Be specific as to what date someone has to be somewhere to meet your silly requirements.
> 
> Or, to a different extent ... What level of inbreeding is required to consider someone indigenous ...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


No cutoff date.

A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.

Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> No cutoff date.
> 
> A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
> Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.
> 
> Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.



You pronounce a bunch convenient stipulations that support some silly idea you have as to the origin of man to suit your desired prejudices.
And refer to the fact we all came from somewhere as "bs" ... You are one silly little nutcase.

If you think you can take the ground I am holding ... Go pound sand nit-wit ... 

.​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No cutoff date.
> 
> A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
> Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.
> 
> Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You pronounce a bunch convenient stipulations that support some silly idea you have as to the origin of man to suit your desired prejudices.
> And refer to the fact we all came from somewhere as "bs" ... You are one silly little nutcase.
> 
> If you think you can take the ground I am holding ... Go pound sand nit-wit ...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


Still claiming Obama, Hilary and Roosvelt are indigenous to Milwaukee?

I'm sorry to burst Your pc bubble,
 just wonder what happens when African Americans grow into bigger numbers than Indians, does it make Farakhan and his buddies into  indigenous Americans overnight?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No cutoff date.
> 
> A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
> Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.
> 
> Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You pronounce a bunch convenient stipulations that support some silly idea you have as to the origin of man to suit your desired prejudices.
> And refer to the fact we all came from somewhere as "bs" ... You are one silly little nutcase.
> 
> If you think you can take the ground I am holding ... Go pound sand nit-wit ...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...



Bottom line--are you Native American/ American Indian?


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the links to where you got your genetic studies, twice.  Where are they?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I missed that request, here are some links describing some studies, I don't you can claim they are biased or pro-arab:
> 
> Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> 
> This one is more recent and interiguing and is on sequencing the Canaanite genome and it's similarities to today's Lebanese (who genetically overlap with Palestinians). Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Not genetic, but historically, Wikipedia has this to say: Palestinians - Wikipedia
> 
> While Palestinian* culture is primarily Arab and Islamic*, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[138] *According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples *who had lived in the country since time immemorial."
> 
> Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:
> 
> "*Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land.* Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[138]
> 
> George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book _The Arab Awakening_:
> 
> "The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century,* but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised*."[139]
> 
> American historian Bernard Lewis writes:
> 
> "*Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement.* This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region.* Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic*."[140]​
> 
> Here is one I linked to earlier in this thread, he is a Jewish Israeli scientist and his ideas are intriguing because he looks at cultural similarities:
> Do the Palestinians have Jewish Roots?
> _Do the Palestinians have Jewish roots? The question may sound fanciful. But not only do many Jews and Palestinians share remarkably similar DNA, there are also numerous customs and even names that overlap.
> 
> Among those who have researched the topic is Tsvi Misinai, an Israeli businessman who writes and speaks extensively about the connection between the Palestinians and the Jews. He claims that nearly 90 percent of all Palestinians are descended from Jews who remained in Israel after the destruction of Second Temple 2,000 years ago, but were forced to convert to Islam.
> 
> 
> According to Misinai, the Hebrew ancestors of the Palestinians were rural mountain dwellers who were allowed to remain in the land in order to supply Rome with grain and olive oil.
> 
> 
> While Misinai is an advocate of this theory, he’s not the only scholar or even political figure to claim a Jewish connection for the Palestinians. The first president of Israel, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi as well as former Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, wrote several books and articles on the subject._​
> What I don't understand is how you can claim that the Palestinians - a hodge podge of Muslims, Christians, Druze, are all descended soley from Arab conquerers.  That would be a direct contradiction to the normal run of conquests historically - invaders invade, conquer, religious conversions occur either by choice or force, some settle and intermarry, the rest move on to new conquests leaving behind their culture, language, laws and of course taxation.  You seem to be saying that everyone in the Palestine region, who is not Jewish, is entirely a descendent of invaders and your links supporting it seem not to say much about ancient history but more about what the modern rise of a Palestinian national identity which is a bit different and is a modern identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep asking the wrong questions.  Questions designed, without your knowledge, to delegitimize Jewish History, genetics and everything else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I don't think I am, nor do I think I am in any way delegitimizing Jewish history or genetics.  Rather, I think that you, in the process...are deligitimizing the Palestinians.  Is there room for only ONE history?  ONE people? ONE narrative?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something which never happened BEFORE the Jews managed to succeed in recreating their National Homeland.
> 
> You, if not others,  are repeatedly told that the term "Palestinians" was never used before the Mandate for Palestine.  It does not matter.
> 
> You, and others, are told that the only ones who actually used the term Palestine during the Mandate were the Jews who were building their infrastructure to create their State.
> Palestine Post (Jerusalem Post)
> Palestine Symphony  (Israel Symphony), so on and so forth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I really don't care what you say I am "repeatedly told" - that comes off as frankly arrogant and ignorant and has little to do with the ancient history of place and people there, but rather with the more modern history and semantics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muslims/Arabs did not use that term at all.  Never cared for it.
> Muslims wanted to be part of Syria, so that the whole region would be a PanArab Caliphate, once the Ottoman Empire resolved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that has what to do with the history and heritage of the people of that region?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why some always fought about the creation of a sovereign Jewish State on the Jewish Ancient homeland.
> 
> We do NOT deny that there have been Arab Muslims and Christians living on the land since the 7th Century, or that the majority of Arab Muslims came to the Region sometimes called Palestine between the end of the 19th century and 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  *You are more subtle then that*.  You deny them an existence prior to the 7th century and you deny them their heritage from the older people's of that region and worse, you claim the *majority *didn't even come until the end of the 19th century, a claim that is not well supported other than from the pro-Israeli narratives.  In fact, the exact populations and immigrations are difficult to determine but it was certainly not an empty land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were NOT called Palestinians then.  NO ONE was called a Palestinian back then, and the Palestinians you and others are now calling Palestinians as a nationality, only became one under the idea Arafat and the KGB had in Moscow in 1964.
> -----------------------------------
> 
> When it comes to the Arab narrative and the name "Palestine," and "Palestinians," there's more than enough "truth" that can be proven to be untrue. For example, if you ask what and where is "Palestine," virtually every enemy of Israel, including Mahmoud Abbas, will tell you it includes the entire land area which the rest of the world calls Israel.
> 
> 
> In fact, "Palestine" refers to a coastal section of land in the area of today's Gaza Strip that was inhabited by the ancient Philistines who were not native to Israel or the region. Most scholars believe they migrated from Greece or Crete. The ancient Philistines were enemies of Israel. The biblical giant Goliath, whom King David slew, was a Philistine.
> 
> 
> The name "Palestine" is from the Latin name "Philistia." It came to be known as such after the unsuccessful Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD.
> 
> 
> 
> Then Roman Emperor Hadrian, in an effort to wipe out any symbols of Jewish presence, renamed the Kingdom of Judea Philistia He did this specifically to insult the Jews, since the Philistines were their enemies.
> 
> For the record, there isn’t, nor has there ever been a sovereign nation called Palestine.
> 
> *Truth routinely sacrificed  *
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> So where does the name "Palestinian" come from? Many will tell you the champion of this remaking of the Arab image is the late Yasser Arafat. He founded the "Palestine" Liberation Organization PLO in 1964 and began using the term "Palestinian" in order to legitimize his effort to portray the "displaced" Arabs from the 1948 War of Independence as unique with an ethnicity and culture of their own. His effort was motivated by the intentional refusal of surrounding Arab countries to absorb them. It is these people who eventually became known as "Palestinian refugees."
> 
> 
> Another reason for inventing the term is well described by then-PLO Executive Committee member Zahir Muhsein. In a 1977 interview, he said: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality there is no difference between Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for our political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since the Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people,’ to oppose Zionism.”
> 
> As recently as the Six-Day War there were no specific people known as "Palestinians."
> 
> Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim terrorist who at that time lived in the area that became known as the "West Bank," (another invented term) said "how can I go to bed as a Jordanian one day, and wake up the next day as a Palestinian?" He is referring to the day before and the day after the start of the Six-Day War.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The truth about Palestine
> 
> -------------------
> Some Arab Muslims will tell the truth.
> But who is bothering to listen to them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?  You are arguing NAMES, I am arguing PEOPLE.  No one is denying that the advent of a Palestinian national identity is relatively recent.  The people however, go back much further.
> 
> Though I don't suppose you will bother to listen to the Jewish scholars who point that out will you?
> 
> 
> *
> Why is it so important to you to dispossess the Palestinians?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent post.
> 
> As I have posted before, Palestine has been invaded, conquered, and occupied many times over the centuries. Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Those are the people who became Palestinians after WWI.
> 
> When people call the Palestinians Arabs it is like...no that is not true. It can't be true. History tells us something different.
Click to expand...

They are Arabs in a broad sense that takes in all the people who were Arabitized


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> Still claiming Obama, Hilary and Roosvelt are indigenous to Milwaukee?
> 
> I'm sorry to burst Your pc bubble,
> just wonder what happens when African Americans grow into bigger numbers than Indians, does it make Farakhan and his buddies into  indigenous Americans overnight?



You tell me ... 

You're the one that seems to be hung up over the exactly how you want to identify your specific handicapping system.
I am simply pointing out where you are handicapped ... Probably the result of inbreeding.

.​


----------



## Coyote

Lll...


rylah said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So  the Indians decide to name it USA?
> Really what is the meaning of the word in the language of the indigenous people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can see why this is confusing to you ...
> 
> You have some misconception as to a particular point in time you want to suggest someone decided to walk across a land and call it theirs.
> What is the cutoff date you would like to apply for your specific handicapping requirements?
> 
> I was born here, my parent's parents were born here, their parents were born here, whose parents were born here to even more parents who were born here ...
> And so on for centuries ... I am native to this land, wasn't born anywhere else ... I am not a native of anywhere else.
> 
> Now if you want to suggest that isn't true because you would like to apply some point in time where my ancestors spawned out of the primordial sludge ...
> And walked across some other place ... Be specific as to what date someone has to be somewhere to meet your silly requirements.
> 
> Or, to a different extent ... What level of inbreeding is required to consider someone indigenous ...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No cutoff date.
> 
> A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
> Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.
> 
> Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.
Click to expand...


Then the term Arab is clearly misused, at least by you.


----------



## Sixties Fan

ForeverYoung436 said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No cutoff date.
> 
> A Jew is indigenous to Judea, Arabs to Arabia.
> Vast majority of US citizens are not native Americans, but somehow You try to change the obvious.
> 
> Its all pretty easy and in Your face., couldn't be more in Your face - and that's why I say that without all the mental choreography and rewriting of terms  and history- Your bs holds no ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You pronounce a bunch convenient stipulations that support some silly idea you have as to the origin of man to suit your desired prejudices.
> And refer to the fact we all came from somewhere as "bs" ... You are one silly little nutcase.
> 
> If you think you can take the ground I am holding ... Go pound sand nit-wit ...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Bottom line--are you Native American/ American Indian?
Click to expand...

Native Americans is used in two ways.

To denote the 500 First Nations which lived on the land before 1620s, and to denote people who are born in the USA.

Native Americans should truly be used for the Indigenous First Nations of the USA, but habit, because Europeans and Asian people have been  born on the land since that time, has created the term as to mean BORN IN THE USA, like Springsteen's song.

There are First Nations which will use the term First Nations, because they were the first ones, and other tribes will use Native Americans.

As long as those who came after 1620 realize that Native Americans for them does not mean that they are the Indigenous People of the land, and clarify that they do not belong to one of the First Nations, I would guess that there is no other term that could be used.

On any form in the USA, asking what Race etc, people are, Native Americans refers to any of the 500 First Nations, and not to those who came from Europe or Asia post 1620 and were born either under the British control of the land, or post 1776 when it became America (named after Amerigo Vespucci )


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still claiming Obama, Hilary and Roosvelt are indigenous to Milwaukee?
> 
> I'm sorry to burst Your pc bubble,
> just wonder what happens when African Americans grow into bigger numbers than Indians, does it make Farakhan and his buddies into  indigenous Americans overnight?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You tell me ...
> 
> You're the one that seems to be hung up over the exactly how you want to identify your specific handicapping system.
> I am imply pointing out where you are handicapped ... Probably the result of inbreeding.
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


Where am I handicapped?

My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word, while Arabs are clueless.

Exactly like the average American can't tell me what Milwaukee means in the local language without an Indian having to explain that for him.


----------



## BlackSand

rylah said:


> Where am I handicapped?
> 
> My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
> The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word.



You are handicapped in a sense that you assume anyone anywhere today didn't have ancestors that travelled from somewhere else.
If it is necessary for you to make a determination as to when exactly someone's ancestors were somewhere ... Then do so.

At least Sixties Fan was able to identify how they desire to handicap their interpretations.

I also indicated that if you have some kind of problem with the heritage or ancestry of another ... That's your problem.
I in turn suggested that problem could be associated with your heritage ...
And how closely you, or anyone for that matter want(s) to use the degree to which you or anyone are/is inbred as a valued determining factor.



.​


----------



## rylah

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where am I handicapped?
> 
> My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
> The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are handicapped in a sense that you assume anyone anywhere today didn't have ancestors that travelled from somewhere else.
> If it is necessary for to make a determination as to when exactly someone was somewhere ... Then do so.
> 
> At least Sixties Fan was able to identify how they desire to handicap their interpretations.
> 
> I also indicated that if you have some kind of problem with the heritage or ancestry of another ... That's your problem.
> I in turn suggested the problem could be associated with your heritage ...
> And how closely you, or anyone for that matter want(s) to use the degree to which you or anyone are/is inbred as a valued determining factor.
> 
> 
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


Another attempt to blame me for Your failure to rewrite history and reverse the meaning of words.

So are You still calming Hillary is an Indigenous Native American?


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackSand said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where am I handicapped?
> 
> My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
> The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are handicapped in a sense that you assume anyone anywhere today didn't have ancestors that travelled from somewhere else.
> If it is necessary for you to make a determination as to when exactly someone's ancestors were somewhere ... Then do so.
> 
> At least Sixties Fan was able to identify how they desire to handicap their interpretations.
> 
> I also indicated that if you have some kind of problem with the heritage or ancestry of another ... That's your problem.
> I in turn suggested that problem could be associated with your heritage ...
> And how closely you, or anyone for that matter want(s) to use the degree to which you or anyone are/is inbred as a valued determining factor.
> 
> 
> 
> .​
Click to expand...

Wow, what an amazing bit of nothing, which says nothing and means absolutely nothing.

Maybe you did not understand my explanation of Native American, as you seem to not understand the meaning of Indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, as opposed to indigenous people of the Arabian Peninsula, or indigenous people of Egyptian Ancestry (that would be the Copts), or the indigenous people of Morocco (that would be the Berbers).

The Copts, the Berbers, the Assyrians, the Yazidis, the Kurds, and all other indigenous people of the land who lived on the land before the invading Arabs came along, do not have AT ALL the problem of the Arab Muslims attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of those lands, anymore than Europeans are attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, and others in the New world.

But.......ask yourself .......why is it that some Arab Muslims and Christians from Arabia are so intent in obliterating the indigenous identity of the Jewish People to their ancient homeland, when they ( The Arabs) , nor any other People (like the Ottoman Turks for 500 years of Ottoman conquest of that land ) have done it, *EVER,* to any other indigenous people anywhere on the Planet?

And still, to this day, no other Indigenous people on the planet is having to deal with those who once conquered their land attempting to obliterate that identity in order to take that land back.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years"*
> 
> The question isn't that hard to answer ...
> What you want to do with the answer may be a little more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> *Ooops ...
> Pineapple*​*
> .*​​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I guess that the majority of US citizens living in America "*of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years" *are the indigenous people?
> 
> Funny after 500 years they don't even call themselves 'natives', everyone knows who are Native Indigenous Americans,.
> 
> With Jews in Judea this question all of a sudden becomes 'hard to answer' for many people....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not hard to answer as she pointed out. Both Jews and Palestinians are indiginous along with other groups.
> 
> Why does recognizing that cause such angst to some that they have to invent narratives to marginalize them?  Why is it so important to insist they are just Europeans or that they are just descendants of Arab invaders? It is like there can only be One indiginous group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It a simple answer.
> 
> Jewish indigenity is not based on creation of any new identity or narrative, or on denying Arabs their rights based on longstanding presence in the land.
> While Palestinian narrative is a creation of a new entity, entirely based on denial of Jewish indigenous rights, and appropriation of other people's history.
> 
> One can see this in the use of the term Palestinian, which is used exclusively to refer to Arabs and exclude Jews. So let's call Arabs Arabs and Jews Jews as they do themselves.
> Because frankly, You'll find more agreement when calling things as they are, rather than creating new identities for people that don't know what THE WORD even means.
Click to expand...


It is not simple matter because both sides are using identity to marginalize the other’s rights.  


In both cases the argument has one main objective: de legitimize the other, their history, their ties to a bit of land.  And it goes hand in hand with there can only be one rightful people. That is clearly seen in Sixtie’s postings as well as in Monte’s repetive cut’n’paste jumbles, to point out two extremes.

There are two factors at play.  The people themselves and the idea of a national identity and the arguments are mixed into each other when they ought to be seperate.

Who are the people?  One side would insist that they are mostly descendendents of Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.  That is only partially in that they certainly would include some of those people as they include people’s from the many prior waves of conquest and the indiginous peoples who were there already.  Cultures change, languages change, religion changes.  And this has been observed in many other regions that have seen either conquest or the mass migrations of many peoples.  The Arab conquests had similarities to the Romans, invade set up a government and taxation, and move to the next goal, with very little mixing with native populations st least until they ran out of soldiers.

Wether one likes it or not genetic studies are a good way showing the interrelationships of ancient peoples where we simply lack sufficient information, but unfortunately, they’ve become tainted by those who attempt to misuse them to disenfranchise a group’s rights.  They do however show extremely close relatedness among a variety of groups in the region.

The other part is political and national identity.  So what if their national identity is relatively recent?  So is the idea of a Jewish notational identity.  It shouldn’t have any effect on the origins and history of the peoples themselves.


----------



## BlackSand

Sixties Fan said:


> Blah-Blah-Blah ...
> 
> And still, to this day, no other Indigenous people on the planet is having to deal with those who once conquered their land attempting to obliterate that identity in order to take that land back.



I think this part is the best part of your comments to address ...

It seems as though you have problems understanding the idea I don't give a damn who you want to say is indigenous to where.
We all come from ancestors that roamed all over the planet at one point or another in search of food and more hospitable climates.

The land belongs to whomever the heck can hold it under the conditions of which they can manage to keep other people from claiming it.
Those conditions can range anywhere from legal contracts recognized by others ... To blowing someone's head off if they try to take it from you.

The problem with the claims of who is what in what they want to call Palestine ...
Is the result of people who want to believe the fact they have been conquered doesn't matter ...
And they can get nit-wits to argue about their heritage to support that fantasy ...

That's probably the case because they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting it back any other way.

.​


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where am I handicapped?
> 
> My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
> The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are handicapped in a sense that you assume anyone anywhere today didn't have ancestors that travelled from somewhere else.
> If it is necessary for you to make a determination as to when exactly someone's ancestors were somewhere ... Then do so.
> 
> At least Sixties Fan was able to identify how they desire to handicap their interpretations.
> 
> I also indicated that if you have some kind of problem with the heritage or ancestry of another ... That's your problem.
> I in turn suggested that problem could be associated with your heritage ...
> And how closely you, or anyone for that matter want(s) to use the degree to which you or anyone are/is inbred as a valued determining factor.
> 
> 
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, what an amazing bit of nothing, which says nothing and means absolutely nothing.
> 
> Maybe you did not understand my explanation of Native American, as you seem to not understand the meaning of Indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, as opposed to indigenous people of the Arabian Peninsula, or indigenous people of Egyptian Ancestry (that would be the Copts), or the indigenous people of Morocco (that would be the Berbers).
> 
> The Copts, the Berbers, the Assyrians, the Yazidis, the Kurds, and all other indigenous people of the land who lived on the land before the invading Arabs came along, do not have AT ALL the problem of the Arab Muslims attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of those lands, anymore than Europeans are attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, and others in the New world.
> 
> But.......ask yourself .......why is it that some Arab Muslims and Christians from Arabia are so intent in obliterating the indigenous identity of the Jewish People to their ancient homeland, when they ( The Arabs) , nor any other People (like the Ottoman Turks for 500 years of Ottoman conquest of that land ) have done it, *EVER,* to any other indigenous people anywhere on the Planet?
> 
> And still, to this day, no other Indigenous people on the planet is having to deal with those who once conquered their land attempting to obliterate that identity in order to take that land back.
Click to expand...


Why is it you have no problem with recognizing the indigenous identity of the berbers, Copts, Kurds etc....but not the Palestinians?  Attempts to obliterate The Jewish identity does not mean it is ok to obliterate the Palestinian identity.  Both are wrong and symptom of what hinders efforts at peace.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, which tribe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really ,so it were the Indigenous Native tribes that decided to rename their land into "America"?
> What does the word mean in Indian?
> 
> This is funny how for Arabs to become indigenous people of Israel, whole histories of nations have to be rewritten just to fit the double standard and support the expansion of an Arabian empire.
> 
> I guess now we know why Arabs helped British invasion of the land...they were the middle eastern Americans, who inherited their indigenous status the same way British did in Americas.
Click to expand...


Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.


----------



## BlackSand

Coyote said:


> Why is it you have no problem with recognizing the indigenous identity of the berbers, Copts, Kurds etc....but not the Palestinians?  Attempts to obliterate The Jewish identity does not mean it is ok to obliterate the Palestinian identity.  Both are wrong and symptom of what hinders efforts at peace.



Who does what with the land and resources they have at their disposal combined with their ability to secure those things ...
Is always going to have more impact on what happens where they are ...
Than someone else's idea of what they can do with what they have not secured for their own use.

Edit:
If they want to fight about it ... Let them fight.
If their only alternative is to argue about who's great (times infinity) grand daddy lived on what side of the creek ... That's just nonsense.

.​
.​


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where am I handicapped?
> 
> My tribal heritage is not based on creating new identities ,and claiming I'm something I'm not.
> The land bears my name, world history is a record of my connection to that land - not the Arab connection. Even the word Palestine doesn't even have a meaning in Arabic, even in this Jews are the only ones who can explain the origin of the word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are handicapped in a sense that you assume anyone anywhere today didn't have ancestors that travelled from somewhere else.
> If it is necessary for you to make a determination as to when exactly someone's ancestors were somewhere ... Then do so.
> 
> At least Sixties Fan was able to identify how they desire to handicap their interpretations.
> 
> I also indicated that if you have some kind of problem with the heritage or ancestry of another ... That's your problem.
> I in turn suggested that problem could be associated with your heritage ...
> And how closely you, or anyone for that matter want(s) to use the degree to which you or anyone are/is inbred as a valued determining factor.
> 
> 
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, what an amazing bit of nothing, which says nothing and means absolutely nothing.
> 
> Maybe you did not understand my explanation of Native American, as you seem to not understand the meaning of Indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, as opposed to indigenous people of the Arabian Peninsula, or indigenous people of Egyptian Ancestry (that would be the Copts), or the indigenous people of Morocco (that would be the Berbers).
> 
> The Copts, the Berbers, the Assyrians, the Yazidis, the Kurds, and all other indigenous people of the land who lived on the land before the invading Arabs came along, do not have AT ALL the problem of the Arab Muslims attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of those lands, anymore than Europeans are attempting to say that they are the indigenous people of the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, and others in the New world.
> 
> But.......ask yourself .......why is it that some Arab Muslims and Christians from Arabia are so intent in obliterating the indigenous identity of the Jewish People to their ancient homeland, when they ( The Arabs) , nor any other People (like the Ottoman Turks for 500 years of Ottoman conquest of that land ) have done it, *EVER,* to any other indigenous people anywhere on the Planet?
> 
> And still, to this day, no other Indigenous people on the planet is having to deal with those who once conquered their land attempting to obliterate that identity in order to take that land back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it you have no problem with recognizing the indigenous identity of the berbers, Copts, Kurds etc....but not the Palestinians?  Attempts to obliterate The Jewish identity does not mean it is ok to obliterate the Palestinian identity.  Both are wrong and symptom of what hinders efforts at peace.
Click to expand...

I have no problem recognizing the Palestinians, for who and what they are.  

Descendents of Arab invaders, and migrants (mostly from the end of the 19th century until 1948, or some clans like the Al Husseini who migrated from Arabia to the area in the 11th century CE )   who in 1964 found their leader Arafat in need of creating a National identity for them.

What took them so long?

Why not during the Ottoman conquest of the land, or at any other time?  Why did they only identify themselves as Arabs and Muslims until 1964?

Where was the Arab League then?

You wish to make the Palestinian Arabs as part of the people who formed the indigenous people of the land, the Canaanite tribes, etc, as those are indigenous people who ended forming the Nation of Israel.

No Arab clans, no Palestinian tribes, no Greeks, no Romans, none, have ever called themselves indigenous to the land, no matter how long they have been living on the ancient land of Canaan.

You view Palestinians as being all the people who have ever migrated to and lived on the region called by some Palestine.

That has never been the case, by any invading or migrating power, for the past 3000 years or more.

Calling all the people who live in the region called by some Palestine, Palestinians is something very new.

As new as the Mandate for Palestine, from 1920 on, which called all of those living in the Mandate Palestinians, Jews, Arabs, Druze, Bedouins,etc and supplied Palestinian passports for mostly Jews, as the Arabs could not be bothered with that term.

As I said before, the Arabs called themselves Syrians, and wanted to be part of Greater Syria, which became another Mandate under the French.

They wanted all of the land to continue to belong only to Muslims, as it did during the Ottoman period.

Which is why there have been no wars against Jordan and the Hashemites who took 78% of the Mandate for Palestine, especially as the Hashemite clan are total foreigners to the region of Palestine, being there only since around 1915 when the Saud Clan from Yemen kicked them out of Arabia.

No worries, I know you have your mind set on what is what.  This is for anyone else who can understand history, and the meaning of the word indigenous, and how the word Palestinian was not used until the Mandate for Palestine, recreation of the Jewish homeland, came to be.

Christianity says that it has replaced Judaism.
Islam says it has replaced both Christianity and Judaism.

Guess how much right to land or anything else Jews have had, not only in the 1300 years since the Muslim invasion, but since the Mandate for Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote

I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none. 

The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity. 

Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'.  Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.

For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost. 

The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.


----------



## Shusha

This is not the same as a nationality.  Palestinians are most certainly in danger of having their nationality lost.  But I think the responsibility for their nationality is incorrectly placed on Israel.  I do not think Israel, nor TI posters here, are denying Arab Palestinians their identity (on the contrary, they are simply recognizing it for what it is).  Nor do I truly think that they are denying Arab Palestinians their nationality.  I do think that Israel is imposing conditions on Arab Palestinian nationality - recognition of the Jewish people, their right to sovereignty and a cessation of all violence.  And those seem to be perfectly reasonable conditions that Arab Palestinians have yet to agree to.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.



Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.

This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.

"Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.



I disagree.



> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.



Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.

But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.



> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.



Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA

Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.




> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.



At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.

And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
> Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.
> 
> This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.
> 
> "Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".
Click to expand...


How can they not be indiginous when they clearly share ancestry with very old peoples there?  Regardless of word meanings (look...is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea either Democratic or a Republic?).

Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> This is not the same as a nationality.  Palestinians are most certainly in danger of having their nationality lost.  But I think the responsibility for their nationality is incorrectly placed on Israel.  I do not think Israel, nor TI posters here, are denying Arab Palestinians their identity (on the contrary, they are simply recognizing it for what it is).  Nor do I truly think that they are denying Arab Palestinians their nationality.  I do think that Israel is imposing conditions on Arab Palestinian nationality - recognition of the Jewish people, their right to sovereignty and a cessation of all violence.  And those seem to be perfectly reasonable conditions that Arab Palestinians have yet to agree to.



I think you are overly kind to some of the Team Israel posters here.

Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.  When they rather explicitely state they have no right to Judea and Sameria or West Bank or Gaza - what ever you want to call it.

For example this statement totally denies the Palestinian's much longer history in that place and their relationship to older peoples, relegating them to descendents of "invaders" from the 19th century.



> I have no problem recognizing the Palestinians, for who and what they are.
> 
> Descendents of Arab invaders, and migrants (mostly from the end of the 19th century until 1948, or some clans like the Al Husseini who migrated from Arabia to the area in the 11th century CE ) who in 1964 found their leader Arafat in need of creating a National identity for them.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
> Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.
> 
> This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.
> 
> "Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How can they not be indiginous when they clearly share ancestry with very old peoples there?  Regardless of word meanings (look...is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea either Democratic or a Republic?).
> 
> Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.
Click to expand...


Modern Lebanese are 44% Arabian and 14% Jewish.
That Semites share close ancestry is pretty obvious.

Are You saying that based on 6 skeletons in one cave - anyone with an Arabian DNA is Canaanite now?

I just wonder where can we find the last living Cannanite language today? Among those who bow to Mecca 5 times a day, or those people who kept Cannan at the center of their identity for millenias?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.
> 
> But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.
> 
> And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
Click to expand...

Arabs are NOT descendants of Biblical Canaanites.

Neither would be the Biblical Philistines, as they were of Greek origin, or any Greeks who came with Alexander and created the Christian Greek Orthodox Church, and so many others who have their indigenous status from somewhere else, be they Egyptians, Ethiopians, or anyone outside of Biblical, Ancient Canaan.

Being born in the land of Canaan, called Israel, or Judea or Palestine, does not make one indigenous from it, even if their descendants  are those who stayed after the Philistines,  Greeks, Romans, Byzantine, etc ceased to be a power.

Those are foreign people to the land, not indigenous to it, the same way as the Europeans after 1620 are foreign to the New World and not Native or indigenous to it.

As said before, the people who lived in what became known in the 20th century as the Region of Palestine, was known only as a region, since the Romans changed the name to Syria Palestina.   

All the inhabitants were known as Jews, Greek, Aramaic, Romans, or any of the people who were living there at the time, but no one ever referred to them as Palestinians.  Because that term was never adopted by the indigenous people or any of the later invader, conquerors like the Byzantine, the Muslim Kurds, Muslim Arabs, teh Crusaders, the Ottomans, or any of the visitors or colonies founded in the area, like the German or American Colonies created in the 19th century.

The Arabs are not part of the indigenous fabric of the Land of Canaan/ Israel.  Neither are the Greeks, Romans, Muslim Kurds, Arabs, European Crusaders or the Ottomans.

The use of the word Palestinians as a national identity for the Arabs only happened in 1964. By Arafat, who was an Egyptian Arab.

The Jews could have taken the word Palestine and Palestinians  (many already had passports as Palestinians ) and called their country and themselves Palestine and Palestinians, as the British chose to bring those words up again.

Had that happened, there would be no issues with "Palestinians", or Palestine , but with Arabs who refused to partition the Mandate into two states (and continue to refuse to do so  )and who want to get the rest of what was called the Mandate for Palestine which was to become once again a sovereign homeland for the Jewish People for themselves, as Muslims, as Arabs.

Muslims consider that they have replaced Judaism.
Therefore Jews cannot ever be allowed to have sovereignty over land they once conquered, and be "submissive" to people they consider themselves superior to.

It is all in the Quran.  That is what they follow.  That is what is written in the Charters for Hamas, the PLO and Fatah.

And none of that, they have any intention of changing.

Which means, no peace with Israel and the Jews.

And it means that they will fight even if it takes forever to achieve what Mohammad achieved out of the Three Jewish Tribes of Mecca.   

Their surrender.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is not the same as a nationality.  Palestinians are most certainly in danger of having their nationality lost.  But I think the responsibility for their nationality is incorrectly placed on Israel.  I do not think Israel, nor TI posters here, are denying Arab Palestinians their identity (on the contrary, they are simply recognizing it for what it is).  Nor do I truly think that they are denying Arab Palestinians their nationality.  I do think that Israel is imposing conditions on Arab Palestinian nationality - recognition of the Jewish people, their right to sovereignty and a cessation of all violence.  And those seem to be perfectly reasonable conditions that Arab Palestinians have yet to agree to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are overly kind to some of the Team Israel posters here.
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.  When they rather explicitely state they have no right to Judea and Sameria or West Bank or Gaza - what ever you want to call it.
> Which Palestinians are you referring to who have a much longer history in the area than the Jews?
> 
> For example this statement totally denies the Palestinian's much longer history in that place and their relationship to older peoples, relegating them to descendents of "invaders" from the 19th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problem recognizing the Palestinians, for who and what they are.
> 
> Descendents of Arab invaders, and migrants (mostly from the end of the 19th century until 1948, or some clans like the Al Husseini who migrated from Arabia to the area in the 11th century CE ) who in 1964 found their leader Arafat in need of creating a National identity for them.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
> Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.
> 
> This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.
> 
> "Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How can they not be indiginous when they clearly share ancestry with very old peoples there?  Regardless of word meanings (look...is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea either Democratic or a Republic?).
> 
> Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.
Click to expand...

Which Palestinians are you referring to who have a much longer history in the area than the Jews?

They share ancestry with which ancient people exactly?
How many of them do, which is provable?

You are clearly using the term Palestinians as painting a broad stroke over all who lived in the area some 2000 years ago.
And clearly, the people in that area were never called Palestinians 2000 years ago, 3000 years ago, when the Muslim Kurds, and then Arabs came 1700 years ago.

The word Palestinian was totally unknown and useless, until the Mandate for Palestine, and until the Muslim Arabs adopted it for their national identity in Gaza and what is known as Israel, Judea and Samaria.

Should we ask Jordan, which is 78% Palestine, why they do not automatically allow those born in their country the nationality of Jordanian, and why are they all not Palestinians, but Palestinians and Hashemites, even if most of the Arabs are from different clans than the Hashemites?

Why a broad brush to all other clans but the Hashemites?
Why only they are Palestinians?  And only if they fled Israel after 1948?


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
> Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.
> 
> This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.
> 
> "Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How can they not be indiginous when they clearly share ancestry with very old peoples there?  Regardless of word meanings (look...is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea either Democratic or a Republic?).
> 
> Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Modern Lebanese are 44% Arabian and 14% Jewish.
> That Semites share close ancestry is pretty obvious.
> 
> Are You saying that based on 6 skeletons in one cave - anyone with an Arabian DNA is Canaanite now?
> 
> I just wonder where can we find the last living Cannanite language today? Among those who bow to Mecca 5 times a day, or those people who kept Cannan at the center of their identity for millenias?
Click to expand...


No, I am not saying anyone with Arab dna is blah blah blah


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is not the same as a nationality.  Palestinians are most certainly in danger of having their nationality lost.  But I think the responsibility for their nationality is incorrectly placed on Israel.  I do not think Israel, nor TI posters here, are denying Arab Palestinians their identity (on the contrary, they are simply recognizing it for what it is).  Nor do I truly think that they are denying Arab Palestinians their nationality.  I do think that Israel is imposing conditions on Arab Palestinian nationality - recognition of the Jewish people, their right to sovereignty and a cessation of all violence.  And those seem to be perfectly reasonable conditions that Arab Palestinians have yet to agree to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are overly kind to some of the Team Israel posters here.
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.  When they rather explicitely state they have no right to Judea and Sameria or West Bank or Gaza - what ever you want to call it.
> Which Palestinians are you referring to who have a much longer history in the area than the Jews?
> 
> For example this statement totally denies the Palestinian's much longer history in that place and their relationship to older peoples, relegating them to descendents of "invaders" from the 19th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problem recognizing the Palestinians, for who and what they are.
> 
> Descendents of Arab invaders, and migrants (mostly from the end of the 19th century until 1948, or some clans like the Al Husseini who migrated from Arabia to the area in the 11th century CE ) who in 1964 found their leader Arafat in need of creating a National identity for them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing has to be rewritten.  We just have to be honest about the meaning of the terms we are using.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Coyote I'm suggesting the same.
> Learn what "Palestinian" means in the local language.
> 
> This couldn't be more in Your face than that. So either we call things by their name or we will keep muddying the waters because for some the term "indigenous" is just too straight forward for the all-inclusive pc vocabulary.
> 
> "Palestinian" - is a word with a meaning, and it means the opposite of "indigenous".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How can they not be indiginous when they clearly share ancestry with very old peoples there?  Regardless of word meanings (look...is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea either Democratic or a Republic?).
> 
> Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which Palestinians are you referring to who have a much longer history in the area than the Jews?
> 
> They share ancestry with which ancient people exactly?
> How many of them do, which is provable?
> 
> You are clearly using the term Palestinians as painting a broad stroke over all who lived in the area some 2000 years ago.
> And clearly, the people in that area were never called Palestinians 2000 years ago, 3000 years ago, when the Muslim Kurds, and then Arabs came 1700 years ago.
> 
> The word Palestinian was totally unknown and useless, until the Mandate for Palestine, and until the Muslim Arabs adopted it for their national identity in Gaza and what is known as Israel, Judea and Samaria.
> 
> Should we ask Jordan, which is 78% Palestine, why they do not automatically allow those born in their country the nationality of Jordanian, and why are they all not Palestinians, but Palestinians and Hashemites, even if most of the Arabs are from different clans than the Hashemites?
> 
> Why a broad brush to all other clans but the Hashemites?
> Why only they are Palestinians?  And only if they fled Israel after 1948?
Click to expand...

You mean the way you use Arab as a broad brush stroke?

What exactly do you mean by your last sentence?  It is a bit of a nonsequiter.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.
> 
> But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.
> 
> And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are NOT descendants of Biblical Canaanites.
> 
> Neither would be the Biblical Philistines, as they were of Greek origin, or any Greeks who came with Alexander and created the Christian Greek Orthodox Church, and so many others who have their indigenous status from somewhere else, be they Egyptians, Ethiopians, or anyone outside of Biblical, Ancient Canaan.
> 
> Being born in the land of Canaan, called Israel, or Judea or Palestine, does not make one indigenous from it, even if their descendants  are those who stayed after the Philistines,  Greeks, Romans, Byzantine, etc ceased to be a power.
> 
> Those are foreign people to the land, not indigenous to it, the same way as the Europeans after 1620 are foreign to the New World and not Native or indigenous to it.
> 
> As said before, the people who lived in what became known in the 20th century as the Region of Palestine, was known only as a region, since the Romans changed the name to Syria Palestina.
> 
> All the inhabitants were known as Jews, Greek, Aramaic, Romans, or any of the people who were living there at the time, but no one ever referred to them as Palestinians.  Because that term was never adopted by the indigenous people or any of the later invader, conquerors like the Byzantine, the Muslim Kurds, Muslim Arabs, teh Crusaders, the Ottomans, or any of the visitors or colonies founded in the area, like the German or American Colonies created in the 19th century.
> 
> The Arabs are not part of the indigenous fabric of the Land of Canaan/ Israel.  Neither are the Greeks, Romans, Muslim Kurds, Arabs, European Crusaders or the Ottomans.
> 
> The use of the word Palestinians as a national identity for the Arabs only happened in 1964. By Arafat, who was an Egyptian Arab.
> 
> The Jews could have taken the word Palestine and Palestinians  (many already had passports as Palestinians ) and called their country and themselves Palestine and Palestinians, as the British chose to bring those words up again.
> 
> Had that happened, there would be no issues with "Palestinians", or Palestine , but with Arabs who refused to partition the Mandate into two states (and continue to refuse to do so  )and who want to get the rest of what was called the Mandate for Palestine which was to become once again a sovereign homeland for the Jewish People for themselves, as Muslims, as Arabs.
> 
> Muslims consider that they have replaced Judaism.
> Therefore Jews cannot ever be allowed to have sovereignty over land they once conquered, and be "submissive" to people they consider themselves superior to.
> 
> It is all in the Quran.  That is what they follow.  That is what is written in the Charters for Hamas, the PLO and Fatah.
> 
> And none of that, they have any intention of changing.
> 
> Which means, no peace with Israel and the Jews.
> 
> And it means that they will fight even if it takes forever to achieve what Mohammad achieved out of the Three Jewish Tribes of Mecca.
> 
> Their surrender.
Click to expand...

what evidence do you have that today’s Palestinians contain no more ancient blood than that 19th century invaders?  How about genetic studies?  Although you apparently think the study in the National Geographic article got it all wrong.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.
> 
> But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.
> 
> And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are NOT descendants of Biblical Canaanites.
> 
> Neither would be the Biblical Philistines, as they were of Greek origin, or any Greeks who came with Alexander and created the Christian Greek Orthodox Church, and so many others who have their indigenous status from somewhere else, be they Egyptians, Ethiopians, or anyone outside of Biblical, Ancient Canaan.
> 
> Being born in the land of Canaan, called Israel, or Judea or Palestine, does not make one indigenous from it, even if their descendants  are those who stayed after the Philistines,  Greeks, Romans, Byzantine, etc ceased to be a power.
> 
> Those are foreign people to the land, not indigenous to it, the same way as the Europeans after 1620 are foreign to the New World and not Native or indigenous to it.
> 
> As said before, the people who lived in what became known in the 20th century as the Region of Palestine, was known only as a region, since the Romans changed the name to Syria Palestina.
> 
> All the inhabitants were known as Jews, Greek, Aramaic, Romans, or any of the people who were living there at the time, but no one ever referred to them as Palestinians.  Because that term was never adopted by the indigenous people or any of the later invader, conquerors like the Byzantine, the Muslim Kurds, Muslim Arabs, teh Crusaders, the Ottomans, or any of the visitors or colonies founded in the area, like the German or American Colonies created in the 19th century.
> 
> The Arabs are not part of the indigenous fabric of the Land of Canaan/ Israel.  Neither are the Greeks, Romans, Muslim Kurds, Arabs, European Crusaders or the Ottomans.
> 
> The use of the word Palestinians as a national identity for the Arabs only happened in 1964. By Arafat, who was an Egyptian Arab.
> 
> The Jews could have taken the word Palestine and Palestinians  (many already had passports as Palestinians ) and called their country and themselves Palestine and Palestinians, as the British chose to bring those words up again.
> 
> Had that happened, there would be no issues with "Palestinians", or Palestine , but with Arabs who refused to partition the Mandate into two states (and continue to refuse to do so  )and who want to get the rest of what was called the Mandate for Palestine which was to become once again a sovereign homeland for the Jewish People for themselves, as Muslims, as Arabs.
> 
> Muslims consider that they have replaced Judaism.
> Therefore Jews cannot ever be allowed to have sovereignty over land they once conquered, and be "submissive" to people they consider themselves superior to.
> 
> It is all in the Quran.  That is what they follow.  That is what is written in the Charters for Hamas, the PLO and Fatah.
> 
> And none of that, they have any intention of changing.
> 
> Which means, no peace with Israel and the Jews.
> 
> And it means that they will fight even if it takes forever to achieve what Mohammad achieved out of the Three Jewish Tribes of Mecca.
> 
> Their surrender.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what evidence do you have that today’s Palestinians contain no more ancient blood than that 19th century invaders?  How about genetic studies?  Although you apparently think the study in the National Geographic article got it all wrong.
Click to expand...

Ancient blood from Ancient Canaan, they do not have.

Ancient blood from when the Muslims left Arabia in the 7th Century CE on, they are all there, living in North Africa, all over what is now called the Middle East, including Iran.

Genetics can only point that the Arabs come from Arabia.
If they mixed with any other ethnic people for the past 2000 years, their DNA will show that as well.

You are possibly still confusing people who lived in Ancient Canaan as using the word Palestinians to identify themselves.

They never did so.

What I keep trying to say is that the concept of anyone being called a Palestinian only started with the Mandate for Palestine.
Had it been called anything else, that is what they would be calling themselves as the Jews would always have chosen the name for the country to be Israel, as it had once been.

And most non Jews who migrated to the region after the first Zionist large migration did so in order to look for work, and most had never been to the area.

The Tamimi clan is from Bosnia.
All the clans names basically say where they are from, and have never forgotten it.  Rylah has posted about many of them.

Can one say that the Al Husseini clan was in Canaan in Biblical Canaanite times, when they themselves tell that they only came to the area around the 11th century CE?

As did so many others?

The Arabs are clearly using the term Palestinian in order to erase the Jewish presence on the land.  They say so, they do so, and BDS is the instrument they have been using to delegitimize any and all things Jewish.

Just look at UNESCO, how all Jewish sites have all of a sudden been given a Palestinian identity.  Something they never bothered to do while it was in Muslim hands.

Why?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.
> 
> But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.
> 
> And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are NOT descendants of Biblical Canaanites.
> 
> Neither would be the Biblical Philistines, as they were of Greek origin, or any Greeks who came with Alexander and created the Christian Greek Orthodox Church, and so many others who have their indigenous status from somewhere else, be they Egyptians, Ethiopians, or anyone outside of Biblical, Ancient Canaan.
> 
> Being born in the land of Canaan, called Israel, or Judea or Palestine, does not make one indigenous from it, even if their descendants  are those who stayed after the Philistines,  Greeks, Romans, Byzantine, etc ceased to be a power.
> 
> Those are foreign people to the land, not indigenous to it, the same way as the Europeans after 1620 are foreign to the New World and not Native or indigenous to it.
> 
> As said before, the people who lived in what became known in the 20th century as the Region of Palestine, was known only as a region, since the Romans changed the name to Syria Palestina.
> 
> All the inhabitants were known as Jews, Greek, Aramaic, Romans, or any of the people who were living there at the time, but no one ever referred to them as Palestinians.  Because that term was never adopted by the indigenous people or any of the later invader, conquerors like the Byzantine, the Muslim Kurds, Muslim Arabs, teh Crusaders, the Ottomans, or any of the visitors or colonies founded in the area, like the German or American Colonies created in the 19th century.
> 
> The Arabs are not part of the indigenous fabric of the Land of Canaan/ Israel.  Neither are the Greeks, Romans, Muslim Kurds, Arabs, European Crusaders or the Ottomans.
> 
> The use of the word Palestinians as a national identity for the Arabs only happened in 1964. By Arafat, who was an Egyptian Arab.
> 
> The Jews could have taken the word Palestine and Palestinians  (many already had passports as Palestinians ) and called their country and themselves Palestine and Palestinians, as the British chose to bring those words up again.
> 
> Had that happened, there would be no issues with "Palestinians", or Palestine , but with Arabs who refused to partition the Mandate into two states (and continue to refuse to do so  )and who want to get the rest of what was called the Mandate for Palestine which was to become once again a sovereign homeland for the Jewish People for themselves, as Muslims, as Arabs.
> 
> Muslims consider that they have replaced Judaism.
> Therefore Jews cannot ever be allowed to have sovereignty over land they once conquered, and be "submissive" to people they consider themselves superior to.
> 
> It is all in the Quran.  That is what they follow.  That is what is written in the Charters for Hamas, the PLO and Fatah.
> 
> And none of that, they have any intention of changing.
> 
> Which means, no peace with Israel and the Jews.
> 
> And it means that they will fight even if it takes forever to achieve what Mohammad achieved out of the Three Jewish Tribes of Mecca.
> 
> Their surrender.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what evidence do you have that today’s Palestinians contain no more ancient blood than that 19th century invaders?  How about genetic studies?  Although you apparently think the study in the National Geographic article got it all wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ancient blood from Ancient Canaan, they do not have.
> 
> Ancient blood from when the Muslims left Arabia in the 7th Century CE on, they are all there, living in North Africa, all over what is now called the Middle East, including Iran.
Click to expand...


So your claim is that the Palestinians are entirely descended from 7th century Muslim Conquerers? Fine.  Prove it with something beyond claims that there was no such thing as "Palestinian" prior to whenever or similar SEMANTICS.



> Genetics can only point that the Arabs come from Arabia.
> If they mixed with any other ethnic people for the past 2000 years, their DNA will show that as well.



Genetics shows what mixture of peoples is in an individual's heritage.  Not that "Arabs come from Arabia" (I imagine that is your way of marginalizing the Palestinians).

What you are trying to do is interesting.  You are identifying them by their Arab ancestry not by their non-Arab ancestry, which shows that their ancestors were much older peoples.  So you are choosing one over the other rather than looking at the complete package.

That is interesting because that is what anti-Israel'ers do to try and insist that European Jews are not really Jews who's ancestral homeland is Israel.  They make the argument - sometimes falsely, sometimes accurately - that because genetics shows non-Jewish lineage - which THEY choose to EMPHASIZE - they can't be Jews.  Isn't that in effect what you are doing with the Palestinians?

When one group conquers another - there will be intermarriage and a certain amount of mingling.  When one group is in a diaspora, the same happens - there will be out-marriages and such simply because it is needed for the groups survival when numbers are small.

So how do you choose to identify them?  You don't - it is how they choose to identify themselves.



> You are possibly still confusing people who lived in Ancient Canaan as using the word Palestinians to identify themselves.
> 
> They never did so.



I'm not confusing anything - I quoted an article - argue with the author if you take issue with it.

Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
_
More than 90 percent of the genetic ancestry of modern Lebanese is derived from ancient Canaanites, according to a paper published today in the American Journal of Human Genetics.


Researchers supported by The Wellcome Trust were able to sequence the Canaanite genome from the remains of five individuals buried in the ancient port city of Sidon (modern Saïda, Lebanon) around 3,700 years ago. The results were compared against the DNA of 99 modern-day Lebanese residents.


According to the results, Canaanite ancestry is a mix of indigenous populations who settled the Levant (the region encompassing much of modern Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories) around 10,000 years ago, and migrants who arrived from the east between 6,600 and 3,550 years ago_.​


> What I keep trying to say is that the concept of anyone being called a Palestinian only started with the Mandate for Palestine.
> Had it been called anything else, that is what they would be calling themselves as the Jews would always have chosen the name for the country to be Israel, as it had once been.



I agree that the concept of being called a Palestinian is relatively recent but the people aren't.

[/quote] And most non Jews who migrated to the region after the first Zionist large migration did so in order to look for work, and most had never been to the area.[/quote]

Yes, but the region was hardly empty.




> The Tamimi clan is from Bosnia.
> All the clans names basically say where they are from, and have never forgotten it.  Rylah has posted about many of them.
> 
> Can one say that the Al Husseini clan was in Canaan in Biblical Canaanite times, when they themselves tell that they only came to the area around the 11th century CE?
> 
> As did so many others?
> 
> The Arabs are clearly using the term Palestinian in order to erase the Jewish presence on the land.  They say so, they do so, and BDS is the instrument they have been using to delegitimize any and all things Jewish.
> 
> Just look at UNESCO, how all Jewish sites have all of a sudden been given a Palestinian identity.  Something they never bothered to do while it was in Muslim hands.
> 
> Why?



Palestine has been around since the 5th century BC - it makes sense to call the people living there Palestinians.  How is using that term erasing Jewish presence?  By not referencing Judea and Sameria, terms which haven't been used for several thousand years?  Or by not referring to the sovereign state of Israel?

There is a bit of push( on both sides) with how they choose to refer to each other's history and to place names (most evident in textbooks), and I do agree there is concerted effort to erase the Jewish history of place that needs to be addressed.  But not by turning the Palestinians into nothing more than "Arab invaders" and denying them THEIR history and THEIR rights of place.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> I think you are attempting to make an equivalency where there is none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinian identity IS Arab.  Arab Palestinians are a result of Arabization -- a systematic invasion, conquest and forced conversion mixing with a local population and culturally over-taking them.  They see themselves as identical to Jordanians and Syrians and are heavily connected to a wider Arab world.  They are Arabs, proudly so.  That is their identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  Arab in the broader sense of term - like....being proud of being European.  Only instead of pan-Europe it is a Pan-Arabian identity that was constructed roughly around the same time as the idea of a Jewish national identity.
> 
> But to use that against them to attempt to marginalize them by saying they are relatively recent invaders when they are not is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their "Palestinianess" is a CONTRUCT.  It did not arise organically from a distinct culture which evolved and changed and developed over time in situ.  It is a construct deliberately and recently built in order to systematically deny and erase the indigenous Jewish peoples.  It is a cultural conquest, by its very nature.  *The newest shift in that construct is to claim "Caananiteness'. * Its another construct designed to ensure the Jewish narrative is erased or made irrelevant.  But Arab Palestinians don't identify with Caananites.  It is not their identity.  Its a tool for them to use.  Its a replacement concept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it might be a new shift, but it's a very interesting one.  Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> 
> Whether it arose organically or not...should not matter - the people, who they are, their heritage and their ties to place are being erased by those who say they are "just" Arabs and by extension could be moved to any other culturally Arabic place.  Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?  That is what those like Sixties is trying to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the Jewish people their Jewishness is their identity.  The whole point for the Jewish people is to prevent the erasure of their culture -- to prevent its being taken over by a dominant, invasive culture.  That is the whole intent of the international community defining and designating indigenous cultures.  It is meant to preserve indigenous culture and languages, and holy places, and history so that they are not erased and lost.
> 
> The Jewish people are in danger of having their identity lost.  That Arab Palestinians are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this point in time, for the Palestinians, that IS their identity - whether it only became so 100 years ago or a thousand should not matter.  It is now and that should be respected not erased by pigeon holing them as "just Arabs' because that IS a denial of their history.
> 
> And that is not to say the same doesn't apply to Jews - it absolutely does, but let's not make it at the expense of the Palestinians.  There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs are NOT descendants of Biblical Canaanites.
> 
> Neither would be the Biblical Philistines, as they were of Greek origin, or any Greeks who came with Alexander and created the Christian Greek Orthodox Church, and so many others who have their indigenous status from somewhere else, be they Egyptians, Ethiopians, or anyone outside of Biblical, Ancient Canaan.
> 
> Being born in the land of Canaan, called Israel, or Judea or Palestine, does not make one indigenous from it, even if their descendants  are those who stayed after the Philistines,  Greeks, Romans, Byzantine, etc ceased to be a power.
> 
> Those are foreign people to the land, not indigenous to it, the same way as the Europeans after 1620 are foreign to the New World and not Native or indigenous to it.
> 
> As said before, the people who lived in what became known in the 20th century as the Region of Palestine, was known only as a region, since the Romans changed the name to Syria Palestina.
> 
> All the inhabitants were known as Jews, Greek, Aramaic, Romans, or any of the people who were living there at the time, but no one ever referred to them as Palestinians.  Because that term was never adopted by the indigenous people or any of the later invader, conquerors like the Byzantine, the Muslim Kurds, Muslim Arabs, teh Crusaders, the Ottomans, or any of the visitors or colonies founded in the area, like the German or American Colonies created in the 19th century.
> 
> The Arabs are not part of the indigenous fabric of the Land of Canaan/ Israel.  Neither are the Greeks, Romans, Muslim Kurds, Arabs, European Crusaders or the Ottomans.
> 
> The use of the word Palestinians as a national identity for the Arabs only happened in 1964. By Arafat, who was an Egyptian Arab.
> 
> The Jews could have taken the word Palestine and Palestinians  (many already had passports as Palestinians ) and called their country and themselves Palestine and Palestinians, as the British chose to bring those words up again.
> 
> Had that happened, there would be no issues with "Palestinians", or Palestine , but with Arabs who refused to partition the Mandate into two states (and continue to refuse to do so  )and who want to get the rest of what was called the Mandate for Palestine which was to become once again a sovereign homeland for the Jewish People for themselves, as Muslims, as Arabs.
> 
> Muslims consider that they have replaced Judaism.
> Therefore Jews cannot ever be allowed to have sovereignty over land they once conquered, and be "submissive" to people they consider themselves superior to.
> 
> It is all in the Quran.  That is what they follow.  That is what is written in the Charters for Hamas, the PLO and Fatah.
> 
> And none of that, they have any intention of changing.
> 
> Which means, no peace with Israel and the Jews.
> 
> And it means that they will fight even if it takes forever to achieve what Mohammad achieved out of the Three Jewish Tribes of Mecca.
> 
> Their surrender.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what evidence do you have that today’s Palestinians contain no more ancient blood than that 19th century invaders?  How about genetic studies?  Although you apparently think the study in the National Geographic article got it all wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ancient blood from Ancient Canaan, they do not have.
> 
> Ancient blood from when the Muslims left Arabia in the 7th Century CE on, they are all there, living in North Africa, all over what is now called the Middle East, including Iran.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So your claim is that the Palestinians are entirely descended from 7th century Muslim Conquerers? Fine.  Prove it with something beyond claims that there was no such thing as "Palestinian" prior to whenever or similar SEMANTICS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Genetics can only point that the Arabs come from Arabia.
> If they mixed with any other ethnic people for the past 2000 years, their DNA will show that as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Genetics shows what mixture of peoples is in an individual's heritage.  Not that "Arabs come from Arabia" (I imagine that is your way of marginalizing the Palestinians).
> 
> What you are trying to do is interesting.  You are identifying them by their Arab ancestry not by their non-Arab ancestry, which shows that their ancestors were much older peoples.  So you are choosing one over the other rather than looking at the complete package.
> 
> That is interesting because that is what anti-Israel'ers do to try and insist that European Jews are not really Jews who's ancestral homeland is Israel.  They make the argument - sometimes falsely, sometimes accurately - that because genetics shows non-Jewish lineage - which THEY choose to EMPHASIZE - they can't be Jews.  Isn't that in effect what you are doing with the Palestinians?
> 
> When one group conquers another - there will be intermarriage and a certain amount of mingling.  When one group is in a diaspora, the same happens - there will be out-marriages and such simply because it is needed for the groups survival when numbers are small.
> 
> So how do you choose to identify them?  You don't - it is how they choose to identify themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are possibly still confusing people who lived in Ancient Canaan as using the word Palestinians to identify themselves.
> 
> They never did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not confusing anything - I quoted an article - argue with the author if you take issue with it.
> 
> Living Descendants of Biblical Canaanites Identified Via DNA
> _
> More than 90 percent of the genetic ancestry of modern Lebanese is derived from ancient Canaanites, according to a paper published today in the American Journal of Human Genetics.
> 
> 
> Researchers supported by The Wellcome Trust were able to sequence the Canaanite genome from the remains of five individuals buried in the ancient port city of Sidon (modern Saïda, Lebanon) around 3,700 years ago. The results were compared against the DNA of 99 modern-day Lebanese residents.
> 
> 
> According to the results, Canaanite ancestry is a mix of indigenous populations who settled the Levant (the region encompassing much of modern Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories) around 10,000 years ago, and migrants who arrived from the east between 6,600 and 3,550 years ago_.​
> 
> 
> 
> What I keep trying to say is that the concept of anyone being called a Palestinian only started with the Mandate for Palestine.
> Had it been called anything else, that is what they would be calling themselves as the Jews would always have chosen the name for the country to be Israel, as it had once been.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree that the concept of being called a Palestinian is relatively recent but the people aren't.
Click to expand...

 And most non Jews who migrated to the region after the first Zionist large migration did so in order to look for work, and most had never been to the area.[/quote]

Yes, but the region was hardly empty.




> The Tamimi clan is from Bosnia.
> All the clans names basically say where they are from, and have never forgotten it.  Rylah has posted about many of them.
> 
> Can one say that the Al Husseini clan was in Canaan in Biblical Canaanite times, when they themselves tell that they only came to the area around the 11th century CE?
> 
> As did so many others?
> 
> The Arabs are clearly using the term Palestinian in order to erase the Jewish presence on the land. They say so, they do so, and BDS is the instrument they have been using to delegitimize any and all things Jewish.
> 
> Just look at UNESCO, how all Jewish sites have all of a sudden been given a Palestinian identity.  Something they never bothered to do while it was in Muslim hands.
> 
> Why?



Palestine has been around since the 5th century BC - it makes sense to call the people living there Palestinians.  How is using that term erasing Jewish presence?  By not referencing Judea and Sameria, terms which haven't been used for several thousand years?  Or by not referring to the sovereign state of Israel?

There is a bit of push( on both sides) with how they choose to refer to each other's history and to place names (most evident in textbooks), and I do agree there is concerted effort to erase the Jewish history of place that needs to be addressed.  But not by turning the Palestinians into nothing more than "Arab invaders" and denying them THEIR history and THEIR rights of place.[/QUOTE]
Please, stop being ridiculous.

History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.

The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.

By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.

By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.

As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.


Enough said?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?



I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue. 

I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
Click to expand...

And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. 

I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.

And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.

If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
Click to expand...


Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
Click to expand...

Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.

Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.

On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.

And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?

Seriously?  Is that what I said?

Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
Click to expand...


You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.

Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history (talk about putting interpretations on what I say when this is probably the 3rd time I have said I agree with you that that is an issue).


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> History books and that of the people who conquered the land will testify that there wasn't one person being called a "Palestinian" in ancient times.
> 
> The use of the word Palestine for the region from 5th century BC does not change that.
> 
> *By all means do not pay attention to what the Muslims have been doing for the past forty years, especially the past 10 years, which is attempting and passing rules where the Jewish identity of the Temple Mount, Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel Tomb, Joseph Tomb and others have magically passed not to be Muslim heritage.*
> 
> By all means, read and think what you like.  No one can make you understand what is factual and what is not.
> 
> As far as you know, if some people called the area, the region ,Palestine, than the inhabitants must have been called Palestinians.
> 
> 
> Enough said?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
Click to expand...

You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
You have been told where they came from and how long ago.

They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.

And there is no way of changing that.

I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
There is no way of changing it.

Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.

That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.

Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.

"Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.

What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.

I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.

But if I do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .

Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?

How were the people refer to?  How did all of those Greeks, Romans, etc refer to the Nation they encountered  there?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> 
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
Click to expand...



You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.

What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".

Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".

You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.

So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you're having issues on what I bolded, because I already agreed that is an issue.
> 
> I'm sticking to factual, and you are totally ignoring the points I make.  It doesn't matter what you CALL a people.  They don't just cease to exist based on a name.
> 
> 
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if I do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were the people refer to?  How did all of those Greeks, Romans, etc refer to the Nation they encountered  there?
Click to expand...



You do realize the conflict saw the expulsions of both Jews and Palestinians, right?  Not just Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
Click to expand...

Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.

The New Testament

Complete Works of Josephus


Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.


Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear. *
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear, what you put in bold letters is exactly what the Palestinians have been doing with the Jews for the past few decades.  Getting rid of the Jews by getting rid of their connection to any one of their holy sites.
> 
> If many people believe that all of those places are really Muslim holy sites and not Jewish, where does that leave the Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if I do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were the people refer to?  How did all of those Greeks, Romans, etc refer to the Nation they encountered  there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize the conflict saw the expulsions of both Jews and Palestinians, right?  Not just Jews.
Click to expand...

In 1948, yes.

From 1920 to before Israel's Independence, no.


----------



## Coyote

''.l


Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your own statements seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians have any right of place in that area.  You work pretty darn hard to deny them any heritage beyond "Arab invaders" and instead make it a discussion about "getting rid of Jews".  How about this?  NEITHER is acceptable!
> 
> 
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
Click to expand...


Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.

And you are dodging (again) my question.

Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop putting your own interpretations on what I wrote.  I could not have been any clearer.
> 
> Israel recognized the identity, nationality of the Palestinians decades ago.
> 
> On the Palestinian side, they have been working very hard to obliterate anything known to be of Jewish heritage and make it now known as Muslim heritage.
> 
> And by saying this you allege that I am saying that I do not think that they Palestinians have no right to live anywhere in region known as Palestine, Israel, Judea or Samaria?
> 
> Seriously?  Is that what I said?
> 
> Clearly you do not seem concerned that the Palestinians are doing such a great job of having all the Jewish holy sites be called by UNESCO as Muslim Palestinian Heritage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
Click to expand...

I will answer again.

No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.

The question remains, what are they waiting for?

So many offers, so many NOs.

What do they want?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> the people, who they are, their heritage ...



But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep talking about what ISRAEL has recognized.  What about you?  I'm not going by Israel's statements, I'm going by yours and you repeatedly refer to Palestinians in ways that negate their history - ie descendents of Arab invaders and migrants for example, in all ways implying they are a recent aberration not a people who have been there a long time.
> 
> Let's stick to that before moving on to what is happening to Jewish heritage because you keep throwing that into the mix as if one is dependent on the other.  I don't disagree with you on the wrongness of attempts to obliterate Jewish history.
> 
> 
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
Click to expand...


That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people, who they are, their heritage ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
Click to expand...


Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.

If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".


----------



## Coyote

Actually...the idea of heritage becomes especially difficult when you have not one, but three ancient religions claiming some recognition of the same sites.  Does that mean they are usurping them?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
Click to expand...

Cut it down to 1700 years and not "thousands of years" and you will have the right people who call themselves Palestinians


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut it down to 1700 years and not "thousands of years" and you will have the right people who call themselves Palestinians
Click to expand...


Again (and again) that doesn't jive with genetic evidence.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people, who they are, their heritage ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
Click to expand...

They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.

Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?

The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut it down to 1700 years and not "thousands of years" and you will have the right people who call themselves Palestinians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again (and again) that doesn't jive with genetic evidence.
Click to expand...

There is nothing I can do if you read genetic studies designed to dupe people against the Jews.

There isn't only one genetic study like that, there are several, and not one of them has the guts to come up with who those people tested were, where to find them so that they will have another test done through a Jewish agency.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people, who they are, their heritage ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
Click to expand...



So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> 
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut it down to 1700 years and not "thousands of years" and you will have the right people who call themselves Palestinians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again (and again) that doesn't jive with genetic evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *There is nothing I can do if you read genetic studies designed to dupe people against the Jews.*
> 
> There isn't only one genetic study like that, there are several, and not one of them has the guts to come up with who those people tested were, where to find them so that they will have another test done through a Jewish agency.
Click to expand...


WTF?  That sounds way off the wall.  The one's I read at least, are scientific studies - they aren't done by anti-semitic groups.  Nor are they designed to turn people against Jews though I am sure there are those who can take such info and misuse it for their own agendas.  Frankly - why would a Jewish agency be more trustworthy than a non-Jewish one?  Perhaps we had better demand and Arab one too just to be fair?

This is the article I cited (from an Israeli newspaper):  Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
_Several major studies published in the past five years attest to these ancient hereditary links. At the forefront of these efforts are two researchers: Harry Ostrer, *professor of pediatrics and pathology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx*, New York, and *Karl Skorecki,* *director of medical and research development at the Rambam Health Care Campus in Haifa*. Back in June 2010, and within two days of each other, the two scientists and their research teams published extensive analyses of the genetic origins of the Jewish people and their Near East ancestry._​


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people, who they are, their heritage ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
Click to expand...

When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).

When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.

Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.

And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.

What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?


----------



## Coyote

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
Click to expand...


So do they have that right?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> the people, who they are, their heritage ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
Click to expand...


It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cut it down to 1700 years and not "thousands of years" and you will have the right people who call themselves Palestinians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again (and again) that doesn't jive with genetic evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *There is nothing I can do if you read genetic studies designed to dupe people against the Jews.*
> 
> There isn't only one genetic study like that, there are several, and not one of them has the guts to come up with who those people tested were, where to find them so that they will have another test done through a Jewish agency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  That sounds way off the wall.  The one's I read at least, are scientific studies - they aren't done by anti-semitic groups.  Nor are they designed to turn people against Jews though I am sure there are those who can take such info and misuse it for their own agendas.  Frankly - why would a Jewish agency be more trustworthy than a non-Jewish one?  Perhaps we had better demand and Arab one too just to be fair?
> 
> This is the article I cited (from an Israeli newspaper):  Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots
> _Several major studies published in the past five years attest to these ancient hereditary links. At the forefront of these efforts are two researchers: Harry Ostrer, *professor of pediatrics and pathology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx*, New York, and *Karl Skorecki,* *director of medical and research development at the Rambam Health Care Campus in Haifa*. Back in June 2010, and within two days of each other, the two scientists and their research teams published extensive analyses of the genetic origins of the Jewish people and their Near East ancestry._​
Click to expand...

Sorry, but there is no truth in this "brother" thing between Palestinians and Jews.

Since Islam was created the Muslims have been telling themselves and the world that they are "cousins" to the Jews via Ishmael.

Strange that it took them 2400 years to come up with that blood connection to the Jewish People.

It does not matter that any Jews may have done this research, there is no validity to it.

Some Jews were forced to convert to Islam, and that is where some blood connection may be found, but the majority of Jews is definitely not blood connected to the Arab Palestinians.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So do they have that right?
Click to expand...

I will let you reread what I wrote.  Read it carefully and do not imagine what you wish to read from it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> But that is EXACTLY the point.  It is not their heritage.  Their identity is a completely different heritage.  They are usurping someone else's heritage deliberately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
Click to expand...

The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.

The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.  
They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.

It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.

Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.
> 
> If you mean usurping Jewish religious sites - then I agree that is wrong.  But they have a heritage in that place that is not merely descendents of "Arab invaders and migrants".
> 
> 
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
Click to expand...



My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.

My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are Usurping the JEWISH heritage.
> 
> Remember them?  The Jewish People, with their Jewish Nation, with a Nation called Israel which had history for 3500 years on that land, with Egypt, the Philistines, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Byzantine, the Muslims, the Crusaders, the Ottomans and the British?
> 
> The Jewish People, the one and ONLY Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
Click to expand...

Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.

Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.   
Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?


Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So do they have that right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will let you reread what I wrote.  Read it carefully and do not imagine what you wish to read from it.
Click to expand...


I framed my question carefully.  You, likewise carefully framed your answers.  Otherwise a simple "yes" or "now" would have provided the answer.   

You state that they have a right to their own state.  The question is - where?  The land of their heritage where they had made their homes...?  Or someplace else?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what do you tell other religions - who also have a long established history involving those sites as part of their religion? One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
Click to expand...


All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.

So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> 
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So do they have that right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will let you reread what I wrote.  Read it carefully and do not imagine what you wish to read from it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I framed my question carefully.  You, likewise carefully framed your answers.  Otherwise a simple "yes" or "now" would have provided the answer.
> 
> You state that they have a right to their own state.  The question is - where?  The land of their heritage where they had made their homes...?  Or someplace else?
Click to expand...

They have a State, all ready to go in Gaza.
And they have Areas A and B in Judea and Samaria.

Anything needs to be negotiated directly with Israel.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?



Because their heritage did NOT precede the Arab/Muslim conquests.  Their identity (heritage) is a DIRECT result of the Arab/Muslim conquests.  They identify as Arab.  The only reason they are seeking some other heritage is to destroy the Jewish claim.  Its not arising from them trying to regain their ancient language, religion, culture, etc or to prevent its loss.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> When Christianity took over, the Christians would not allow the Jews to enter Jerusalem (since the Romans forbade it in 135 CE).
> 
> When Islam came to be and they came to the area, the second wave of Muslims allowed the Jews to enter Jerusalem.
> 
> Nowadays, Islam is intent in delegitimizing any connection that the Jewish people have to Jerusalem, to any of their holy sites, to any and all of Israel.
> 
> And some Christians are of the same mind as the Muslims, as they are helping them in this attempt to totally appropriate all of Israel, their holy sites, their culture, their history -  from the Jews.
> 
> What are we supposed to tell those Christians and Muslims who are hell bent into destroying any memory of a people who basically defines the holy land, and always have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
Click to expand...

A discussion is not about opinions only.

I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
I am quoting facts.

As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"

I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.

Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.

Solution?   

What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?

What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because their heritage did NOT precede the Arab/Muslim conquests.  Their identity (heritage) is a DIRECT result of the Arab/Muslim conquests.  They identify as Arab.  The only reason they are seeking some other heritage is to destroy the Jewish claim.  Its not arising from them trying to regain their ancient language, religion, culture, etc or to prevent its loss.
Click to expand...


They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests - they descend from the people that were conquered.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.



No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it so important to deny the fact that their heritage - even if they weren't a distinct "people" PRECEDED the Muslim conquests?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because their heritage did NOT precede the Arab/Muslim conquests.  Their identity (heritage) is a DIRECT result of the Arab/Muslim conquests.  They identify as Arab.  The only reason they are seeking some other heritage is to destroy the Jewish claim.  Its not arising from them trying to regain their ancient language, religion, culture, etc or to prevent its loss.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests - they descend from the people that were conquered.
Click to expand...

Palestinians are Arab Muslims and Christians.
They will tell anyone that themselves.

They did not live in the area pre Muslim Arab invasion.

Anymore than the Arabs lived in any part of North Africa before the Arab Muslims went and conquered that part in the 7th Century CE.

Or the centuries they spent in Southern Spain.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust and should remain that way.  No one has the right to destroy it, defile it or remove any one's heritage from it.  It no longer belongs to just one group does it?
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
Click to expand...


When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
Click to expand...


They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians do not seem to be on the same wavelength as you.
> 
> The Muslims refuse to allow Jews to enter the Temple Mount.
> They play soccer and have picnics on the Temple Mount.
> They verbally attack the Jews who do enter.
> Jews need police protection to visit their part of the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is a shared sacred trust now, but for centuries Jews were not allowed to go to it, and sometimes only allowed to to to the Western Wall.
> 
> Now, even the Western Wall the Palestinians are saying that it is a Muslim only sacred area and want UNICEF to declare it so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.
Click to expand...

Except that your facts come from sources which are mistaken.

I understand that you believe all of those sources, but many have been designed to tell people the opposite of what is true in order to delegitimize the Jewish People.

By saying that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient people of Canaan, they are actually delegitimizing the Jewish people as the ones who are the legitimate indigenous people fo the region.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Arab does not just refer to people of the Arabian peninsula, it refers to many of the people conquered and Arabitized as well.



Exactly.  The indigenous peoples are those whose identity is PRIOR TO and OUTSIDE the conquest.  That's the point.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
Click to expand...

The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.

But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........

About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat

Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative

Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites


Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have been told the history of today's Palestinian people.
> You have been told where they came from and how long ago.
> 
> They DO NOT come from the region called Palestine in the 5th Century BCE.
> 
> And there is no way of changing that.
> 
> I do not negate their history, I and others, have told you what their history is, and always have been, and always will be.
> There is no way of changing it.
> 
> Some clans have been there since the 7th century and others are as recent as coming before 1948.
> 
> That is their history.  It cannot, and it will not be changed.
> 
> Neither I, Israel, not anyone else has forced them to leave.
> It has been the Jewish people who were forced to leave their homes from 1920 to 1948, and then again in 2005.
> And they want Israel to get out of more land, and then more land.......until they achieve what Mohammad, their Muslim master designed as the way to beat the enemy.
> 
> "Khaybar, remember Khaybar"  they yell at the Jews.
> 
> What do you think they want?  To live in peace with the Jews?
> Many do, those who live in Israel or those who have been in touch with Jews, and know that they are not the evil monkeys the Quran describes.
> 
> I cannot change Where they came from and When they came to the region called Palestine, with their Shieks, and Caliphs and controlled the area until the Crusaders came.
> 
> But if do continue to understand you, you seem to think that because a region was name Palestine (because of the Philistines) and that word used by a few at some points in time, that all who lived there were actually known as Palestinians, and were called Palestinians and dealt with the Greeks, the Romans, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, etc as Palestinians .
> 
> Is that what history tells us?  That all of those conquerors of ancient Canaan referred to the people on the land as Palestinians ?
> 
> How were they refer to them?  How did they refer to the Nation they encounter there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
Click to expand...



You claim that "Palestinians" have lived for thousands of years, even though these "Palestinians" were not invented until recent times.  Shouldn't you be dealing in truth rather than fabrication?



Arabs have lived in the general area for several centuries, and Jews for over 3000 years, but any claim that "Palestinians" have lived there for such a time is an utter lie.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests



No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.  

The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Palestinian History. Where is it?

Palestinian museum opens minus exhibits


----------



## Shusha

None of this affects their rights in even the smallest way.  No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinian rights.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My personal opinion is that all 3 religions should have equal rights to those sites, as long as people behave peacefully.  Unpeaceful people should be removed from the site.
> 
> My personal opinon is that it is part of a shared sacred trust, and we can not change the past, we can only try to make the future better.
> 
> 
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except that your facts come from sources which are mistaken.
> 
> I understand that you believe all of those sources, but many have been designed to tell people the opposite of what is true in order to delegitimize the Jewish People.
> 
> By saying that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient people of Canaan, they are actually delegitimizing the Jewish people as the ones who are the legitimate indigenous people fo the region.
Click to expand...



Oh.  I see.  My sources are "mistaken" 

National Geographic is mistaken. 
Tsvi Misinai is "mistaken".
Michael Hammer is "mistaken"
Every source I use is "mistaken" and only you can possibly be factual.

This is ridiculous.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> None of this affects their rights in even the smallest way.  No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinian rights.


 You should talk to MJB, Boston, Indee, Hollie and some of the others.


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ''.l
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying "you've been told" "you've been told""you've been told""you've been told" as if your narrative is the only truth while completely ignoring anything counter to it.  So get off your high horse please.
> 
> What you "seem to think" I think is completely off.  You are stuck on SEMANTICS, that is all it is for you.  You ignore genetics, you ignore what historians have said (and which I posted) you ignore everything except "they weren't known as Palestinians".
> 
> Your entire argument is based on "well no one CALLED them Palestinians".
> 
> You completely ignore my questions asking about YOUR views, talking instead about what Israel does.
> 
> So again - your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give two references from the 1st century CE.
> 
> The New Testament
> 
> Complete Works of Josephus
> 
> 
> Find one mention of Palestinians in either one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again.  You are going entirely by the existence of a word.  This is pointless.
> 
> And you are dodging (again) my question.
> 
> Your own arguments seem to imply you do not feel that the Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.*   Is that how you feel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will answer again.
> 
> No, I do not think that the Palestinians DO NOT have the right to have their own place, State, country, etc.
> 
> The question remains, what are they waiting for?
> 
> So many offers, so many NOs.
> 
> What do they want?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what I asked.  Do Palestinians *have any right of place in that area.  *That would be the area they have lived for generations if not thousands of years.  Not some Jordan.  Not Egypt.  Not Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You claim that "Palestinians" have lived for thousands of years, even though these "Palestinians" were not invented until recent times.  Shouldn't you be dealing in truth rather than fabrication?
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs have lived in the general area for several centuries, and Jews for over 3000 years, but any claim that "Palestinians" have lived there for such a time is an utter lie.
Click to expand...


So...look who chooses to make an appearance.

I provided sources to back up my claims.

I'm curious - do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.
> 
> The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.
Click to expand...


Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your personal opinion about the rights of all three religions is worthless based on what Islam and Christianity have been doing to keep the Jews out of any and all of their Holy Sites and ancient cities.
> 
> Jews have a 3800 year history in Hebron but it UNESCO named it a Palestinian (Muslim) World Heritage site.
> Where is the spirit of sharing amongst the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> Unesco makes Hebron old city Palestinian world heritage site
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except that your facts come from sources which are mistaken.
> 
> I understand that you believe all of those sources, but many have been designed to tell people the opposite of what is true in order to delegitimize the Jewish People.
> 
> By saying that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient people of Canaan, they are actually delegitimizing the Jewish people as the ones who are the legitimate indigenous people fo the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh.  I see.  My sources are "mistaken"
> 
> National Geographic is mistaken.
> Tsvi Misinai is "mistaken".
> Michael Hammer is "mistaken"
> Every source I use is "mistaken" and only you can possibly be factual.
> 
> This is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Tsvi Misinai is simply "claiming" what he believes.  There is no proof of it.

Tsvi Misinai - Wikipedia

Who has verified Hammer's work?

Michael Hammer - Google Scholar Citations


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
Click to expand...


There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.



> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.



The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?

Same with the second one.

The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.


  I don't have the right to post here?

 You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime. 

 Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.



Yeah, but dividing Palestine into two States -- 75% for the Arab people of the area and 25% for the Jewish people of the area (and her returning people) seems more than fair to the Arabs.  Its a legit argument. That the Arab State is Jordan.  And the Jewish State is Israel -- all of it.  Remembering that, at the time, and NOW, the Arabs do not see any difference in IDENTITY between "Palestinians" and "Jordanians".  (Or Syrians).

And there are NO posters here who think that Palestinians should be sent to Jordan simply on the principle that they are Arab.  Every single poster here on TI rejects that. Some have suggested that if the Arab Palestinians can't be non-violent that the only solution is to segregate them.  But that is a COMPLETELY different discussion.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of our opinions are worthless but this is a discussion not a summit and I speak for MYSELF only, not all the Palestinians, not all the Jews, not anyone but me.  This all about opinions, yours included.
> 
> So what do you propose to do about it?  What would be a solution?
> 
> 
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except that your facts come from sources which are mistaken.
> 
> I understand that you believe all of those sources, but many have been designed to tell people the opposite of what is true in order to delegitimize the Jewish People.
> 
> By saying that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient people of Canaan, they are actually delegitimizing the Jewish people as the ones who are the legitimate indigenous people fo the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh.  I see.  My sources are "mistaken"
> 
> National Geographic is mistaken.
> Tsvi Misinai is "mistaken".
> Michael Hammer is "mistaken"
> Every source I use is "mistaken" and only you can possibly be factual.
> 
> This is ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tsvi Misinai is simply "claiming" what he believes.  There is no proof of it.
> 
> Tsvi Misinai - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


Which is different from your sources how?





> Who has verified Hammer's work?
> 
> Michael Hammer - Google Scholar Citations



Who needs to?  Articles don't get published without going through a strict process.

Prove he is wrong - show me scientific studies disproving what he has found.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.
> 
> The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
Click to expand...

No Palestinian has shown any proof of being descendant from the ancient Canaanites, so far.
Which one of the many Canaanite tribes/nations did they come from, exactly?  Do they know?  Have they said it?

Abbas alleges that they are from the Jebusite tribe, but that tribe was conquered by King David and Jerusalem became the Capital of Israel back then.

Where is their written history?

Where is the DNA study which actually shows Abbas' family coming from the area of Jerusalem 3000 to 4000 years ago, and not from an area of Arabia, which is where they came from?


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
Click to expand...


Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.

*
Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.
> 
> The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No Palestinian has shown any proof of being descendant from the ancient Canaanites, so far.
> Which one of the many Canaanite tribes/nations did they come from, exactly?  Do they know?  Have they said it?
> 
> Abbas alleges that they are from the Jebusite tribe, but that tribe was conquered by King David and Jerusalem became the Capital of Israel back then.
> 
> Where is their written history?
> 
> Where is the DNA study which actually shows Abbas' family coming from the area of Jerusalem 3000 to 4000 years ago, and not from an area of Arabia, which is where they came from?
Click to expand...


Abbas is making a claim.  I have no idea if it's true or not.  He's a politician.  You can choose political sources if you want, but I am sticking to science.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> A discussion is not about opinions only.
> 
> I am not giving my opinions as to who the Palestinians are, how long they have lived in the area, etc, etc.
> I am quoting facts.
> 
> As the saying goes " You have the right to your opinions but not the right to your facts"
> 
> I do not propose to "do" anything about it. I am not involved in the negotiations, or attempts to negotiate between the two parties.
> 
> Both parties need to come to the table and negotiate, as the Egyptians and Jordanians did.
> 
> Solution?
> 
> What would make Hamas and the PLO and Fatah do away with their charters, which then might be the start of the peace process between them and Israel?
> 
> What is the answer to that?  When will they give up on their charters?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I quote my opinion, I state it as that because you seem to be busy telling me what I am thinking.  When I am *stating fact*, I am clear about it and I include sources as I did with genetics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except that your facts come from sources which are mistaken.
> 
> I understand that you believe all of those sources, but many have been designed to tell people the opposite of what is true in order to delegitimize the Jewish People.
> 
> By saying that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient people of Canaan, they are actually delegitimizing the Jewish people as the ones who are the legitimate indigenous people fo the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh.  I see.  My sources are "mistaken"
> 
> National Geographic is mistaken.
> Tsvi Misinai is "mistaken".
> Michael Hammer is "mistaken"
> Every source I use is "mistaken" and only you can possibly be factual.
> 
> This is ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tsvi Misinai is simply "claiming" what he believes.  There is no proof of it.
> 
> Tsvi Misinai - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which is different from your sources how?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who has verified Hammer's work?
> 
> Michael Hammer - Google Scholar Citations
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who needs to?  Articles don't get published without going through a strict process.
> 
> Prove he is wrong - show me scientific studies disproving what he has found.
Click to expand...

We do not claim.  We have shown to the world historical, archeological, etc proof of the Jewish people being indigenous of the area.

The Palestine museum remains empty.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but dividing Palestine into two States -- 75% for the Arab people of the area and 25% for the Jewish people of the area (and her returning people) seems more than fair to the Arabs.  Its a legit argument. That the Arab State is Jordan.  And the Jewish State is Israel -- all of it.  Remembering that, at the time, and NOW, the Arabs do not see any difference in IDENTITY between "Palestinians" and "Jordanians".  (Or Syrians).
> 
> And there are NO posters here who think that Palestinians should be sent to Jordan simply on the principle that they are Arab.  Every single poster here on TI rejects that. Some have suggested that if the Arab Palestinians can't be non-violent that the only solution is to segregate them.  But that is a COMPLETELY different discussion.
Click to expand...


It is not a legit argument, it's an inhuman one.

There absolutely are those who think that Palestinians should be expelled elsewhere.  I'll look them up but for a start - look at MJB's posts.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.
> 
> The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No Palestinian has shown any proof of being descendant from the ancient Canaanites, so far.
> Which one of the many Canaanite tribes/nations did they come from, exactly?  Do they know?  Have they said it?
> 
> Abbas alleges that they are from the Jebusite tribe, but that tribe was conquered by King David and Jerusalem became the Capital of Israel back then.
> 
> Where is their written history?
> 
> Where is the DNA study which actually shows Abbas' family coming from the area of Jerusalem 3000 to 4000 years ago, and not from an area of Arabia, which is where they came from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas is making a claim.  I have no idea if it's true or not.  He's a politician.  You can choose political sources if you want, but I am sticking to science.
Click to expand...

The Palestinian Museum remains empty.


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> And here you are, alleging that the State of Israel, I and others, wish the Palestinian people to disappear.
> 
> I have no idea how Israel intends to do so, since they did recognize them as a nationality decades ago, and have been working hard to make the PA and Gaza put down their weapons long enough to sit down and negotiate for the Arab State they keep saying they want to have.
> 
> And still, as you say that we are somehow wanting the Palestinians to disappear ...,



THIS.  

Even as Sixties vehemently argues his point concerning indigeneity and Jewish rights -- still he fundamentally recognizes Arab Palestinian rights.  This is VASTLY different than TP which argues, consistently, that Israel has no right to exist, Israel does not exist, the Jewish people aren't really a people, etc, etc, etc.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
Click to expand...

I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.

 "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so. 

 ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but dividing Palestine into two States -- 75% for the Arab people of the area and 25% for the Jewish people of the area (and her returning people) seems more than fair to the Arabs.  Its a legit argument. That the Arab State is Jordan.  And the Jewish State is Israel -- all of it.  Remembering that, at the time, and NOW, the Arabs do not see any difference in IDENTITY between "Palestinians" and "Jordanians".  (Or Syrians).
> 
> And there are NO posters here who think that Palestinians should be sent to Jordan simply on the principle that they are Arab.  Every single poster here on TI rejects that. Some have suggested that if the Arab Palestinians can't be non-violent that the only solution is to segregate them.  But that is a COMPLETELY different discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not a legit argument, it's an inhuman one.
> 
> There absolutely are those who think that Palestinians should be expelled elsewhere.  I'll look them up but for a start - look at MJB's posts.
Click to expand...

For sure all of those who have spelled out how they want to kill Jews and destroy Israel, the government has the right to decide if she wants any of them to live in the country.

Or they can stay in Gaza and build their nation, already !
or Build another Arab Muslim nation, or Emirates, whatever they like in Areas A and B.

With the education the Arab Palestinians keep getting in school, they only want one thing.

Destroy Israel and kill the Jews.

It is not an opinion, it is in the research done by PMW and many other organizations, it is what has been found in the textbooks distributed by UNWRA in Gaza and elsewhere .

How to stop that inhumane ideology which drags generations after generations to want to kill people for a piece of land?


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
Click to expand...


Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They existed prior to the Arab Muslim conquests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They did not.  Their heritage and their identity did not exist prior to the conquests.  The conquests formed their identity.  The conquests transformed their identity.  (Indeed, their identity did not transform until the Jewish return.  Their identity developed as a direct response to the Jewish return).  They can't just drop their Arabness and BE Jewish, or Caananite.  Their identity is tied to their Arabness.
> 
> The Jewish people, and their culture, in its entirety, existed prior to the conquests.  Has existed for 3000+years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
Click to expand...


Enough with this, what bloodlines?!

Arabs are still to this day keep to their Arabian roots, in every aspect of their social life, be it Yemenite/Saudi politcal fractions, family histories of migration and origins, belonging to Arabian tribes, and surnames that leave no doubt about their roots.

Fact is Christians Muslim Arabs in Palestine is the group that migrated from a much wider variety of countries and spoke a wider variety of languages than Jews - by a BIG gap.

There's ZERO Canaanite heritage in that group that one can point to.
In fact all this shabang about Arabs turning into Canaanites only appeared  when Jews revived the Canaanite history of the land.

You're trying to make Arabs into anybody and everyone at the same time just so that You have some remote chance to catch a fish with a bigger net. But more importantly all this is done as an attempt to not  see the obvious.  And the obvious thing is that in any such attempt to invent a new identity for Arabs it *virtually all goes through JEWS*, the only indigenous people at hand to whom all try to compare, and the ONLY people who kept Canaanite heritage.

When are we going to let people decide their identity rather than invent it for them because certain liberal ideals of all-inclusiveness look better than calling things by their name?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> You do realize the conflict saw the expulsions of both Jews and Palestinians, right?  Not just Jews.



Yeah.  No.

In the simplest terms, Jews were expelled from Arab Muslim lands without cause or threat.  Arabs (and Jews) were expelled from some places within Israel/"Palestine" in the context of a military conflict.  

Again, there is no equivalence here.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
Click to expand...

The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.

Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.

Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?

Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?


And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
Click to expand...



 I am not being deceptive, you are.

You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Who's heritage are Palestinians usurping?  They DO have ties to THAT land - they do have their own heritage that goes back a long time - maybe not as distinctive as the Jewish heritage, but none the less they have those ties.



They are usurping Jewish heritage.  Literally laying claim to Jewish sites, and Jewish people and Jewish history.  Their heritage goes back to the Arab conquest.  There is NOTHING about their heritage prior to that.  Some of their ancestors certainly went back further than that.  Their heritage, though, their IDENTITY, stems entirely from the Arab conquest.  They would have no culture without it.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Actually...the idea of heritage becomes especially difficult when you have not one, but three ancient religions claiming some recognition of the same sites.  Does that mean they are usurping them?



Yep.  Absolutely.  Completely.  Without doubt.  Christians and Muslims have usurped Jewish sites.  Literally taken them over.  Prevented the original (indigenous) peoples from worshiping there.

Should Jews have access to ancient Cambodian Temples?  And then build a synagogue there?  And then claim if for a Jewish (and only Jewish) holy site?  Denying Cambodians access to their holy places?  It sounds ridiculous when you apply it to other cultures.  But somehow, its okay if its done to Jews.


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...look who chooses to make an appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
Click to expand...


So you won't give a straight answer?

Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...the idea of heritage becomes especially difficult when you have not one, but three ancient religions claiming some recognition of the same sites.  Does that mean they are usurping them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Absolutely.  Completely.  Without doubt.  Christians and Muslims have usurped Jewish sites.  Literally taken them over.  Prevented the original (indigenous) peoples from worshiping there.
> 
> Should Jews have access to ancient Cambodian Temples?  And then build a synagogue there?  And then claim if for a Jewish (and only Jewish) holy site?  Denying Cambodians access to their holy places?  It sounds ridiculous when you apply it to other cultures.  But somehow, its okay if its done to Jews.
Click to expand...


But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between Christians and Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.  So is that really comparable?

No one should be denied access to their holy sites.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both with denying either their narratives and historic connections to place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.
> 
> Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.
> 
> Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?
> 
> Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?
> 
> 
> And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.
Click to expand...



They can change their stories, it's all political and designed to suit their agenda.  I don't disagree there.  But it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinians do descend from much older peoples then the Arabs, with a mixture of later Arab blood.  In fact in the genetic study I quoted earlier - they are much closer to a number of Jewish groups and Syrians then they are to the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula (such as the Saudi's).


----------



## rylah

Qarawat Bani Hassan Town Profile

Location and Physical Characteristics
Qarawat Bani Hassan is a Palestinian town in Salfit Governorate located 8.9 km north-west of Salfit City. Qarawat Bani Hassan is bordered by Deir Istiya and Haris villages to the east, Sarta to the south, Biddya town to the west, and Deir Istiya to the north (ARIJ-GIS, 2013) (See Map 1).

History
Qarawat Bani Hassan town was named in relation to a righteous man called Abu Muhammad Abdul Hamid ben Madd al Qarawani al Hassani descended from the Al Husniya tribes which were responsible for controlling and protecting the trade roads; from Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem until „Azzun village in the northern West Bank. The word “Qarawat” is derived from the word “Qura” which means generosity or good hospitality. *The town was established in 1600 AD with its residents deriving from Al Husniya tribes whom are descendants of the Arabian Peninsula (Qarawat Bani Hassan Municipality, 2012).

http://vprofile.arij.org/salfit/pdfs/vprofile/Qarawat.pdf*

_
-"No, no, they don't know who they are, but they're Canaanites, Jews, Romans, Jebusites and anything BUT Arabians  " 
_
You know what's funny, people go to such lengthy loops that they don't even try to tie them to Philistines anymore, because it's pretty clear to anyone with little sense those Arabian tribes are no Greek "sea people".  But let anyone suggest the most evident - they're from Arabia and mental gymnastics begin working extra hours.

This just shows how skewed this Palestinian identity at the root, whole cultures and nations loose their identity for the Arabs to feel "home" in countries everyone knows they've invaded and ethnically cleansed.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.



What do you do?  

1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.  
2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.

None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).  

There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.  

This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you won't give a straight answer?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
Click to expand...

What does any of our answers matter, when you do not see that the Palestinians have been since 1920, intent in depriving the Jews of any and all of their land, with multiple riots, attacks, then wars from 1948 to 1973  and then it evolved into the BDS movement continuing to delegitimize the Jewish rights to any and all of their ancient homeland.

I will say it again, that you are not reading all of the sources you need to read in order to arrive at a balanced view of the conflict.

All of your demands for the rights of the Palestinians when the rights have been trampled on by the Arab Muslims, not only for the past 1400 years, but especially now that they "dared" to achieve sovereignty over a sliver of what was once their homeland.

Do the Palestinians have any right to any place if they are intent in destroying Israel and kill all the Jews, as they continuously teach their generations and even yell at the Jews before attacking them with anything they have?

Anything, because that is what that kind of education and incitement will do to the minds of Muslims who are taught from their own "holy book" that the Jews are not humans, and therefore one can kill them at will.

Opinion?  No.
Need to be scientific?  No

It is all in the Quran and the endless education they get on a daily basis on how to treat the Jews.

The Quran only agrees that the land belongs to the Jews, as long as the Jews are under Arab Muslim control.

Sovereignty is not for the Jews.  Not with any Muslims around.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you won't give a straight answer?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
Click to expand...



I believe that any Arab that can prove ownership and the forced removal from that which they owned should be recompensed.

I do not believe that  Arabs who moved into the area as a result of Jewish economic development and who were hostile to the creation of the new state are owed anything.

 Since there are MORE Jews who were kicked out of Arab lands than there were Arabs who fled Israel, I consider the matter settled.

 This creation of a brand new people called 'Palestinian" I find disingenuous and manipulative.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> You state that they have a right to their own state.  The question is - where?  The land of their heritage where they had made their homes...?  Or someplace else?



The trick is to define the "land of their heritage".  If you were to draw a map and crayon in blue all the "land of their heritage" of the Jewish people and crayon in green the "land of their heritage" for the Arab Palestinian/Jordanian/Syrian people and then divide those portions with some level of equality -- the Jewish people would certainly not get less than they are exerting sovereignty over and would likely get quite a bit more.


----------



## Sixties Fan

[ How the Palestinian Grand Mufti went all the way to Iraq in 1941, in order to kill Jews there .......because it was all about ......Palestine....]

Similar attacks occurred against almost all the Jews living in Arab countries.

These Jews, who had lived in these countries for thousands of years, did not declare war on their hosts. They never fought against them, as the Arabs in mandatory Palestine fought against that Jews and afterward against the nascent Jewish State of Israel. The world has heard a great deal about the “Nakba,” the “catastrophe” of the Palestinian Arabs, but knows almost nothing about the wrongs committed against Jews in Arab countries. What happened in Iraq and the rest of the Arab countries was in effect an ethnic cleansing. Jews were forced to leave behind their personal and communal property, including schools, hospitals, ancient synagogues, cemeteries, and prophets’ graves. The Arab governments confiscated all Jewish property.

(full article online)

The 77th anniversary of the Farhud


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of this affects their rights in even the smallest way.  No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinian rights.
> 
> 
> 
> You should talk to MJB, Boston, Indee, Hollie and some of the others.
Click to expand...


I have seen all of their posts.  Non of them are denying Arab Palestinian rights to a territory, to sovereignty or to self-determination.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one on TI is denying Arab Palestinians long connection to the place by reason of their long residence there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.
> 
> Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.
> 
> Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?
> 
> Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?
> 
> 
> And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They can change their stories, it's all political and designed to suit their agenda.  I don't disagree there.  But it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinians do descend from much older peoples then the Arabs, with a mixture of later Arab blood.  In fact in the genetic study I quoted earlier - they are much closer to a number of Jewish groups and Syrians then they are to the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula (such as the Saudi's).
Click to expand...


Actually Jews cluster  genetically with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.



Their heritage exists only in reference to Arab conquests.  They have no heritage in absence of the Arab conquests.  They define themselves by their Arabness.  You can't take the "Arabness" out of them and have them be the same.  

The idea of blood purity, and claims or rights based on blood purity, is abhorrent.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> It is not a legit argument, it's an inhuman one.



Its an inhuman argument to claim that Palestine (all of it) was divided into two States.  75% of the territory went to the Arab peoples of the region, for their sovereignty.  25% of the territory went to the Jewish people, for their sovereignty. 

How the F*&K is that "inhuman"?



> There absolutely are those who think that Palestinians should be expelled elsewhere.  I'll look them up but for a start - look at MJB's posts.



I read this board every day.  I'm VERY familiar with all the posters here and their beliefs.  No one claims that Arabs should be segregated from Jews because they are Arabs.  No one suggests that all Arabs should be expelled from Israel due to their ethnicity.  Israel certainly does not support that, and has gone to considerable lengths to oppose it in law.  (As opposed to Gaza and "Palestine" who refuse to entertain the idea of a Jew living in 'their' land).  Even the most extreme of posters, those who DO suggest expulsion (and I know who they are, I see them) only do so because of the violence.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?



BOTH the Arab people AND the Jewish people have rights to live, generally, in the place.  The question is HOW MUCH should be under Israel's sovereignty and HOW MUCH should be under Arab sovereignty.  

The Jewish answer has CONSISTENTLY been -- some for each.  

The Arab answer has CONSISTENTLY been  --  none for Jews.  

BOTH the Arabs and the Jews have sovereignty over some territory.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between  ...  Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.



There IS?  A relationship between Arab Muslims and the place of the Holy Temple?   How so?


----------



## Slyhunter

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have the right to post here?
> 
> You really do hate the truth, though, don't you?  The truth of the matter is that there were no "Palestinians" until they were invented during my own lifetime.
> 
> Are you going to make yet another one of my postings disappear, though? That would make, what, a few hundred by now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you won't give a straight answer?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
Click to expand...

Not if it is used as an excuse to displace an Israel citizen from their historical placement.


----------



## Slyhunter

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...the idea of heritage becomes especially difficult when you have not one, but three ancient religions claiming some recognition of the same sites.  Does that mean they are usurping them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Absolutely.  Completely.  Without doubt.  Christians and Muslims have usurped Jewish sites.  Literally taken them over.  Prevented the original (indigenous) peoples from worshiping there.
> 
> Should Jews have access to ancient Cambodian Temples?  And then build a synagogue there?  And then claim if for a Jewish (and only Jewish) holy site?  Denying Cambodians access to their holy places?  It sounds ridiculous when you apply it to other cultures.  But somehow, its okay if its done to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between Christians and Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.  So is that really comparable?
> 
> No one should be denied access to their holy sites.
Click to expand...

No one should create their holy site at someone else's existing holy site attempting to obliterate its original history.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> ll''''
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not deny that now they are a national people.  Israel has recognized it publicly.
> Their ties go way back to when they invaded the region.  They never claimed an identity until the Jews earned legally the right to re-create their nation on their own ancient Jewish land.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel denies their ties -* it's right there in your narrative*
Click to expand...

Sorry, but nobody here is an official spokesman of Israel.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Slyhunter said:


> No one should create their holy site at someone else's existing holy site attempting to obliterate its original history.




You have just described the entire history of Islam.


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> 
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you won't give a straight answer?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that any Arab that can prove ownership and the forced removal from that which they owned should be recompensed.
> 
> I do not believe that  Arabs who moved into the area as a result of Jewish economic development and who were hostile to the creation of the new state are owed anything.
> 
> Since there are MORE Jews who were kicked out of Arab lands than there were Arabs who fled Israel, I consider the matter settled.
> 
> This creation of a brand new people called 'Palestinian" I find disingenuous and manipulative.
Click to expand...


I somewhat agree but not entirely. Thank you for a serious answer.

1.  They should not have to prove forced removal.  Many fled simply out of fear of violence and were prevented from returning to their property both directly and indirectly through a series of absentee owner laws which confiscated their property.

2. Whether they were indiginous or came later should have no bearing on property rights.

3. The fact that Arab nations expelled Jews should have no bearing on it.  The Palestinians were not responsible for it.  The caveat is when it comes to the refugees, other nations should have and should now be stepping up to take in and assimilate many of the refugees into their own nations as Israel did with the Jewish refugees who were expelled.  Right of return should only apply to those directly affected, not endless generations.  

But you still avoided the question, do you the people now called Palestinians have a right of place to the part of Palestine where they have lived for generations?

I have a difficult time getting people to answer that directly and I don’t know why.

I believe they do and so do the Jewish people.  Neither’s rights should be marginalized or disregarded in any negotiated settlement.


----------



## Coyote

Dogmaphobe said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one should create their holy site at someone else's existing holy site attempting to obliterate its original history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have just described the entire history of Islam.
Click to expand...

And Christianity, and for that matter the Romans.  The conquering people subsumed the conquered gods and holy things, built over sacred places or destroyed them.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
Click to expand...


I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.

As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.

That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.


Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.




> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.



I agree


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> [ How the Palestinian Grand Mufti went all the way to Iraq in 1941, in order to kill Jews there .......because it was all about ......Palestine....]
> 
> Similar attacks occurred against almost all the Jews living in Arab countries.
> 
> These Jews, who had lived in these countries for thousands of years, did not declare war on their hosts. They never fought against them, as the Arabs in mandatory Palestine fought against that Jews and afterward against the nascent Jewish State of Israel. The world has heard a great deal about the “Nakba,” the “catastrophe” of the Palestinian Arabs, but knows almost nothing about the wrongs committed against Jews in Arab countries. What happened in Iraq and the rest of the Arab countries was in effect an ethnic cleansing. Jews were forced to leave behind their personal and communal property, including schools, hospitals, ancient synagogues, cemeteries, and prophets’ graves. The Arab governments confiscated all Jewish property.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> The 77th anniversary of the Farhud



Yes the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries was ethnic cleansing.  

Does that diminish the Palestinian tragedy?


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are denying that their ancestors included people who existed there prior to the Islamic conquest.
> 
> 
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.
> 
> Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.
> 
> Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?
> 
> Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?
> 
> 
> And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They can change their stories, it's all political and designed to suit their agenda.  I don't disagree there.  But it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinians do descend from much older peoples then the Arabs, with a mixture of later Arab blood.  In fact in the genetic study I quoted earlier - they are much closer to a number of Jewish groups and Syrians then they are to the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula (such as the Saudi's).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Jews cluster  genetically with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.
Click to expand...


That doesn’t agree with this diagram from Hammers study, which shows a different clustering.

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/files/2009/01/Hammer_2000_Jew_Arab_Ychromosome.png


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BOTH the Arab people AND the Jewish people have rights to live, generally, in the place.  The question is HOW MUCH should be under Israel's sovereignty and HOW MUCH should be under Arab sovereignty.
> 
> The Jewish answer has CONSISTENTLY been -- some for each.
> 
> The Arab answer has CONSISTENTLY been  --  none for Jews.
> 
> BOTH the Arabs and the Jews have sovereignty over some territory.
Click to expand...

Agree except  that there are Jews who believe the entire area of biblical Israel belongs to the Jews and there are Palestinians who support a two state solution.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between  ...  Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There IS?  A relationship between Arab Muslims and the place of the Holy Temple?   How so?
Click to expand...

I said some of the same sites.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage exists only in reference to Arab conquests.  They have no heritage in absence of the Arab conquests.  They define themselves by their Arabness.  You can't take the "Arabness" out of them and have them be the same.
> 
> The idea of blood purity, and claims or rights based on blood purity, is abhorrent.
Click to expand...


I am not talking about blood purity.  If you are bound and determined to insist the Palestinians have ties going back no further than the Arab conquest, then genetics refutes that and shows they have been in that place far longer then their detractors wish to acknowledge, maybe not as a recognizable people but as PEOPLE.

You can’t have it both ways and claim Jews have ancestral ties to a piece of land based on blood but the Palestians do not.


----------



## Coyote

Slyhunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say anything about your right to post here?  No.  If you have a problem with moderation - you know what to do.  Take it up via pm.
> 
> *
> Do you believe Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?*
> 
> 
> 
> I was responding to your snarky and dismissive comment "So...look who chooses to make an appearance" which does bring into question my right to post, here, and constitutes an ad Hominem rather than a rebuttal.
> 
> "Palestinians" did not exist until they were invented for propaganda purposes.  Your question is deceptive and intentionally so.
> 
> ARABS existed at the time of the original mandate rather than these so-called "Palestinians" and so any honest look at the situation would evaluate ARAB interests vs Jewish.  The original mandate included what is now Jordan, so any divvying up of terrritory must take that into account in order to be honest and fair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Speaking of deceptive...how about a direct answer?  Do you believe that the Palestinians have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I am not being deceptive, you are.
> 
> You know full well no such people as "Palestinian" existed until recent times yet you demand I answer a question as if they did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you won't give a straight answer?
> 
> Ok, let me rephrase it in a way that is more acceptable to you:  Do you believe that the people, referred to as Palestinians, have any right of place to the area currently referred to as Palestine?  We aren't talking about historical divisions - we are talking about a place where they live and have lived for centuries if not thousands of years.  Basically do they have a right to that place?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not if it is used as an excuse to displace an Israel citizen from their historical placement.
Click to expand...

 How about displacing a Palestinian?


----------



## Coyote

Slyhunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually...the idea of heritage becomes especially difficult when you have not one, but three ancient religions claiming some recognition of the same sites.  Does that mean they are usurping them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep.  Absolutely.  Completely.  Without doubt.  Christians and Muslims have usurped Jewish sites.  Literally taken them over.  Prevented the original (indigenous) peoples from worshiping there.
> 
> Should Jews have access to ancient Cambodian Temples?  And then build a synagogue there?  And then claim if for a Jewish (and only Jewish) holy site?  Denying Cambodians access to their holy places?  It sounds ridiculous when you apply it to other cultures.  But somehow, its okay if its done to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between Christians and Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.  So is that really comparable?
> 
> No one should be denied access to their holy sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one should create their holy site at someone else's existing holy site attempting to obliterate its original history.
Click to expand...


I agree, but people thought very differently thousands of years ago.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between  ...  Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There IS?  A relationship between Arab Muslims and the place of the Holy Temple?   How so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said some of the same sites.
Click to expand...


What sites, if not the Holy Temple?  The Cave of the Patriarchs?  Rachel's Tomb?  

These are all Jewish sites.  They are completely unrelated to Islam except that Islam decided to usurp both the places and the stories.  Thousands of years later.  

It is precisely a parallel to building a Jewish synagogue on top of the site of Cambodian Temples.  And yet, you seem to think the one is ridiculous and the other to be ignored.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The number of people who would have converted by will or by force is minuscule, compared to the majority of the people who remained Jewish, Bedouins, Druze, and all others who did live there at the time.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But what the Arab Muslim Palestinians have been doing with their BDS campaign, check Abbas' quotes, is to say that the Palestinians people have been there for 5000 years. No, 10,000 years.  No, One Million Years.........
> 
> About that 10,000-year history in Jericho, Mr. Erekat
> 
> Palestine Office Tourism Website Illustrates Absurdity Of Palestinian Narrative
> 
> Another Abbas Lie: Palestinians are the Descendants of the Canaanites
> 
> 
> Which one could possibly be true?  And without any archeological proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.
> 
> Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.
> 
> Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?
> 
> Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?
> 
> 
> And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They can change their stories, it's all political and designed to suit their agenda.  I don't disagree there.  But it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinians do descend from much older peoples then the Arabs, with a mixture of later Arab blood.  In fact in the genetic study I quoted earlier - they are much closer to a number of Jewish groups and Syrians then they are to the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula (such as the Saudi's).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Jews cluster  genetically with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn’t agree with this diagram from Hammers study, which shows a different clustering.
> 
> http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/files/2009/01/Hammer_2000_Jew_Arab_Ychromosome.png
Click to expand...


Actually it does, try looking into bigger diagrams to see the distances, and compare to later studies that usually include bigger databases. I really don't like this notion of discussing genetics regarding anything to do with Jews, I think You can appreciate why, and respect that. Genetics at the service of politics doesn't look good at all.

(Jews cluster  with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.)






I'd appreciate if we put this discussion aside, and focus on politics.
This forum has a specially bad taste using genetics, I'm not saying that's You, and that's not to say that it's not a valid subject, but I think in any case genetics for politics is a dirty business. Already starting to look ugly - I was unpleasantly surprised You went that way.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage exists only in reference to Arab conquests.  They have no heritage in absence of the Arab conquests.  They define themselves by their Arabness.  You can't take the "Arabness" out of them and have them be the same.
> 
> The idea of blood purity, and claims or rights based on blood purity, is abhorrent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not talking about blood purity.  If you are bound and determined to insist the Palestinians have ties going back no further than the Arab conquest, then genetics refutes that and shows they have been in that place far longer then their detractors wish to acknowledge, maybe not as a recognizable people but as PEOPLE.
> 
> You can’t have it both ways and claim Jews have ancestral ties to a piece of land based on blood but the Palestians do not.
Click to expand...


Its not based on blood for the Jewish people.  Its based on culture and on them being a recognizable people.  No one is denying that the Arab conquest mixed with a local population and over-ran their culture.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not a legit argument, it's an inhuman one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its an inhuman argument to claim that Palestine (all of it) was divided into two States.  75% of the territory went to the Arab peoples of the region, for their sovereignty.  25% of the territory went to the Jewish people, for their sovereignty.
> 
> How the F*&K is that "inhuman"?
Click to expand...


I was referring to the forced transfer of people.



> There absolutely are those who think that Palestinians should be expelled elsewhere.  I'll look them up but for a start - look at MJB's posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read this board every day.  I'm VERY familiar with all the posters here and their beliefs.  No one claims that Arabs should be segregated from Jews because they are Arabs.  No one suggests that all Arabs should be expelled from Israel due to their ethnicity.  Israel certainly does not support that, and has gone to considerable lengths to oppose it in law.  (As opposed to Gaza and "Palestine" who refuse to entertain the idea of a Jew living in 'their' land).  Even the most extreme of posters, those who DO suggest expulsion (and I know who they are, I see them) only do so because of the violence.
Click to expand...


I have been on here for years and some truly ugly stuff posted by both sides, and there is not a a division between violent and non violent.  I have seen calls for mass expulsions, the justification the inhumane treatment of children in the detention, expelling them to Jordan, calling them animals, the deliberate promotion of false memes designed to demonize (such as the picture claiming to be a mass wedding of child brides) and a total denial of Palestinian humanity.  Some of those posters no longer post here, but they were quite vociferous.  Calling for expulsion BECAUSE they were Arab, send them to another Arab country.  This forum has toned down some, but maybe you ought to look at what some say more critically.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage exists only in reference to Arab conquests.  They have no heritage in absence of the Arab conquests.  They define themselves by their Arabness.  You can't take the "Arabness" out of them and have them be the same.
> 
> The idea of blood purity, and claims or rights based on blood purity, is abhorrent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not talking about blood purity.  If you are bound and determined to insist the Palestinians have ties going back no further than the Arab conquest, then genetics refutes that and shows they have been in that place far longer then their detractors wish to acknowledge, maybe not as a recognizable people but as PEOPLE.
> 
> You can’t have it both ways and claim Jews have ancestral ties to a piece of land based on blood but the Palestians do not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Its not based on blood for the Jewish people.  Its based on culture and on them being a recognizable people.  No one is denying that the Arab conquest mixed with a local population and over-ran their culture.
Click to expand...

Yes they are.  Sixties for example calling them descendents so Arab invaders and migrants and the many people denying their ties to older peoples.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between  ...  Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There IS?  A relationship between Arab Muslims and the place of the Holy Temple?   How so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said some of the same sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What sites, if not the Holy Temple?  The Cave of the Patriarchs?  Rachel's Tomb?
> 
> These are all Jewish sites.  They are completely unrelated to Islam except that Islam decided to usurp both the places and the stories.  Thousands of years later.
> 
> It is precisely a parallel to building a Jewish synagogue on top of the site of Cambodian Temples.  And yet, you seem to think the one is ridiculous and the other to be ignored.
Click to expand...


Isn’t Jewish history and doctrine part of Christian and Muslim history and doctrine?  How is Cambodian history and doctrine part of Jewish history and doctrine?


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage in terms of bloodlines and place most certainly did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their heritage exists only in reference to Arab conquests.  They have no heritage in absence of the Arab conquests.  They define themselves by their Arabness.  You can't take the "Arabness" out of them and have them be the same.
> 
> The idea of blood purity, and claims or rights based on blood purity, is abhorrent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not talking about blood purity.  If you are bound and determined to insist the Palestinians have ties going back no further than the Arab conquest, then genetics refutes that and shows they have been in that place far longer then their detractors wish to acknowledge, maybe not as a recognizable people but as PEOPLE.
> 
> You can’t have it both ways and claim Jews have ancestral ties to a piece of land based on blood but the Palestians do not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Its not based on blood for the Jewish people.  Its based on culture and on them being a recognizable people.  No one is denying that the Arab conquest mixed with a local population and over-ran their culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they are.  Sixties for example calling them descendents so Arab invaders and migrants and the many people denying their ties to older peoples.
Click to expand...

People don't seem to know that Arabs are not Palestians nor vice versa.

People make that mistake about Persians too.

Palestinians are a unique people who derive their heritage from the ancient Philistines.

As such, they are more closely related to the ancient Greeks than anybody else.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.


Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.  



> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.


Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).



> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.


But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.

And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.  



> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,


The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Isn’t Jewish history and doctrine part of Christian and Muslim history and doctrine?  How is Cambodian history and doctrine part of Jewish history and doctrine?



There is NO connection between Islam and Jewish history other than the fact that they "borrowed" Jewish stories.  Their doctrine is their own.  There is no more connection between Islam and Jews than there is between Cambodia and Jews.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way of knowing with any accuracy how many.
> 
> The first one is hardly a scientific article nor one written by historical experts.  What is your point?
> 
> Same with the second one.
> 
> The third one could, oddly have some merit based on the dna analysis referred to in the National Geographic article you refer to as "mistaken".
> 
> 
> 
> The point in all of them is that the PA, Abbas and others, are going around changing their story of how long the Palestinians have actually been in the area.
> 
> Those articles were not written out of a vacuum, but based on what Abbas, Erekart and other Palestinian leaders have been telling the Western world for the past 10 to 20 years.
> 
> Why would they do that?  Do they not know how far back the Palestinian people have lived on the land and exactly where?
> 
> Are they the Canaanite tribe?  The Hitites? Edomites?  Jebusites?  Any and all of them?
> 
> 
> And the Palestinian Museum remains empty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They can change their stories, it's all political and designed to suit their agenda.  I don't disagree there.  But it doesn't change the fact that the Palestinians do descend from much older peoples then the Arabs, with a mixture of later Arab blood.  In fact in the genetic study I quoted earlier - they are much closer to a number of Jewish groups and Syrians then they are to the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula (such as the Saudi's).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Jews cluster  genetically with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn’t agree with this diagram from Hammers study, which shows a different clustering.
> 
> http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/epiphenom/files/2009/01/Hammer_2000_Jew_Arab_Ychromosome.png
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually it does, try looking into bigger diagrams to see the distances, and compare to later studies that usually include bigger databases. I really don't like this notion of discussing genetics regarding anything to do with Jews, I think You can appreciate why, and respect that. Genetics at the service of politics doesn't look good at all.
> 
> (Jews cluster  with Lebanese Druze and Christians while Palestinian Arabs with Saudis, Jordanians and Bedouins, they almost entirely don't cluster with Syrians.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd appreciate if we put this discussion aside, and focus on politics.
> This forum has a specially bad taste using genetics, I'm not saying that's You, and that's not to say that it's not a valid subject, but I think in any case genetics for politics is a dirty business. Already starting to look ugly - I was unpleasantly surprised You went that way.
Click to expand...


Since you requested I will put aside genetics, but doing so allows people to make false claims about Palestinians that I can’t then refute with science.  Genetics and the movement and interrelationships of different peoples fascinates me and always has.  It should not be a bad thing.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn’t Jewish history and doctrine part of Christian and Muslim history and doctrine?  How is Cambodian history and doctrine part of Jewish history and doctrine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NO connection between Islam and Jewish history other than the fact that they "borrowed" Jewish stories.  Their doctrine is their own.  There is no more connection between Islam and Jews than there is between Cambodia and Jews.
Click to expand...

I guess I don’t see it that way.  I see Islam and Christianity as having built upon Judaism and each other. You can’t ignore their interrelatedness.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I was referring to the forced transfer of people.


I have never suggested a forced transfer of people.



> I have seen calls for mass expulsions, the justification the inhumane treatment of children in the detention, expelling them to Jordan, calling them animals, the deliberate promotion of false memes designed to demonize (such as the picture claiming to be a mass wedding of child brides) and a total denial of Palestinian humanity.  Some of those posters no longer post here, but they were quite vociferous.  Calling for expulsion BECAUSE they were Arab, send them to another Arab country.  This forum has toned down some, but maybe you ought to look at what some say more critically.


I have seen some of these things.  It is almost always related to violence.  Boston used to call for mass expulsions -- but not because they were Arabs, because they were violent and weren't able to live in peace with Jews.  He was specific about it.  Several others have also said such things, always in the context of violence.  Some of it is ugly.  I'm aware of it.  But I think you are missing the context.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I guess I don’t see it that way.  I see Islam and Christianity as having built upon Judaism and each other.



Sure.  All you've done is soften the language.  "built upon" = "usurped"

That is exactly, literally, what Islam did.  It built a shrine on top of someone else's Holy Place and then borrowed a story to make a connection where there was none.  

It would be exactly the same as if some Jewish person built a shrine at Angkor Wat and then claimed a Cambodian story.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
Click to expand...


1.  I have emphasized multiple times the importance of peaceful behavior. Do I need to repeat it?  Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence. 

2.  I don’t have any issue with Jews as the creators of those sacred spaces being acknowledged and with gratitude, in fact that is a really nice tradition.

3.  I Dont see how it matters whether the entire land or specific sites are important.  Those specific sites ARE important to those faiths and they have a right to access those sites as a result.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I don’t see it that way.  I see Islam and Christianity as having built upon Judaism and each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  All you've done is soften the language.  "built upon" = "usurped"
> 
> That is exactly, literally, what Islam did.  It built a shrine on top of someone else's Holy Place and then borrowed a story to make a connection where there was none.
> 
> It would be exactly the same as if some Jewish person built a shrine at Angkor Wat and then claimed a Cambodian story.
Click to expand...

Well...I disagree.  I notice you only claim it of Islam, not Christianity.


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no relationship between Jews and Cambodian Temples.  There is a relationship between  ...  Muslims and Jews to some of the same sites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There IS?  A relationship between Arab Muslims and the place of the Holy Temple?   How so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said some of the same sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What sites, if not the Holy Temple?  The Cave of the Patriarchs?  Rachel's Tomb?
> 
> These are all Jewish sites.  They are completely unrelated to Islam except that Islam decided to usurp both the places and the stories.  Thousands of years later.
> 
> It is precisely a parallel to building a Jewish synagogue on top of the site of Cambodian Temples.  And yet, you seem to think the one is ridiculous and the other to be ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Isn’t Jewish history and doctrine part of Christian and Muslim history and doctrine?  How is Cambodian history and doctrine part of Jewish history and doctrine?
Click to expand...


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I don’t see it that way.  I see Islam and Christianity as having built upon Judaism and each other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  All you've done is soften the language.  "built upon" = "usurped"
> 
> That is exactly, literally, what Islam did.  It built a shrine on top of someone else's Holy Place and then borrowed a story to make a connection where there was none.
> 
> It would be exactly the same as if some Jewish person built a shrine at Angkor Wat and then claimed a Cambodian story.
Click to expand...

They built a shrine on an older holy place, something religious conquests have done for ages and ethics were completely different.  How is that usurped?  Did the Jews usurp stories from older religions and cultures to create their narratives?  Yes.  Biblical floods for one, the story of Moses for another.

What do you mean borrowed a story?  It seems they have their own story associated with al Akhsa.

I think claiming usurption is insulting, a way of delegitimizating a religion’s rights to holy places.  I agree with Jewish primacy there, but I think similar respect should be given to all the faiths.


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  I have emphasized multiple times the importance of peaceful behavior. Do I need to repeat it?  Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence.
> 
> 2.  I don’t have any issue with Jews as the creators of those sacred spaces being acknowledged and with gratitude, in fact that is a really nice tradition.
> 
> 3.  I Dont see how it matters whether the entire land or specific sites are important.  Those specific sites ARE important to those faiths and they have a right to access those sites as a result.
Click to expand...

I have been to the temple mount, King David's tomb, the garden Gethsemane, the garden tomb, Bethlehem chapel, the crusader church of the holy mount, the crusader castle in Acre, Jaffa, the archeological dig at Jericho, the fortress Masada, the Catholic shrine of the hill of beatitudes, the Sea Of Tiberias, and the IDF checkpoint at Naharia.

Beautiful place.  A heritage for Christians and Jews.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to the forced transfer of people.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never suggested a forced transfer of people.
Click to expand...


No, but what you said in response to my post took me by surprise.  

I said:



> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.



And you responded with a description of how it was divided, and saying it was a legitimate solution.  Sending the Palestinians to Jordan would likely mean a forced transfer and that is not in my mind a legitimate solution.  It would be inhumane.


----------



## Coyote

yiostheoy said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  I have emphasized multiple times the importance of peaceful behavior. Do I need to repeat it?  Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence.
> 
> 2.  I don’t have any issue with Jews as the creators of those sacred spaces being acknowledged and with gratitude, in fact that is a really nice tradition.
> 
> 3.  I Dont see how it matters whether the entire land or specific sites are important.  Those specific sites ARE important to those faiths and they have a right to access those sites as a result.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have been to the temple mount, King David's tomb, the garden Gethsemane, the garden tomb, Bethlehem chapel, the crusader church of the holy mount, the crusader castle in Acre, Jaffa, the archeological dig at Jericho, the fortress Masada, the Catholic shrine of the hill of beatitudes, the Sea Of Tiberias, and the IDF checkpoint at Naharia.
> 
> Beautiful place.  A heritage for Christians and Jews.
Click to expand...


There is a wealth of history in those places...I would love to see them.  And I have to say I trust the Israeli’s far more than any other group to conserve, conduct responsible archeological investigations and preserve fair access.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to the forced transfer of people.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never suggested a forced transfer of people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but what you said in response to my post took me by surprise.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you responded with a description of how it was divided, and saying it was a legitimate solution.  Sending the Palestinians to Jordan would likely mean a forced transfer and that is not in my mind a legitimate solution.  It would be inhumane.
Click to expand...



But I did not suggest a forced transfer. Or any transfer. You are putting things on me that I do not believe and did not say. This is why I suggest you are misunderstanding and missing the context of some of the TI posters here.


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  I have emphasized multiple times the importance of peaceful behavior. Do I need to repeat it?  Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence.
> 
> 2.  I don’t have any issue with Jews as the creators of those sacred spaces being acknowledged and with gratitude, in fact that is a really nice tradition.
> 
> 3.  I Dont see how it matters whether the entire land or specific sites are important.  Those specific sites ARE important to those faiths and they have a right to access those sites as a result.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have been to the temple mount, King David's tomb, the garden Gethsemane, the garden tomb, Bethlehem chapel, the crusader church of the holy mount, the crusader castle in Acre, Jaffa, the archeological dig at Jericho, the fortress Masada, the Catholic shrine of the hill of beatitudes, the Sea Of Tiberias, and the IDF checkpoint at Naharia.
> 
> Beautiful place.  A heritage for Christians and Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a wealth of history in those places...I would love to see them.  And I have to say I trust the Israeli’s far more than any other group to conserve, conduct responsible archeological investigations and preserve fair access.
Click to expand...

When I was there I tried to shake hands and say thanks to as many IDF and UN guards as I could.

Dangerous job.


----------



## yiostheoy

The Palestinians inherited the land when the Romans kicked the Jews out.  It was originally Jewish land.  The Jews and their cousins the other Israelites took it from the Canaanites, and extinct people who were exterminated by Joshua and Caleb.

The Palestinians living along the coast in their ancient cities of Ascalon etc. then converted to Islam during the Arab Conquest.

Life was good for the Palestinians there until the Balfour Declaration.

It got worse during the 1948 Israeli War Of Independence.

Foolishly, rather than stay and unite with the Jews, the Palestinians mostly fled to Jordan ending up in refugee camps.

Life sucks when you turn chicken and abandon your land.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> They built a shrine on an older holy place, something religious conquests have done for ages and ethics were completely different.



But do you see how you are erasing Jewish history here?  They built a shrine on an older Jewish holy place. Or they built a shrine on an older Cambodian holy place. 

Yes. The ethics have changed. Exactly that. Conquering people and over-taking them is now seen as unethical. And the indigenous peoples in need of protection. That is exactly why Islam must recognize its past history and acknowledge that their holy places were usurped and gain permission to use them. Which the Jewish people will (have already) granted. 



> I think claiming usurption is insulting, a way of delegitimizating a religion’s rights to holy places.  I agree with Jewish primacy there, but I think similar respect should be given to all the faiths.



It's not insulting to acknowledge harm your people has done to another people. It's healing. It's reconciliation.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence.
Click to expand...

Well, then who is the cause of the violence?


----------



## yiostheoy

Coyote said:


> yiostheoy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Which I acknowledged in the rest of my post, making it very much a three way street. The Jewish people have absolutely no problem with other people and faiths worshiping at their own holy spots near the Jewish ones.  As is very evident in Jerusalem.  It is part of Jewish theology.  Its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, it is.  Its exactly like that with Islam.  (Not that I would use the term 'cult' for Islam, as it is demeaning).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But people and faiths who use violence as a means to control spaces and other people should not be catered to.  The violence has to stop.  And the other side of the "all religions must have access to holy spaces" coin is that all religions must do so peacefully -- or else they shouldn't be able to have access to holy spaces.  Again, its not the Jewish people causing problems here.
> 
> And the Holy Land is only important to one faith.  There is nothing holy about the land to Muslims and Christians.  There may be certain specific locations, but not the land in general.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish peoples, as the original aboriginal creators of those sacred spaces, must be acknowledged.  Its not demeaning to recognize the facts of one's faith.  its not demeaning to recognize things done in the past which have had an extremely negative affect on other peoples.  For other peoples, that is the basis of reconciliation.  In my synagogue, we acknowledge and thank the First Nations peoples, on whose land the building sits.  There is nothing demeaning AT ALL about that.  Its a powerful acknowledgement of the pain caused.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  I have emphasized multiple times the importance of peaceful behavior. Do I need to repeat it?  Nor have I said Jews are the cause of the violence.
> 
> 2.  I don’t have any issue with Jews as the creators of those sacred spaces being acknowledged and with gratitude, in fact that is a really nice tradition.
> 
> 3.  I Dont see how it matters whether the entire land or specific sites are important.  Those specific sites ARE important to those faiths and they have a right to access those sites as a result.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have been to the temple mount, King David's tomb, the garden Gethsemane, the garden tomb, Bethlehem chapel, the crusader church of the holy mount, the crusader castle in Acre, Jaffa, the archeological dig at Jericho, the fortress Masada, the Catholic shrine of the hill of beatitudes, the Sea Of Tiberias, and the IDF checkpoint at Naharia.
> 
> Beautiful place.  A heritage for Christians and Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is a wealth of history in those places...I would love to see them.  And I have to say I trust the Israeli’s far more than any other group to conserve, conduct responsible archeological investigations and preserve fair access.
Click to expand...

If you go back into ancient history far enough you find that the Jews are actually a remnant of the ancient Babylonians like their distant cousins the Assyrians (who all mostly live in the USA now).  These are Semitic speaking peoples distantly related to Sargon The Great of Akkad (somewhere in Bumfuk Iraq).

The Palestinians are most closely related to the ancient Greeks of Mycenae and Crete.  They are not Arabs.  Their ancient religion before the Arab Conquest was Greek polytheism (Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, etc.).


----------



## yiostheoy

Long and short of it, the Palestinians have always throughout ancient and modern history been chicken-sh!ts that don't stand for anything very long.


----------



## Sixties Fan

yiostheoy said:


> Long and short of it, the Palestinians have always throughout ancient and modern history been chicken-sh!ts that don't stand for anything very long.


Do you have anymore of this pathetic rewriting of history of the area and the people who lived on it?

Amazing.  The only area of the world, and the only people on the planet (The Jewish People/Nation) who seem to have whatever version of history those who do not care about them are willing to spit out.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.


And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
Click to expand...


No nation in the world has developed this land more than Israel.

Under any other rule it was a secondary district, now Israel is a leading country in the whole of middle east. No one around the world would even care or know it as a Holy Land  if not for the Jewish heritage and history.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
Click to expand...


You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
Click to expand...

Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:


From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).

IsraelBiblicalStudies.com


----------



## Hollie

Sixties Fan said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
Click to expand...



Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:

*Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*

_On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_

(More at the link)


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to the forced transfer of people.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never suggested a forced transfer of people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but what you said in response to my post took me by surprise.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you responded with a description of how it was divided, and saying it was a legitimate solution.  Sending the Palestinians to Jordan would likely mean a forced transfer and that is not in my mind a legitimate solution.  It would be inhumane.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But I did not suggest a forced transfer. Or any transfer. You are putting things on me that I do not believe and did not say. This is why I suggest you are misunderstanding and missing the context of some of the TI posters here.
Click to expand...

750,000 got the boot in 1948. A few thousand more in 1967. And more all the way through to today, and not allowed to return.

You are perfectly fine with that.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
Click to expand...

Israel protects holy sites...but...


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to the forced transfer of people.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never suggested a forced transfer of people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but what you said in response to my post took me by surprise.
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Denying them ties to the region is denying them rights to it - and I see that [often enough when they talk of sending them to Jordan for example.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you responded with a description of how it was divided, and saying it was a legitimate solution.  Sending the Palestinians to Jordan would likely mean a forced transfer and that is not in my mind a legitimate solution.  It would be inhumane.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But I did not suggest a forced transfer. Or any transfer. You are putting things on me that I do not believe and did not say. This is why I suggest you are misunderstanding and missing the context of some of the TI posters here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 750,000 got the boot in 1948. A few thousand more in 1967. And more all the way through to today, and not allowed to return.
> 
> You are perfectly fine with that.
Click to expand...


The Arab-Moslem invasion caused the al-boot.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
Click to expand...



Israel protects holy sites. Arabs-Moslems on the other hand,


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
Click to expand...


So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
Click to expand...


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> 750,000 got the boot in 1948. A few thousand more in 1967. And more all the way through to today, and not allowed to return.
> 
> You are perfectly fine with that.



On the contrary, I support return.  All those who lost actual property should be able to return to it, or be compensated for its loss.  All those descended from those uprooted people should be permitted to return to their ancestral land -- the Jewish people to Israel and the Arab people to Palestine in a two state solution.  Should any uprooted people prefer to stay in the country of their refuge (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc) they should be permitted to do so.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No nation in the world has developed this land more than Israel.
> 
> Under any other rule it was a secondary district, now Israel is a leading country in the whole of middle east. No one around the world would even care or know it as a Holy Land  if not for the Jewish heritage and history.
Click to expand...

 Nice deflection.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.



Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 750,000 got the boot in 1948. A few thousand more in 1967. And more all the way through to today, and not allowed to return.
> 
> You are perfectly fine with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the contrary, I support return.  All those who lost actual property should be able to return to it, or be compensated for its loss.  All those descended from those uprooted people should be permitted to return to their ancestral land -- the Jewish people to Israel and the Arab people to Palestine in a two state solution.  Should any uprooted people prefer to stay in the country of their refuge (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc) they should be permitted to do so.
Click to expand...

Home is where you are from. House is not required.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Home is where you are from. House is not required.



Sure.  Jews can return home to Israel.  Arabs can return home to Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
Click to expand...

Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
Click to expand...


I'm not watching another of your ridiculous videos.  If you have a point -- make it.  But I was JUST IN JERUSALEM.  And I assure you that people of all faiths worship at their own holy sites there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  (The only people who are excluded from worshiping at their holy places are Jews and that is specifically because Arab Muslims get violent in the mere presence of Jews being, you know, Jewish.)


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Home is where you are from. House is not required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Jews can return home to Israel.  Arabs can return home to Palestine.
Click to expand...

So somebody from Jaffa can go to a bantustan in the West Bank.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not watching another of your ridiculous videos.  If you have a point -- make it.  But I was JUST IN JERUSALEM.  And I assure you that people of all faiths worship at their own holy sites there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  (The only people who are excluded from worshiping at their holy places are Jews and that is specifically because Arab Muslims get violent in the mere presence of Jews being, you know, Jewish.)
Click to expand...

You won't watch it because it shows that you are lying.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
Click to expand...

Hurray for Pallywood.
Gosh forbid if all Christians cannot enter the Sepulcher Church, after all there are so many , and it is not big enough for all of them.

Patience is not the forte of some Arab Christians, and especially not the forte of those who simply need to demean, and attack Israel at every opportunity.
When did the allow Jews to pray or go to their holy sites for the 1300 years they had it under their control?  Or from 1948 to 1967 as they destroyed every Synagogue in Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.  ( Shhh....let us not even mention TranJordan and Hebron     )

Let us take a look, even if it does not have to do with the thread:


The thousands who filled Jerusalem's cavernous Church of the Holy Sepulcher began lining up for the ceremony hours earlier. Video screens set up in various places in the Old City broadcast the ceremony live for the thousands more who could not fit inside.

Some of the celebrants held church flags, while others beat hand drums and sang hymns.

The various Orthodox denominations grouped into different areas of the church, which was heavily secured by Israeli forces.

Police spokesman Shmuel Ben-Ruby said about 2,500 police were stationed in the area, including as many as 1,500 within the church itself. He estimated that between 8,000 and 10,000 worshippers packed the church and about 7,000 more spilled over into its cobbled courtyard.

(Full article online)

Holy Fire Draws Orthodox Christians to Holy Land


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not watching another of your ridiculous videos.  If you have a point -- make it.  But I was JUST IN JERUSALEM.  And I assure you that people of all faiths worship at their own holy sites there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  (The only people who are excluded from worshiping at their holy places are Jews and that is specifically because Arab Muslims get violent in the mere presence of Jews being, you know, Jewish.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You won't watch it because it shows that you are lying.
Click to expand...

I watched it and it is another one of "You are full of it"

Why do they not tell why some of them may not have been allowed enter, if that is true?   What was the reason given to them?  The Truth.

And some of these Palestinians, who do not know how the Jews were treated by their ancestors and recently for 1400 years, does dare to call the Jews "racists".

These Christians seem to have a terrible short memory of how THEY were treated by the Muslims, the same as the Jews. as Dhimmis

Hooray for Pallywood !!!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hurray for Pallywood.
> Gosh forbid if all Christians cannot enter the Sepulcher Church, after all there are so many , and it is not big enough for all of them.
> 
> Patience is not the forte of some Arab Christians, and especially not the forte of those who simply need to demean, and attack Israel at every opportunity.
> When did the allow Jews to pray or go to their holy sites for the 1300 years they had it under their control?  Or from 1948 to 1967 as they destroyed every Synagogue in Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.  ( Shhh....let us not even mention TranJordan and Hebron     )
> 
> Let us take a look, even if it does not have to do with the thread:
> 
> 
> The thousands who filled Jerusalem's cavernous Church of the Holy Sepulcher began lining up for the ceremony hours earlier. Video screens set up in various places in the Old City broadcast the ceremony live for the thousands more who could not fit inside.
> 
> Some of the celebrants held church flags, while others beat hand drums and sang hymns.
> 
> The various Orthodox denominations grouped into different areas of the church, which was heavily secured by Israeli forces.
> 
> Police spokesman Shmuel Ben-Ruby said about 2,500 police were stationed in the area, including as many as 1,500 within the church itself. He estimated that between 8,000 and 10,000 worshippers packed the church and about 7,000 more spilled over into its cobbled courtyard.
> 
> (Full article online)
> 
> Holy Fire Draws Orthodox Christians to Holy Land
Click to expand...

The Palestinians were not in control from 1948 to 1967. You can't blame them.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Why is it off topic?
Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
*if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *

But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.

At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel destroying it?  On the contrary.  Remember I just got back from Jerusalem.  People of all faiths worship there, just as they have been doing for thousands of years.  Its beautiful.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another Israeli lie. (there are so many)
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hurray for Pallywood.
> Gosh forbid if all Christians cannot enter the Sepulcher Church, after all there are so many , and it is not big enough for all of them.
> 
> Patience is not the forte of some Arab Christians, and especially not the forte of those who simply need to demean, and attack Israel at every opportunity.
> When did the allow Jews to pray or go to their holy sites for the 1300 years they had it under their control?  Or from 1948 to 1967 as they destroyed every Synagogue in Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem.  ( Shhh....let us not even mention TranJordan and Hebron     )
> 
> Let us take a look, even if it does not have to do with the thread:
> 
> 
> The thousands who filled Jerusalem's cavernous Church of the Holy Sepulcher began lining up for the ceremony hours earlier. Video screens set up in various places in the Old City broadcast the ceremony live for the thousands more who could not fit inside.
> 
> Some of the celebrants held church flags, while others beat hand drums and sang hymns.
> 
> The various Orthodox denominations grouped into different areas of the church, which was heavily secured by Israeli forces.
> 
> Police spokesman Shmuel Ben-Ruby said about 2,500 police were stationed in the area, including as many as 1,500 within the church itself. He estimated that between 8,000 and 10,000 worshippers packed the church and about 7,000 more spilled over into its cobbled courtyard.
> 
> (Full article online)
> 
> Holy Fire Draws Orthodox Christians to Holy Land
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were not in control from 1948 to 1967. You can't blame them.
Click to expand...

Muslim Jordan was. And it did not allow Jews or Christians into Old Jerusalem to their holy sites, or any other holy sites in Judea and Samaria during those years.  And you do know that.

And who was blaming the "Palestinians" ?  I was not.

You are making a huge deal, as always, just as much as that "reporter" was about everything, instead of dealing with the huge number who came for the event and the fact that not all were going to be allowed in the Sepulcher.  It happens everywhere, including in Rome.  It opens at a certain time, it closes at a certain time.  The end.


----------



## Slyhunter

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
Click to expand...

Yeah well it's ok if the MOOSlims do it. Their the superior race.


----------



## rylah

Slyhunter said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> 
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah well it's ok if the MOOSlims do it. Their the superior race.
Click to expand...


First Muslims colonized the lands, then history of the land, then they colonized the religion of the land.
They're superior in this in every land outside Arabia that suffered Muslim invasions.

There's no middle eastern country outside of Arabia,
that managed to free itself from Arab Muslim rule except Israel.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Home is where you are from. House is not required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Jews can return home to Israel.  Arabs can return home to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So somebody from Jaffa can go to a bantustan in the West Bank.
Click to expand...


Someone whose family was from somewhere in Palestine can continue to live in their home territory of Palestine.  But the Jewish people will live in the State of Israel and the Arab people will live in the State of Palestine.  This is what happens when a territory is divided along ethnic lines, especially after 100 years of non-stop aggression and war.  

Return of every descendant to the very streets where their families used to live decades ago is not longer possible.  Its not morally possible, its not physically possible, its not economically possible, its not strategically possible.  You simply can not unbreak that egg. 

Of course, no one should be forcibly uprooted from the point of peace forward.  And if a family wishes to return after the war is over, and are content to live peacefully as Arab citizens of Israel or Jewish citizens of Palestine, I would hope that would be possible.  Just as I could hopefully choose to live in the land of my Irish or Scots ancestors if I wanted to.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism may be the only Monotheism which has built a Temple for All of the People:
> 
> 
> From its very inception, the Temple was designed to be *a universal institution*. The prophet Isaiah, addressing the "foreigners who join themselves to the Lord" (Isa. 56:6), proclaimed, *"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations"* (Isa. 56:7).
> 
> IsraelBiblicalStudies.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Home is where you are from. House is not required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Jews can return home to Israel.  Arabs can return home to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So somebody from Jaffa can go to a bantustan in the West Bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone whose family was from somewhere in Palestine can continue to live in their home territory of Palestine.  But the Jewish people will live in the State of Israel and the Arab people will live in the State of Palestine.  This is what happens when a territory is divided along ethnic lines, especially after 100 years of non-stop aggression and war.
> 
> Return of every descendant to the very streets where their families used to live decades ago is not longer possible.  Its not morally possible, its not physically possible, its not economically possible, its not strategically possible.  You simply can not unbreak that egg.
> 
> Of course, no one should be forcibly uprooted from the point of peace forward.  And if a family wishes to return after the war is over, and are content to live peacefully as Arab citizens of Israel or Jewish citizens of Palestine, I would hope that would be possible.  Just as I could hopefully choose to live in the land of my Irish or Scots ancestors if I wanted to.
Click to expand...

Sure it's possible. 90% of the land that the Palestinians were expelled from is still uninhabited.


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> Gosh forbid if all Christians cannot enter the Sepulcher Church, after all there are so many , and it is not big enough for all of them.



Lol.  He's trying to argue that Israel is evil because TOO MANY Christians line up to get into the Church?  Sheesh.


----------



## Slyhunter

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> 
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
Click to expand...

Still unrelated.


----------



## Slyhunter

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Still unrelated.
Click to expand...

Why because you say so and you make the rules?
NOT!


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Sure it's possible. 90% of the land that the Palestinians were expelled from is still uninhabited.



Seriously?  You are thinking you are going to dump 1000 descendants on a hill that formerly supported subsistence farming for 100 and you are going to do this with 7 million people?  Be serious.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:
> 
> *Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967:*
> 
> _On 27 June 1967, Prime Minister Eshkol again addressed the spiritual leaders of all communities and assured them of Israel's determination to protect the Holy Places. On behalf of the religious dignitaries present, His Beatitude Benedictos, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, replied. On the same day, the Knesset passed the Protection of Holy Places Law, 1967. Texts of the statements and the Law follow:_
> 
> (More at the link)
> 
> 
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
Click to expand...


The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.

Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.

Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Home is where you are from. House is not required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Jews can return home to Israel.  Arabs can return home to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So somebody from Jaffa can go to a bantustan in the West Bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone whose family was from somewhere in Palestine can continue to live in their home territory of Palestine.  But the Jewish people will live in the State of Israel and the Arab people will live in the State of Palestine.  This is what happens when a territory is divided along ethnic lines, especially after 100 years of non-stop aggression and war.
> 
> Return of every descendant to the very streets where their families used to live decades ago is not longer possible.  Its not morally possible, its not physically possible, its not economically possible, its not strategically possible.  You simply can not unbreak that egg.
> 
> Of course, no one should be forcibly uprooted from the point of peace forward.  And if a family wishes to return after the war is over, and are content to live peacefully as Arab citizens of Israel or Jewish citizens of Palestine, I would hope that would be possible.  Just as I could hopefully choose to live in the land of my Irish or Scots ancestors if I wanted to.
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> This is what happens when a territory is divided along ethnic lines,


By foreigners. That violates international law. No legal division has happened yet.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel protects holy sites...but...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
Click to expand...




rylah said:


> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.


Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure it's possible. 90% of the land that the Palestinians were expelled from is still uninhabited.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously?  You are thinking you are going to dump 1000 descendants on a hill that formerly supported subsistence farming for 100 and you are going to do this with 7 million people?  Be serious.
Click to expand...

Not everybody will be farmers. There is plenty else to do.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
Click to expand...

The Palestinian claim is against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.

They are separate issues.


----------



## Slyhunter

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> 
> At the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
Click to expand...

no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So when are Jews allowed to  have their property back in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> orAt the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


The land was carved by the same mandate system.
When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
_
If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.

I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
I smell serious double standard here.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> 
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.


----------



## Slyhunter

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

Arab is an Arab, Muslim is  muslim, Animal is an animal.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> orAt the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land was carved by the same mandate system.
> When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
> _
> If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.
> 
> I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
> I smell serious double standard here.
Click to expand...

Before the Treaty of Lausanne, that whole area was one country.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ever heard of quid pro quo. Or if it's good enough for the Goose/allah, it's good enough for all/jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...


Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel  and in all those neighboring countries.

Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under mandate.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Slyhunter said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> 
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab is an Arab, Muslim is  muslim, Animal is an animal.
Click to expand...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> orAt the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land was carved by the same mandate system.
> When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
> _
> If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.
> 
> I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
> I smell serious double standard here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before the Treaty of Lausanne, that whole area was one country.
Click to expand...


What country?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still unrelated.
> 
> 
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
Click to expand...

The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it off topic?
> Jews have been living in what became Syria and Lebanon continuously for 2500 years.
> *if* *You want to talk about lost property it goes both ways. *
> 
> But my claim is even further - it was the plight of oldest Jewish communities in Syria-Palestine against Arab pogroms and discrimination that initiated the organization of Zionism.
> orAt the end of the day - Jews lost more lands and property to Arabs then vice versa.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land was carved by the same mandate system.
> When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
> _
> If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.
> 
> I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
> I smell serious double standard here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before the Treaty of Lausanne, that whole area was one country.
Click to expand...


That’s so silly.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
Click to expand...


Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.

Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why because you say so and you make the rules?
> NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
Click to expand...


I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Toddsterpatriot said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter. They are separate and unrelated issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land was carved by the same mandate system.
> When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
> _
> If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.
> 
> I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
> I smell serious double standard here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before the Treaty of Lausanne, that whole area was one country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country?
Click to expand...

Ottoman/Turkish Empire.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian claim as against Israel. The Jewish claim is against other countries.
> 
> They are separate issues.
> 
> 
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
Click to expand...

Where did they go?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> no they balance out. They cancel each other out.
> poker game; my debt to susan is cancelled out due to susans debt to john because john owes me money.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where did they go?
Click to expand...


Who?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are not in the loop between the Jews and other countries. They had nothing to do with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where did they go?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who?
Click to expand...

Do try to keep up.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.




Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.

Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews and they have nothing to do with it?
> Yeh try again...
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where did they go?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do try to keep up.
Click to expand...


How quickly you get befuddled.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where did they go?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do try to keep up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How quickly you get befuddled.
Click to expand...

You are the one who can't keep up.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
Click to expand...

Does not address my post.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess they just never botherd to tell you. Makes you feel rather unimportant, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> Where did they go?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do try to keep up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How quickly you get befuddled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are the one who can't keep up.
Click to expand...


Nice duck.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does not address my post.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.

If Palestinian Arabs want compensation or return of their property they have first to compensate Palestinian Jews for a much bigger loss of property they caused.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

P F Tinmore said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Arabs ended with the most of the land and property, Jews* lost *the most of the land an property they've lived on since time immemorial.
> 
> Q. Why do You want to separate the Jews in the wider context when talking about property rights of indigenous people? Is it because Arab claim becomes irrelevant and self-defeating?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The same system that created Syria, Jordan and Lebanon out of what You claim to have been one non separate land created Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land was carved by the same mandate system.
> When discussing Arab migration from neighboring countries during the mandate period, I remember You stating something like _"there was no migration, it was like a walk from one neighborhood to another".
> _
> If You need to be specific about that, I'll find that quotation.
> 
> I'm still waiting for You to explain, how Jewish loss of property has to be put in a special category?
> I smell serious double standard here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Before the Treaty of Lausanne, that whole area was one country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What country?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ottoman/Turkish Empire.
Click to expand...


So the "Palestinians" should go home.....to Turkey!

Excellent idea, Ergodan seems like a very nice fellow.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does not address my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
Click to expand...

Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does not address my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
Click to expand...


I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
Palestinian Arabs are responsible for causing the most loss of property in this conflict.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were at home. They did not go attack anybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does not address my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
Click to expand...

While at home?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs started a war against Palestinian Jews, which resulted in loss of property in Israel and in all those neighboring countries.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs caused the most loss of property and got the most of the land under the mandate.
> 
> 
> 
> Does not address my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> While at home?
Click to expand...


Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them of property.

Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does not address my post.
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> While at home?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
Click to expand...

Going right over your head, I see.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile it's You who keeps presenting self-defeating demands.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> While at home?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Going right over your head, I see.
Click to expand...


I still don't see any contradiction of my claim.
I think we'll talk about reparations when I return from prayer.


----------



## Coyote

A


P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
Click to expand...

They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.


----------



## Hollie

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't quote my post then blabber on about something else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> While at home?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Going right over your head, I see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I still don't see any contradiction of my claim.
> I think we'll talk about reparations when I return from prayer.
Click to expand...


I think it’s only fair that the Islamist colonial project be held accountable for  damages as a part of their invasion and dispossession of the Jewish people.


----------



## Coyote

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
Click to expand...

You are wrong there as well.  Those sites are still there.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> A
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
Click to expand...

With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?


----------



## Hollie

Coyote said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are wrong there as well.  Those sites are still there.
Click to expand...

I am not wrong. Islamics have a documented history of destroying religious sites. I provided examples earlier.


----------



## Coyote

Hollie said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a sad little Islamist. Obviously you are ignorant to the fact that Israel is preserving religious sites. That is quite at odds with the islamic practice of destroying religious sites.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are wrong there as well.  Those sites are still there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not wrong. Islamics have a documented history of destroying religious sites. I provided examples earlier.
Click to expand...

Yes they...as do Christians back in the day.  On the other hand they have also conserved.


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> One religion building on another is not exactly new.  What I have a problem with in terms of Muslims is when they want to claim it for Islam only, which they can't, but they are a sacred trust for 3 religions now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
Click to expand...

They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you do?
> 
> 1.  You acknowledge the originating indigenous, aboriginal culture.
> 2.  You remove yourself as much as possible from everything you have usurped.
> 3.  You give the originating culture the space to honor their religion and worship as they need.
> 4.  You ask permission of them to continue to use your holy spaces with mutual respect and dignity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of this is HARD for decent, moral human beings.  The especial Holy Places do NOT actually encroach upon each other.  There is no reason for Jews not to have the Temple Mount and the Kotel, the Christians to have the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the Via Dolarosa, and the Muslims to have Al-Aqsa.  They do not actually encroach on each other.  (Depending on where Jews decide the Holy of Holies is -- but Jews tend to be somewhat flexible (cough cough) in that way).
> 
> There is no actual conflict here.  And you have the added advantage that the originating peoples -- the Jewish peoples -- have a theology that encourages worship by ALL of the nations.  And a sovereign government which is willing to BEND OVER BACKWARDS to facilitate worship for other people.
> 
> This is win, win, win, win.  If only the OTHER religions would just let it happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?
Click to expand...

OK, but how does that relate to my post?


----------



## Coyote

Illo


P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that it should be the one way street you seem to think it should and I think the uniqueness of this situation be recognized.  I can’t think of any other situation where three very ancient religions, closely related, have strong ties to the same sacred areas and artifacts.  It isn’t like some new found cult decided that the Cambodian Temp,es were part of their sacred landscape.  The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.  However you might feel about the religions themselves, you can’t ignore this.
> 
> As a result it needs to be treated as a sacred space and the rights of all three respected, not demeaned by claims of usurption, over events more than a thousand years in the past.  The people of today have every right to worship, peacefully and respectfully at their sacred places.
> 
> That said, I think guardianship of those places belongs with the indiginous culture, and they are responsible for insuring fair access to the site, respectful treatment of all worshippers, and maintaining the integrity of those places and setting appropriate rules.  I don’t think either of the other religions should have to beg “permission” to visit their Holy Places any more than the Jews should have had to when it was under the control of others.
> 
> 
> Mutual respect, dignity and peaceful conduct all around.
> 
> 
> I agree
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Holy Land, which is probably the best term for this area, is important to all three that it has been the flashpoint of so much senseless violence as a result of religious ties.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but how does that relate to my post?
Click to expand...

we we’re talking about the Holy Land and sacred sites weren’t we?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Illo
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it really saddens me that Israel is destroying it.
> 
> 
> 
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but how does that relate to my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> we we’re talking about the Holy Land and sacred sites weren’t we?
Click to expand...

Indeed, like Bethlehem that Israel has choked down to about nothing.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Illo
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A
> They aren’t, they are good respectful conservators of history, archaeology and religious rights.
> 
> 
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but how does that relate to my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> we we’re talking about the Holy Land and sacred sites weren’t we?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, like Bethlehem that Israel has choked down to about nothing.
Click to expand...


Pathetic blood libel,
 Bethlehem is full of tourism, new villas, fancy cars.

If anything it's the Palestinian Arabs that managed to choke the Jewish presence in the city to nothing.
Not the other way around.


----------



## rylah

Hollie said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see You refute anything of what I said.
> Palestinian Arabs *caused* the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> 
> 
> While at home?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Going right over your head, I see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I still don't see any contradiction of my claim.
> I think we'll talk about reparations when I return from prayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it’s only fair that the Islamist colonial project be held accountable for  damages as a part of their invasion and dispossession of the Jewish people.
Click to expand...


It's pathetic how  quickly Arab demands of lost property disappear when they realize that it goes both ways.


----------



## Slyhunter

27 mortars fired at Israel from Gaza and you want them to lift the blockade. Why the fuck should Israel lift the blockade if you use the port to bring in more missiles to fire at her? Who is to blame if Israel fires back. What in the fuck do you think Israel should do that will successful stop the rocket attacks, napalm, carpet bombing, total eradication of all electric and water production, what will work. Only after the rockets have stopped can you bitch about the humanitarian needs of Gazans.


----------



## Slyhunter

oh shit.

PA threatens to cut security ties with Israel if Gaza blockade lifted
*PA threatens to cut security ties with Israel if Gaza blockade lifted*
*Palestinians don't want the blockade lifted.*


----------



## admonit

Slyhunter said:


> 27 mortars fired at Israel from Gaza and you want them to lift the blockade. Why the fuck should Israel lift the blockade if you use the port to bring in more missiles to fire at her? Who is to blame if Israel fires back. What in the fuck do you think Israel should do that will successful stop the rocket attacks, napalm, carpet bombing, total eradication of all electric and water production, what will work. Only after the rockets have stopped can you bitch about the humanitarian needs of Gazans.


"The attack came as parents were beginning to send their children to school."
"One of the shells landed just outside an empty kindergarten"
Mortar shells strike southern Israel in largest volley since 2014; no injuries

These people understand only one language and I hope that Israel will react appropriately.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> While at home?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Going right over your head, I see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I still don't see any contradiction of my claim.
> I think we'll talk about reparations when I return from prayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it’s only fair that the Islamist colonial project be held accountable for  damages as a part of their invasion and dispossession of the Jewish people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's pathetic how  quickly Arab demands of lost property disappear when they realize that it goes both ways.
Click to expand...

Under who's control is the property that Jews lost?  It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Illo
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> With bulldozed buildings, ugly walls, cattle pens, and dispossessing Christians?
> 
> 
> 
> They have conserved religious and holy sites, conducted responsible archeology,  and, unlike when under some other regimes, they allow access to the other religions.  I think they deserve credit there don’t you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but how does that relate to my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> we we’re talking about the Holy Land and sacred sites weren’t we?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, like Bethlehem that Israel has choked down to about nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pathetic blood libel,
> Bethlehem is full of tourism, new villas, fancy cars.
> 
> If anything it's the Palestinian Arabs that managed to choke the Jewish presence in the city to nothing.
> Not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Actually alot of Christians have left Bethlahem, due to multiple reasons, not just Israel as implied.  Important landmarks are in conservation trouble.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes while staring a war against Palestinian Jews and dispossessing them from the oldest communities, stripping them from property.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs are responsible for the most loss of property in this conflict.
> 
> 
> 
> Going right over your head, I see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I still don't see any contradiction of my claim.
> I think we'll talk about reparations when I return from prayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it’s only fair that the Islamist colonial project be held accountable for  damages as a part of their invasion and dispossession of the Jewish people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's pathetic how  quickly Arab demands of lost property disappear when they realize that it goes both ways.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under who's control is the property that Jews lost?  It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
Click to expand...


First of all You can't exclude Jews from Palestinians and then claim that it's not an Arab-Jewish conflict.

The Arabs  in Palestine themselves identified as members of the bigger Arab nation, be it when they called themselves Syrians or Egyptians and Saudis, and fought under a joint banner of Arab Muslim imperialism, but somehow the property of Jews lost in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq are out of the context?

In any balanced comparison- it weren't the Jews who caused the most of land and property loss in this conflict. It was a joint Arab effort to displace Jews from Israel and all of oldest Jewish communities in the middle east, Israel is the only place where Arabs didn't succeed.


----------



## Shusha

Here is an interesting article about the indigenous identity and the false seduction of genetic testing by Kim Tallbear.  She is an anthropologist, of the Santee Dakota First Nation people.

_I want to be careful with the argument that it’s culture versus biology; it’s also political authority versus biology. We have debates amongst ourselves about whether being Native American is about being a citizen of your tribe – a political designation – or about culture and traditional practice. I tend to come down on the side of political citizenship. It’s true that it’s about much more than blood – culture matters. But our political autonomy matters too, and that helps produce a space in which our cultural traditions can thrive....

I worry about the way Native American identity gets represented as this purely racial category by some of the companies marketing these tests. The story is so much more complicated than that....

There’s a great desire by many people in the US to feel like you belong to this land. I recently moved to Texas, and many of the white people I meet say: “I’ve got a Cherokee ancestor.” Lots of non-profit groups have also sprung up calling themselves Cherokee tribes, but they’re more like clubs – they don’t have tribal status in the way that federally recognised tribes do. It’s more like, “Do you identify yourself as Cherokee in your soul and your spirit?” That worries us in a land where we already feel there’s very little understanding about the history of our tribes, our relationships with colonial powers, and the conditions of our lives now._


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.


Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared to demand freedom from Arab subjugation, on their ancestral land.


To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.

This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
Click to expand...


Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.


----------



## Coyote

Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
Click to expand...


Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused to Jews?
Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
Click to expand...


Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
Click to expand...


Because Arabs in Palestine are one nation with Arabs in Syria as they officially proclaimed, when they tried to cede the land to a Syria when it was ruled by a King from Mecca.
Because Arabs in Syria-Palestine were the instigators of the violence, and property loss even before Zionism.
Because Arabs leadership in Palestine went outside Palestine and actively organized violence against Jews in all those countries.

Just the property in Syria itself is enough to cover for all what Arabs lost in Palestine, and that's before we discuss Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq. Those ancient Jewish communities were established millenias before Arab Muslim conquests.

Do the math - and let's see who owes whom.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
Click to expand...

Check my thread on the Fahrud and then tell me that the leaders of the Arabs had nothing to do with any expulsion of Jews anywhere, from 1920 to around 1972.

Yes, there are many Arabs who are friendly to Jews and Pro Israel and want nothing to do with what their leaders have done.
Many, if not most, remained in Israel and are happy to have done so.

Most Arabs are taught in schools and social media, etc that the Jews do not have any right to their land. That it is Muslim land.
They do not even mean Palestinians.

Who are these Arab Palestinians who constantly go to the Gaza border, or attack Jews in Samaria or Judea, or in Israel? 

These are the ones who agree with their leaders that the Jews are low, and do not have any right to be sovereign over any MUSLIM land.

One will never get to make the Arabs to agree that what their leader Husseini did was wrong, that it lead to the persecution, torture, etc and then finally expulsion (when they had really planned on concentration camps for the Jews if Germany won WWII )

Jews from those areas do not have to hold their breaths that it will ever happen.  It never will.  Cooperation with Israel against Iran, etc or no cooperation, those lessons against Jews continue to this day, and will continue as long as the Arab/Muslim countries do not learn what democracy is, and much less implement it.

It will be never.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Arabs in Palestine are one nation with Arabs in Syria as they officially proclaimed, when they tried to cede the land to a Syria when it was ruled by a King from Mecca.
> Because Arabs in Syria-Palestine were the instigators of the violence, and property loss even before Zionism.
> Because Palestinian Arabs went outside Palestine and actively organized violence against Jews in all those countries.
> 
> Just the property in Syria itself is enough to cover for all what Arabs lost in Palestine, and that's before we discuss Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq. Those ancient Jewish communities were established millenias before Arab Muslim conquests.
> 
> Do the math - and let's see who owes whom.
Click to expand...


So then perhaps the survivors should demand compensation.  That doesn't absolve any responsibility from Israel to the Palestinians who's property was unjustly confiscated.   But that would demand a greater ethics than "two wrongs make a right" that seems to be the prevailing norm.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Check my thread on the Fahrud and then tell me that the leaders of the Arabs had nothing to do with any expulsion of Jews anywhere, from 1920 to around 1972.
> 
> Yes, there are many Arabs who are friendly to Jews and Pro Israel and want nothing to do with what their leaders have done.
> Many, if not most, remained in Israel and are happy to have done so.
> 
> Most Arabs are taught in schools and social media, etc that the Jews do not have any right to their land. That it is Muslim land.
> They do not even mean Palestinians.
> 
> Who are these Arab Palestinians who constantly go to the Gaza border, or attack Jews in Samaria or Judea, or in Israel?
> 
> These are the ones who agree with their leaders that the Jews are low, and do not have any right to be sovereign over any MUSLIM land.
> 
> One will never get to make the Arabs to agree that what their leader Husseini did was wrong, that it lead to the persecution, torture, etc and then finally expulsion (when they had really planned on concentration camps for the Jews if Germany won WWII )
> 
> Jews from those areas do not have to hold their breaths that it will ever happen.  It never will.  Cooperation with Israel against Iran, etc or no cooperation, those lessons against Jews continue to this day, and will continue as long as the Arab/Muslim countries do not learn what democracy is, and much less implement it.
> 
> It will be never.
Click to expand...



Your first sentence: * I never said the Arab leaders had nothing to do with it*.  What's the point of reading the rest when you don't even get what I say accurately???

Should the confiscated property of people who were unjustly evicted or fled out of fear of conflict and barred from return by the IDF and unjust property confiscation laws, be compensated or returned?  We certainly thought that principle was important before, such as with the Nazi's and we are still in the process of identifying and returning the many items they looted from their victims.   Doing what is right should not be dependent on what other people have done, but apparently a different standard is applied to the Palestinians in this particular case.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Arabs in Palestine are one nation with Arabs in Syria as they officially proclaimed, when they tried to cede the land to a Syria when it was ruled by a King from Mecca.
> Because Arabs in Syria-Palestine were the instigators of the violence, and property loss even before Zionism.
> Because Palestinian Arabs went outside Palestine and actively organized violence against Jews in all those countries.
> 
> Just the property in Syria itself is enough to cover for all what Arabs lost in Palestine, and that's before we discuss Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq. Those ancient Jewish communities were established millenias before Arab Muslim conquests.
> 
> Do the math - and let's see who owes whom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So then perhaps the survivors should demand compensation.  That doesn't absolve any responsibility from Israel to the Palestinians who's property was unjustly confiscated.   But that would demand a greater ethics than "two wrongs make a right" that seems to be the prevailing norm.
Click to expand...


So again You want to exclude Jews from Palestinians and then claim it's not an Arab-Jewish conflict?

Arabs are still the main cause for most property loss in that conflict, anything lost by Arabs was compensated by larger property gained by Arabs. 
Even if You wan't to go by personal case, there were more Jews expelled and stripped from much larger property.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Arabs in Palestine are one nation with Arabs in Syria as they officially proclaimed, when they tried to cede the land to a Syria when it was ruled by a King from Mecca.
> Because Arabs in Syria-Palestine were the instigators of the violence, and property loss even before Zionism.
> Because Palestinian Arabs went outside Palestine and actively organized violence against Jews in all those countries.
> 
> Just the property in Syria itself is enough to cover for all what Arabs lost in Palestine, and that's before we discuss Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq. Those ancient Jewish communities were established millenias before Arab Muslim conquests.
> 
> Do the math - and let's see who owes whom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So then perhaps the survivors should demand compensation.  That doesn't absolve any responsibility from Israel to the Palestinians who's property was unjustly confiscated.   But that would demand a greater ethics than "two wrongs make a right" that seems to be the prevailing norm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So again You want to exclude Jews from Palestinians and then claim it's not an Arab-Jewish conflict?
Click to expand...


Umh, no.  Jews who lost property have as much right to compensation as Palestinians.  Compensation to either should NOT depend on whether the OTHER gets it or not.



> Arabs are still the main cause for most property loss in that conflict, anything lost by Arabs was compensated by larger property gained by Arabs.
> Even if You wan't to go by personal case, there were more Jews expelled and stripped from much larger property.



Who cares if the arabs are the main cause????  Arabs are a huge general group - *what does it matter to the individual Palestinians who's property was taken*, and who, unlike the Jews - remain stateless?  Why should THEY be punished for the actions of others? And, before you say it - I agree that the other Arab nations have failed them in insisting that the refugee status quo be retained rather than taking them in.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.



In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.

All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left after paying the Israelis.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
Click to expand...



I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,





Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palestinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This entire idea and question about who pays whom for what is already settled.  While some may think it is an unfair outcome, in every dispute their outcome.  NOW, if the Arab Palestinian want to reopen a conflict, long since settled, then they should standup and say so.  Declare War, so that the two parties can engage again on the question of reparations, restitution, and cost of claims.

But the Arab parties concerned, that engaged Israel on behalf of the Arab Palestinians have either made peace, disengaged and abandon the field, or are unable to continue the quest (whatever they thought they should get).

In a war, there are all kinds of possible outcomes.  Some can gain something, some more often than not - lose something.  But the war over the territory is OVER.  Now we have the Arab Palestinians that blame the Israelis for fair-out better in the wars, than did the Arab Palestinians.

Get your map out and look at the Treaties of with Jordan and Egypt.  Do they cover the Gaza Strip and the West Bank?  If they do, and the Arab Palestinians put their faith in the Arab League to defeat the Israelis, what is there to say?

In terms that everyone can understand is it fair to say we are dealing with:




​In the US, over the last 50 years, there have been all sorts of financial and land/property investment that left hundreds of thousand of investors destitute.  They were bank, housing, mortgage and investment scandals that affected peoples lives all over the world.  IT HAPPENs...
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared  to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Check my thread on the Fahrud and then tell me that the leaders of the Arabs had nothing to do with any expulsion of Jews anywhere, from 1920 to around 1972.
> 
> Yes, there are many Arabs who are friendly to Jews and Pro Israel and want nothing to do with what their leaders have done.
> Many, if not most, remained in Israel and are happy to have done so.
> 
> Most Arabs are taught in schools and social media, etc that the Jews do not have any right to their land. That it is Muslim land.
> They do not even mean Palestinians.
> 
> Who are these Arab Palestinians who constantly go to the Gaza border, or attack Jews in Samaria or Judea, or in Israel?
> 
> These are the ones who agree with their leaders that the Jews are low, and do not have any right to be sovereign over any MUSLIM land.
> 
> One will never get to make the Arabs to agree that what their leader Husseini did was wrong, that it lead to the persecution, torture, etc and then finally expulsion (when they had really planned on concentration camps for the Jews if Germany won WWII )
> 
> Jews from those areas do not have to hold their breaths that it will ever happen.  It never will.  Cooperation with Israel against Iran, etc or no cooperation, those lessons against Jews continue to this day, and will continue as long as the Arab/Muslim countries do not learn what democracy is, and much less implement it.
> 
> It will be never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your first sentence: * I never said the Arab leaders had nothing to do with it*.  What's the point of reading the rest when you don't even get what I say accurately???
> 
> Should the confiscated property of people who were unjustly evicted or fled out of fear of conflict and barred from return by the IDF and unjust property confiscation laws, be compensated or returned?  We certainly thought that principle was important before, such as with the Nazi's and we are still in the process of identifying and returning the many items they looted from their victims.   Doing what is right should not be dependent on what other people have done, but apparently a different standard is applied to the Palestinians in this particular case.
Click to expand...

Please do not equate what happened to the Jews in Europe.

The Arabs in Palestine, and then later in all other Arab countries became nazis themselves.

Egypt and Syria alone accepted thousands of runaway nazis into their midst.

In one word.

NO


The Arab Palestinians do not get to be compensated by Israel for what their leaders created with the intention of killing every Jew in Israel and destroying her.

The Palestinian population which was actually expelled by Israel, is very small.

There is no compensation  from Israel, to all of those who left because their leaders, including the Jordanians, told them to do.
Leave and return in two weeks.
Just give the leaders and their weapons take care of the Jews and they would be able to return in no time at all.

Israel is responsible for what the Arab leaders promised?

Israel is responsible for those Arabs who took arms against Israel and wanted to kill Jews, but lost the battles and the war and were expelled?


If you can show me that the Jews of all of those Arab countries took up arms and tried to kill the leaders and anyone else, for whichever reason, but were defeated and then expelled .....then one might have a case for asking Israel to compensate the Arab Palestinians.

There is not one case.

From 1920 on, it has been the Arab leaders attacking, killing and we know what else.....any Jews they could find.

So Israel had to form a Military and become strong and stronger when seven Arab countries attacked her right after it declared Independence.

Israel owes the Arabs in the world nothing.
Israel owes the Arabs in "Palestine" even less.

The Jews survived and turned their homeland into a prosperous place, and have only asked that the Arabs respect the Jews and turn their places into the same.

The "right thing" ,is for the Arab countries to compensate the Jewish People they expelled with whatever is agreed on.

Nazi Arabs do not get away with wanting to murder every Jew in Asia Minor and then demand compensation.

Nazi Arabs have all the Billions they have been stealing from all the Arab countries and the West, which they should already have distributed amongst all of those who THEY forced out of what is now Israel.

Why in the world would I want to compensate Nazi Arabs for wanting me and my family dead?


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It should not effect compensation or the return of confiscated property to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs in Syria-Palestine were directly responsible for property loss and expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in the middle east.* It was a coordinated effort *by the Arabs to target any Jewish community in the middle east because they dared to own state for their own, on their ancestral land.
> 
> 
> To suggest that the property lost by Arabs in a tiny sliver of land, is anywhere close to the amount lost by Jews in some 22 Arab countries due to the conflict initiated by Arabs- is disingenuous and pathetic.
> 
> This is no different than the Arab pogroms in Syria-Palestine before Zionism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palestinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire idea and question about who pays whom for what is already settled.  While some may think it is an unfair outcome, in every dispute their outcome.  NOW, if the Arab Palestinian want to reopen a conflict, long since settled, then they should standup and say so.  Declare War, so that the two parties can engage again on the question of reparations, restitution, and cost of claims.
> 
> But the Arab parties concerned, that engaged Israel on behalf of the Arab Palestinians have either made peace, disengaged and abandon the field, or are unable to continue the quest (whatever they thought they should get).
> 
> In a war, there are all kinds of possible outcomes.  Some can gain something, some more often than not - lose something.  But the war over the territory is OVER.  Now we have the Arab Palestinians that blame the Israelis for fair-out better in the wars, than did the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Get your map out and look at the Treaties of with Jordan and Egypt.  Do they cover the Gaza Strip and the West Bank?  If they do, and the Arab Palestinians put their faith in the Arab League to defeat the Israelis, what is there to say?
> 
> In terms that everyone can understand is it fair to say we are dealing with:
> 
> View attachment 196386​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...



There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
Click to expand...


Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews in all of middle east.

Arabs to this day continue with the demand of a Jew free state in Judea,
*and You demand an apology?!*


----------



## Coyote

....


rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
Click to expand...


For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.

But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again - it should not affect the compensation of confiscated property to the Palestinians.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  Or, maybe they do these days.  It's impossible to tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Check my thread on the Fahrud and then tell me that the leaders of the Arabs had nothing to do with any expulsion of Jews anywhere, from 1920 to around 1972.
> 
> Yes, there are many Arabs who are friendly to Jews and Pro Israel and want nothing to do with what their leaders have done.
> Many, if not most, remained in Israel and are happy to have done so.
> 
> Most Arabs are taught in schools and social media, etc that the Jews do not have any right to their land. That it is Muslim land.
> They do not even mean Palestinians.
> 
> Who are these Arab Palestinians who constantly go to the Gaza border, or attack Jews in Samaria or Judea, or in Israel?
> 
> These are the ones who agree with their leaders that the Jews are low, and do not have any right to be sovereign over any MUSLIM land.
> 
> One will never get to make the Arabs to agree that what their leader Husseini did was wrong, that it lead to the persecution, torture, etc and then finally expulsion (when they had really planned on concentration camps for the Jews if Germany won WWII )
> 
> Jews from those areas do not have to hold their breaths that it will ever happen.  It never will.  Cooperation with Israel against Iran, etc or no cooperation, those lessons against Jews continue to this day, and will continue as long as the Arab/Muslim countries do not learn what democracy is, and much less implement it.
> 
> It will be never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your first sentence: * I never said the Arab leaders had nothing to do with it*.  What's the point of reading the rest when you don't even get what I say accurately???
> 
> Should the confiscated property of people who were unjustly evicted or fled out of fear of conflict and barred from return by the IDF and unjust property confiscation laws, be compensated or returned?  We certainly thought that principle was important before, such as with the Nazi's and we are still in the process of identifying and returning the many items they looted from their victims.   Doing what is right should not be dependent on what other people have done, but apparently a different standard is applied to the Palestinians in this particular case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please do not equate what happened to the Jews in Europe.
> 
> The Arabs in Palestine, and then later in all other Arab countries became nazis themselves.
> 
> Egypt and Syria alone accepted thousands of runaway nazis into their midst.
> 
> In one word.
> 
> NO
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not get to be compensated by Israel for what their leaders created with the intention of killing every Jew in Israel and destroying her.
> 
> The Palestinian population which was actually expelled by Israel, is very small.
> 
> There is no compensation  from Israel, to all of those who left because their leaders, including the Jordanians, told them to do.
> Leave and return in two weeks.
> Just give the leaders and their weapons take care of the Jews and they would be able to return in no time at all.
> 
> Israel is responsible for what the Arab leaders promised?
> 
> Israel is responsible for those Arabs who took arms against Israel and wanted to kill Jews, but lost the battles and the war and were expelled?
> 
> 
> If you can show me that the Jews of all of those Arab countries took up arms and tried to kill the leaders and anyone else, for whichever reason, but were defeated and then expelled .....then one might have a case for asking Israel to compensate the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> There is not one case.
> 
> From 1920 on, it has been the Arab leaders attacking, killing and we know what else.....any Jews they could find.
> 
> So Israel had to form a Military and become strong and stronger when seven Arab countries attacked her right after it declared Independence.
> 
> Israel owes the Arabs in the world nothing.
> Israel owes the Arabs in "Palestine" even less.
> 
> The Jews survived and turned their homeland into a prosperous place, and have only asked that the Arabs respect the Jews and turn their places into the same.
> 
> The "right thing" ,is for the Arab countries to compensate the Jewish People they expelled with whatever is agreed on.
> 
> Nazi Arabs do not get away with wanting to murder every Jew in Asia Minor and then demand compensation.
> 
> Nazi Arabs have all the Billions they have been stealing from all the Arab countries and the West, which they should already have distributed amongst all of those who THEY forced out of what is now Israel.
> 
> Why in the world would I want to compensate Nazi Arabs for wanting me and my family dead?
Click to expand...


Not all the Arabs were Nazi's or supported the Nazi's.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,

It is not a matter of "acceptance" in terms of who was treated fairly and who was not.  It is a matter of "Life;" which as you know is not always fair.  It would be absolutely wrong of anyone to attempt to apply the rules of a perfect world to these events.



Coyote said:


> There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?


*(COMMENT)*

Even if I agree, that there is a certain category of Arab Palestinian that might be owed something (some law of gains-based recovery), there is no more reason to believe that such an award will be favored → any more than the unfortunate losers in the Bank Bail-out, or the Enron Scandal, or the Housing Scandal, or any of the other dozen investment debacles.  Good people lost their homes, their retirements, their lifes saving, their trust funds → everything.  They will not get anything back either.  That is the real-world.

There is no one in the region, that really want to damage Israel to such a degree, that it turns into the human development cesspool like many counterparts in the Arab World that surrounds it.  And no one wants to press Israel into a corner of no escape, to ignite a war.  The world is not perfect and the world is not fair.  The outcome is what it is. 

So, you think it is fair to re-ignite a war, over again, between the Israelis and Palestinians?  The just cause being, they want restitution?  Who is going to win that war?  How much more are the Arab Palestinians going to lose?  If the outcome is that the sum total of the Arab Palestinians will be housed in left-over Iraq war GP Medium Tents, will that be favorable?

What is your solution given that the Jewish National Home is not going to surrender its sovereignty to the Arab World that will bleed them dry?


Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Compensation to Arabs should not be affected by the losses they caused Jews?
> Maybe You still didn't get my point - *You don't demand a penny when You owe me billions.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Each of those people, who lost property did nothing to deserve it.  They weren't the rulers.  The Palestinians had no effect on what the Syrians chose to do to do to their Jewish communities, so why should they be punished for what Syria did?  Same with the other countries.  You put it all on the Palistinians heads and insist they pay the price?  No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Check my thread on the Fahrud and then tell me that the leaders of the Arabs had nothing to do with any expulsion of Jews anywhere, from 1920 to around 1972.
> 
> Yes, there are many Arabs who are friendly to Jews and Pro Israel and want nothing to do with what their leaders have done.
> Many, if not most, remained in Israel and are happy to have done so.
> 
> Most Arabs are taught in schools and social media, etc that the Jews do not have any right to their land. That it is Muslim land.
> They do not even mean Palestinians.
> 
> Who are these Arab Palestinians who constantly go to the Gaza border, or attack Jews in Samaria or Judea, or in Israel?
> 
> These are the ones who agree with their leaders that the Jews are low, and do not have any right to be sovereign over any MUSLIM land.
> 
> One will never get to make the Arabs to agree that what their leader Husseini did was wrong, that it lead to the persecution, torture, etc and then finally expulsion (when they had really planned on concentration camps for the Jews if Germany won WWII )
> 
> Jews from those areas do not have to hold their breaths that it will ever happen.  It never will.  Cooperation with Israel against Iran, etc or no cooperation, those lessons against Jews continue to this day, and will continue as long as the Arab/Muslim countries do not learn what democracy is, and much less implement it.
> 
> It will be never.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your first sentence: * I never said the Arab leaders had nothing to do with it*.  What's the point of reading the rest when you don't even get what I say accurately???
> 
> Should the confiscated property of people who were unjustly evicted or fled out of fear of conflict and barred from return by the IDF and unjust property confiscation laws, be compensated or returned?  We certainly thought that principle was important before, such as with the Nazi's and we are still in the process of identifying and returning the many items they looted from their victims.   Doing what is right should not be dependent on what other people have done, but apparently a different standard is applied to the Palestinians in this particular case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please do not equate what happened to the Jews in Europe.
> 
> The Arabs in Palestine, and then later in all other Arab countries became nazis themselves.
> 
> Egypt and Syria alone accepted thousands of runaway nazis into their midst.
> 
> In one word.
> 
> NO
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not get to be compensated by Israel for what their leaders created with the intention of killing every Jew in Israel and destroying her.
> 
> The Palestinian population which was actually expelled by Israel, is very small.
> 
> There is no compensation  from Israel, to all of those who left because their leaders, including the Jordanians, told them to do.
> Leave and return in two weeks.
> Just give the leaders and their weapons take care of the Jews and they would be able to return in no time at all.
> 
> Israel is responsible for what the Arab leaders promised?
> 
> Israel is responsible for those Arabs who took arms against Israel and wanted to kill Jews, but lost the battles and the war and were expelled?
> 
> 
> If you can show me that the Jews of all of those Arab countries took up arms and tried to kill the leaders and anyone else, for whichever reason, but were defeated and then expelled .....then one might have a case for asking Israel to compensate the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> There is not one case.
> 
> From 1920 on, it has been the Arab leaders attacking, killing and we know what else.....any Jews they could find.
> 
> So Israel had to form a Military and become strong and stronger when seven Arab countries attacked her right after it declared Independence.
> 
> Israel owes the Arabs in the world nothing.
> Israel owes the Arabs in "Palestine" even less.
> 
> The Jews survived and turned their homeland into a prosperous place, and have only asked that the Arabs respect the Jews and turn their places into the same.
> 
> The "right thing" ,is for the Arab countries to compensate the Jewish People they expelled with whatever is agreed on.
> 
> Nazi Arabs do not get away with wanting to murder every Jew in Asia Minor and then demand compensation.
> 
> Nazi Arabs have all the Billions they have been stealing from all the Arab countries and the West, which they should already have distributed amongst all of those who THEY forced out of what is now Israel.
> 
> Why in the world would I want to compensate Nazi Arabs for wanting me and my family dead?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not all the Arabs were Nazi's or supported the Nazi's.
Click to expand...

Right, and I did not say that.

But go tell the dead Jews in Baghdad after the Fahrud that only some of the Arabs embraced Naziism and it was ok what the Jews went through during those two days, because it was NEVER about a future state called Israel.  

You may not understand this, but what happened is no different from what happened during the Crusades, where Christian Europeans went around murdering every Jew they saw, or the Inquisition which took quite some time oppressing, torturing, murdering and then finally deciding to expel all the Jews in Spain.
And of course the same had happened from 1290 until 1492.

There is no difference between the Christian and the Muslim intolerance to Jews.  Both view the Jews as their Dhimmies, with basically no rights.  With of course the now and then exceptions, when it comes to governments who did what they did.

Many in the population were responsible for engaging in what the government or the church/mosques wanted them to do, and many were not.

It does not change what happened in all three or four cases cases.

The Crusades
The Inquisition
The Fahrud (Happened during the Holocaust and was actually part of it, as Al Husseini was hand in hand with the Nazis killing Jews and others in Europe and in Asia)
The Holocaust

Israel has always done more for the Arabs around them than their leaders ever cared to do.

Israel brought electricity to Gaza and Judea and Samaria post 1967
Israel gives health care to those in Gaza and the PA
Israel gives education to those in the PA
Israel gives jobs to thousands of eligible  Arabs, who come into Israel on a daily basis for all three, now mainly from the PA areas.


What do the Arab leaders continue to give Israel?

So, who compensates Israel for all of these opportunities it gives any Arab who need health care, jobs and education?

Especially when some of them only come into Israel or some of the Jewish villages in Area C in order to kill more Jews?

I think the Arabs need to compensate the Israelis and all the Jews in the world for their endless incitement against them which continues to lead to murders of Jews not only in Israel but around the world.

Should Jews do to Arabs around the world what is done to them?

Do unto others......


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,
> 
> It is not a matter of "acceptance" in terms of who was treated fairly and who was not.  It is a matter of "Life;" which as you know is not always fair.  It would be absolutely wrong of anyone to attempt to apply the rules of a perfect world to these events.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even if I agree, that there is a certain category of Arab Palestinian that might be owed something (some law of gains-based recovery), there is no more reason to believe that such an award will be favored → any more than the unfortunate losers in the Bank Bail-out, or the Enron Scandal, or the Housing Scandal, or any of the other dozen investment debacles.  Good people lost their homes, their retirements, their lives saving, their trust funds → everything.  They will not get anything back either.
> 
> There is no one in the region, that really want to damage Israel to such a degree, that it turns into the human development losers like the reason the Arab World that surrounds it.  And no one wants to press Israel into a corner of no escape, to ignite a war.  The world is not perfect and the world is not fair.  The outcome is what it is.
> 
> So, you think it is fair to ignite a war, over again, between the Israelis and Palestinians?  The just cause being, they want restitution?  Who is going to win that war?  How much more are the Arab Palestinians going to lose?  If the outcome is that the sum total of the Arab Palestinians will be housed in left-over Iraq war GP Medium Tents, will that be favorable?
> 
> What is your solution given that the Jewish National Home is not going to surrender its sovereignty to the Arab World that will bleed them dry?
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...



I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!

What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,
> 
> It is not a matter of "acceptance" in terms of who was treated fairly and who was not.  It is a matter of "Life;" which as you know is not always fair.  It would be absolutely wrong of anyone to attempt to apply the rules of a perfect world to these events.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even if I agree, that there is a certain category of Arab Palestinian that might be owed something (some law of gains-based recovery), there is no more reason to believe that such an award will be favored → any more than the unfortunate losers in the Bank Bail-out, or the Enron Scandal, or the Housing Scandal, or any of the other dozen investment debacles.  Good people lost their homes, their retirements, their lives saving, their trust funds → everything.  They will not get anything back either.
> 
> There is no one in the region, that really want to damage Israel to such a degree, that it turns into the human development losers like the reason the Arab World that surrounds it.  And no one wants to press Israel into a corner of no escape, to ignite a war.  The world is not perfect and the world is not fair.  The outcome is what it is.
> 
> So, you think it is fair to ignite a war, over again, between the Israelis and Palestinians?  The just cause being, they want restitution?  Who is going to win that war?  How much more are the Arab Palestinians going to lose?  If the outcome is that the sum total of the Arab Palestinians will be housed in left-over Iraq war GP Medium Tents, will that be favorable?
> 
> What is your solution given that the Jewish National Home is not going to surrender its sovereignty to the Arab World that will bleed them dry?
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?
Click to expand...

Please, STOP with the* Israel can do no wrong *mantra*.
*
Israel and the Jews did NOT commit an ethnic cleansing and genocide as the Turks did.

The Jews, and then Israel, were the victims of the Arabs, whose leader had been a soldier during that whole Turkish genocide against the Armenians.

That is who the Jews were dealing with.

With a person, no different from little Adolf, who got so upset that the Ottoman Empire lost along with Germany WWI, that he decided that under NO circumstances, the Jews were EVER going to achieve sovereignty over any part of their ancient homeland, which he and other Muslims considered now Muslim Land.

You are "not" going to bother to read the Thread on the Fahrud, are you?

Al Husseini's whole life and devotion to kill every Jew he could......it is all there.

It includes forming troops in Bosnia, etc to kill Jews and others.
It includes managing to convince the Nazis to not allow 10,000 Jewish children to be sent to Palestine. Instead they all ended up in concentration camps.

I will repeat it.

Israel owes NOTHING to any Palestinians.

It already does more for them than their lousy leaders have ever done or will ever do for them.

Apologize for having survived the endless attacks for the past 100 years, which meant to see every Jew dead?

NEVER


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,
> 
> It is not a matter of "acceptance" in terms of who was treated fairly and who was not.  It is a matter of "Life;" which as you know is not always fair.  It would be absolutely wrong of anyone to attempt to apply the rules of a perfect world to these events.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even if I agree, that there is a certain category of Arab Palestinian that might be owed something (some law of gains-based recovery), there is no more reason to believe that such an award will be favored → any more than the unfortunate losers in the Bank Bail-out, or the Enron Scandal, or the Housing Scandal, or any of the other dozen investment debacles.  Good people lost their homes, their retirements, their lives saving, their trust funds → everything.  They will not get anything back either.
> 
> There is no one in the region, that really want to damage Israel to such a degree, that it turns into the human development losers like the reason the Arab World that surrounds it.  And no one wants to press Israel into a corner of no escape, to ignite a war.  The world is not perfect and the world is not fair.  The outcome is what it is.
> 
> So, you think it is fair to ignite a war, over again, between the Israelis and Palestinians?  The just cause being, they want restitution?  Who is going to win that war?  How much more are the Arab Palestinians going to lose?  If the outcome is that the sum total of the Arab Palestinians will be housed in left-over Iraq war GP Medium Tents, will that be favorable?
> 
> What is your solution given that the Jewish National Home is not going to surrender its sovereignty to the Arab World that will bleed them dry?
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please, STOP with the* Israel can do no wrong *mantra*.
> *
> Israel and the Jews did NOT commit an ethnic cleansing and genocide as the Turks did.
> 
> The Jews, and then Israel, were the victims of the Arabs, whose leader had been a soldier during that whole Turkish genocide against the Armenians.
> 
> That is who the Jews were dealing with.
> 
> With a person, no different from little Adolf, who got so upset that the Ottoman Empire lost along with Germany WWI, that he decided that under NO circumstances, the Jews were EVER going to achieve sovereignty over any part of their ancient homeland, which he and other Muslims considered now Muslim Land.
> 
> You are "not" going to bother to read the Thread on the Fahrud, are you?
> 
> Al Husseini's whole life and devotion to kill every Jew he could......it is all there.
> 
> It includes forming troops in Bosnia, etc to kill Jews and others.
> It includes managing to convince the Nazis to not allow 10,000 Jewish children to be sent to Palestine. Instead they all ended up in concentration camps.
> 
> I will repeat it.
> 
> Israel owes NOTHING to any Palestinians.
> 
> It already does more for them than their lousy leaders have ever done or will ever do for them.
> 
> Apologize for having survived the endless attacks for the past 100 years, which meant to see every Jew dead?
> 
> NEVER
Click to expand...


I'm not defending Al Husseini.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote, rylah, et al,
> 
> It is not a matter of "acceptance" in terms of who was treated fairly and who was not.  It is a matter of "Life;" which as you know is not always fair.  It would be absolutely wrong of anyone to attempt to apply the rules of a perfect world to these events.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were Palestinians who were expelled and fled.  Contrary to the "official narrative"  - in 1948, many did not flee because their leaders told them to do so but because they feared the conflict or they were actually expelled by the Jewish militias as part of an orchestrated terror campaign.  They were then barred from returning to their homes and legal mechanisms were set up to prevent them from being able to claim their property.  Are you saying this is acceptable?  That they are owed no compensation or return of property or even recognition of the wrong done to them?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even if I agree, that there is a certain category of Arab Palestinian that might be owed something (some law of gains-based recovery), there is no more reason to believe that such an award will be favored → any more than the unfortunate losers in the Bank Bail-out, or the Enron Scandal, or the Housing Scandal, or any of the other dozen investment debacles.  Good people lost their homes, their retirements, their lives saving, their trust funds → everything.  They will not get anything back either.
> 
> There is no one in the region, that really want to damage Israel to such a degree, that it turns into the human development losers like the reason the Arab World that surrounds it.  And no one wants to press Israel into a corner of no escape, to ignite a war.  The world is not perfect and the world is not fair.  The outcome is what it is.
> 
> So, you think it is fair to ignite a war, over again, between the Israelis and Palestinians?  The just cause being, they want restitution?  Who is going to win that war?  How much more are the Arab Palestinians going to lose?  If the outcome is that the sum total of the Arab Palestinians will be housed in left-over Iraq war GP Medium Tents, will that be favorable?
> 
> What is your solution given that the Jewish National Home is not going to surrender its sovereignty to the Arab World that will bleed them dry?
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please, STOP with the* Israel can do no wrong *mantra*.
> *
> Israel and the Jews did NOT commit an ethnic cleansing and genocide as the Turks did.
> 
> The Jews, and then Israel, were the victims of the Arabs, whose leader had been a soldier during that whole Turkish genocide against the Armenians.
> 
> That is who the Jews were dealing with.
> 
> With a person, no different from little Adolf, who got so upset that the Ottoman Empire lost along with Germany WWI, that he decided that under NO circumstances, the Jews were EVER going to achieve sovereignty over any part of their ancient homeland, which he and other Muslims considered now Muslim Land.
> 
> You are "not" going to bother to read the Thread on the Fahrud, are you?
> 
> Al Husseini's whole life and devotion to kill every Jew he could......it is all there.
> 
> It includes forming troops in Bosnia, etc to kill Jews and others.
> It includes managing to convince the Nazis to not allow 10,000 Jewish children to be sent to Palestine. Instead they all ended up in concentration camps.
> 
> I will repeat it.
> 
> Israel owes NOTHING to any Palestinians.
> 
> It already does more for them than their lousy leaders have ever done or will ever do for them.
> 
> Apologize for having survived the endless attacks for the past 100 years, which meant to see every Jew dead?
> 
> NEVER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not defending Al Husseini.
Click to expand...

The answer continues to be 

NO

Israel does not owe ONE Palestinian Arab an apology, or anything else.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Coyote,  et al,

It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.



Coyote said:


> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?


*(COMMENT)*

The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.

There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.  

Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)." 
_*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _

If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.

Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.  

Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.

If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> ....
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
Click to expand...

That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.

Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.


----------



## Billo_Really

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Where's your link to what happened between 1916 and 1920?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where's your link to what happened between 1916 and 1920?
Click to expand...


Would that turn Arabs into the indigenous people of Judea all of a sudden?


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Would that turn Arabs into the indigenous people of Judea all of a sudden?


If you want to keep playing this bullshit game, then Jews are not indigenous to the area, either.  Go back far enough and you'll find they moved there from Africa.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis,


You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?



RoccoR said:


> *Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs


Oop, there it is. Israel's premier bullshit site.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would that turn Arabs into the indigenous people of Judea all of a sudden?
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to keep playing this bullshit game, then Jews are not indigenous to the area, either.  Go back far enough and you'll find they moved there from Africa.
Click to expand...


You mistakenly conflate native with indigenous.
But even Americans who have lived in a land for some 5 centuries, yet they still don't call themselves neither natives nor indigenous.

Being indigenous means creating a specific world heritage that connects a specific people to a specific land. It's a function of people who create a unique culture that is rooted in the land, language specific to only that land, maintaining presence and heritage of that land and holding it as a basis of a nation.

As for the Arabs they're as indigenous and native to Judea as the average US citizen to Milwaukee.
They themselves call the land _*"The Jewish Desert"*_...the Arab desert everyone knows where it is, as much as where their language belongs.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> You mistakenly conflate native with indigenous.
> But even Americans who have lived in a land for some 5 centuries, yet they still don't call themselves neither natives nor indigenous.
> 
> Being indigenous means creating a specific world heritage that connects a specific people to a specific land. It's a function of people who create a unique culture that is rooted in the land, language specific to only that land, maintaining presence and heritage of that land and holding it as a basis of a nation.
> 
> As for the Arabs they're as indigenous and native to Judea as the average US citizen to Milwaukee.
> They themselves call the land _*"The Jewish Desert"*_...the Arab desert everyone knows where it is, as much as where their language belongs.


Indigenous means native.  Originally or occurring naturally in a particular place.  Palestinian-Arabs are just as indigenous as Palestinian-Jews.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mistakenly conflate native with indigenous.
> But even Americans who have lived in a land for some 5 centuries, yet they still don't call themselves neither natives nor indigenous.
> 
> Being indigenous means creating a specific world heritage that connects a specific people to a specific land. It's a function of people who create a unique culture that is rooted in the land, language specific to only that land, maintaining presence and heritage of that land and holding it as a basis of a nation.
> 
> As for the Arabs they're as indigenous and native to Judea as the average US citizen to Milwaukee.
> They themselves call the land _*"The Jewish Desert"*_...the Arab desert everyone knows where it is, as much as where their language belongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous means native.  Originally or occurring naturally in a particular place.  Palestinian-Arabs are just as indigenous as Palestinian-Jews.
Click to expand...


Yeah, it's funny how for  Arabs there's whole bunch of new mental gymnastics invented, and terms have to be  turned upside down - to make that ridiculous claim.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Yeah, it's funny how for  Arabs there's whole bunch of new mental gymnastics and terms have to be  turned upside down - to make that ridiculous claim.


That's not as ridiculous as saying that's your land because God told you so!


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it's funny how for  Arabs there's whole bunch of new mental gymnastics and terms have to be  turned upside down - to make that ridiculous claim.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not as ridiculous as saying that's your land because God told you so!
Click to expand...


Well, You know, it's not called the Arabian Desert for a reason... 



*Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎ 

The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, it's funny how for  Arabs there's whole bunch of new mental gymnastics and terms have to be  turned upside down - to make that ridiculous claim.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not as ridiculous as saying that's your land because God told you so!
Click to expand...

Arabs say that Arabia is their land, because their Allah told them so.

It is ok for them, it is not ok for the Jews who are indigenous of the Land of Canaan to say it or want to keep any part of their indigenous land.

You do need to come up with a more indigenous idea than the one about "my god gave it to me" when it comes to the Muslims who do believe that Allah, not only gave Arabia to them - but the whole world.

You have not noticed how Muslims worked very hard for 1300 years to conquer and keep as much of the world to themselves as they could.

And they have not given up to it.

Just watch the news.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Well, You know, it's not called the Arabian Desert for a reason...
> 
> 
> 
> *Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.


That's not what God said.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, You know, it's not called the Arabian Desert for a reason...
> 
> 
> 
> *Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what God said.
Click to expand...


That wasn't my argument either.
*"The Jewish Desert"* is how ARABS call the land.

You're welcome to use the info, stay away from my land.


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs say that Arabia is their land, because their Allah told them so.
> 
> It is ok for them, it is not ok for the Jews who are indigenous of the Land of Canaan to say it or want to keep any part of their indigenous land.
> 
> You do need to come up with a more indigenous idea than the one about "my god gave it to me" when it comes to the Muslims who do believe that Allah, not only gave Arabia to them - but the whole world.
> 
> You have not noticed how Muslims worked very hard for 1300 years to conquer and keep as much of the world to themselves as they could.
> 
> And they have not given up to it.
> 
> Just watch the news.


Arabs don't say that and you took land that wasn't yours to begin with.

You can't move into an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> That wasn't my argument either.
> *"The Jewish Desert"* is how ARABS call the land.
> 
> You're welcome to use the info, stay away from my land.


Okay, I stand corrected.

As far as staying away, what if I came to your land and said your house was my house now, because Tom Cruise told me so?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't my argument either.
> *"The Jewish Desert"* is how ARABS call the land.
> 
> You're welcome to use the info, stay away from my land.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, I stand corrected.
> 
> As far as staying away, what if I came to your land and said your house was my house now, because Tom Cruise told me so?
Click to expand...


I'd ask if it was Tom Cruise who did the circumcision... if yes then I'd do it again, just to make sure You have at least the minimal condition to make that claim.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I think the Arab countries that expelled the Jews should issue, at least, a formal apology and make some movement towards a compensation or formal measure of some kind recognizing what they have done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
Click to expand...

There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.  

 Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion it's quiet disingenuous to ask for a mere apology while demanding Jews compensate Arabs for a war they initiated.
> 
> All I'm saying -let's do the math, just don't complain when Arabs have no pants left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.
> 
> Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.
Click to expand...


It's easy for You not to talk about "hundreds of years of event", because You'll be put in an impossible position to demand anything from Israel. You're just looking for excuses to find relativity where there's none.

Let's just talk about the Arab Pogroms in Syria Palestine that moved Jews to organize Zionism, shall we?....Yeah even there it all started with Arabs dispossessing Jews from their ancient holy cities.

There're simply no possible proportions for You to use to compare Israel's response to 1400 years of dispossession and subjugation under Arab/Muslim rule.

You're basically blaming an ant for biting an elephant's ass when it sat on it.


----------



## Coyote

,,,,


RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said, at the "least" because many of those people are no longer alive and I don't believe in monetary compensation to descendents (either Jewish or Palestinians).  A formal apology and simple acknowledgement of wrong done can go a long ways.  Including with the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.
> 
> Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's easy for You not to talk about "hundreds of years of event", because You'll be put in an impossible position to demand anything from Israel. You're just looking for excuses to find relativity where there's none.
> 
> Let's just talk about the Arab Pogroms in Syria Palestine that moved Jews to organize Zionism, shall we?....Yeah even there it all started with Arabs dispossessing Jews of their ancient holy cities.
> 
> There're simply no proportions in which You can compare 1400 years of displacement and dissolve the Arabs for the responsibility of losses, on both sides.
Click to expand...


1.  What difference does what happened hundreds of years ago make in resolving today’s problems beyond imparting a greater understanding of what led to today?  Those people are dead and those regimes are gone.  These people are alive today.  Israel is a regional power.  No one can demand anything of Israel it does not CHOOSE to give.  Going back and rehashing thousands of years of history as justification for today’s actions is a page right out of the Balkans playbook.  Or I could say the Arab playbook since they too like to hold on to old angers.

2.  Acknowledging that something wrong was done is not absolving the other of anything.  Israel is established, it has stood long enough that it can now afford to examine some of the chapters in its own history without fear of crumbling into dust.  If not now then when?  Never?  When Israel won its war it established and fiercely promoted its official narrative, a narrative that was not entirely true, as was shown when historians were finally allowed to examine old documents.  One of those was why the Palestinians fled their villages.  The official version was that Arab leaders told them to flee, they would slaughter the Jews, then they could return.  When historical documents were examined that accounted for very few.  Most fled either out of fear of the horrors of war or were forcibly expelled by Jewish militias.  Then Israel created absentee landowner laws, which confiscated unclaimed property and at the same time refused to allow them back.  The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower. 

3.  Look at the Palestinian claim of right of return.  Where does that fit?  If we approach it with your view of all historical wrongs count towards some final tally defining justice TODAY, then they and all their descendents have a right to return regardless of the fact that most have never set foot there and that right will continue to exist in a thousand years because we can’t possibly resolve any injustice without looking at the accumulated tally of rights and wrongs by each party back to the dawn of history.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
Click to expand...

Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.

And again, please......

Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.

If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.

I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.

May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
Click to expand...


I would basically agree with You, if You didn't put it as if it's all relative.
It's not - we have people with suicidal and genocidal intentions, who treat their own worse than their enemies, versus a civilized nation that has proven of it's peaceful intentions with the neighborhood.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Basically You've proven once more that the term 'Palestinian' was appropriated to refer only to Arabs, and to dissolve them from any responsibility in an all out coordinated war against Jews.
> 
> Arabs to this day continue with the demand of  Jew free state in Judea,
> *and You demand an apology?!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.
> 
> Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's easy for You not to talk about "hundreds of years of event", because You'll be put in an impossible position to demand anything from Israel. You're just looking for excuses to find relativity where there's none.
> 
> Let's just talk about the Arab Pogroms in Syria Palestine that moved Jews to organize Zionism, shall we?....Yeah even there it all started with Arabs dispossessing Jews of their ancient holy cities.
> 
> There're simply no proportions in which You can compare 1400 years of displacement and dissolve the Arabs for the responsibility of losses, on both sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  What difference does what happened hundreds of years ago make in resolving today’s problems beyond imparting a greater understanding of what led to today?  Those people are dead and those regimes are gone.  These people are alive today.  Israel is a regional power.  No one can demand anything of Israel it does not CHOOSE to give.  Going back and rehashing thousands of years of history as justification for today’s actions is a page right out of the Balkans playbook.  Or I could say the Arab playbook since they too like to hold on to old angers.
> 
> 2.  Acknowledging that something wrong was done is not absolving the other of anything.  Israel is established, it has stood long enough that it can now afford to examine some of the chapters in its own history without fear of crumbling into dust.  If not now then when?  Never?  When Israel won its war it established and fiercely promoted its official narrative, a narrative that was not entirely true, as was shown when historians were finally allowed to examine old documents.  One of those was why the Palestinians fled their villages.  The official version was that Arab leaders told them to flee, they would slaughter the Jews, then they could return.  When historical documents were examined that accounted for very few.  Most fled either out of fear of the horrors of war or were forcibly expelled by Jewish militias.  Then Israel created absentee landowner laws, which confiscated unclaimed property and at the same time refused to allow them back.  The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.
> 
> 3.  Look at the Palestinian claim of right of return.  Where does that fit?  If we approach it with your view of all historical wrongs count towards some final tally defining justice TODAY, then they and all their descendents have a right to return regardless of the fact that most have never set foot there and that right will continue to exist in a thousand years because we can’t possibly resolve any injustice without looking at the accumulated tally of rights and wrongs by each party back to the dawn of history.
Click to expand...

What remains of the Palestinians who followed their leaders orders, or were expelled because they took arms against Israel, is very small.  About 20,000 left.

What you may not be aware of is that Israel has already allowed many Arabs to return into Israel to reconnect with families which remained after 1948.

And many of those who were allowed to return have been found to attack Jews whenever they could.

And many Arabs who end up marrying Arab women who do live in Israel have been granted residence, some of them also have gone to murder Jews.

Are the Arabs throwing away the Quran and giving up on destroying Israel?  No.

Most Arabs in Gaza believe in destroying Israel.  Whether they are the ones who left or the next generations, truly does not matter.

As long as the Arabs continue to believe in, and educate every education that the only Good Jew is a dead one, or one who converted to Islam, there is nowhere to go from there .

And clearly, there are absolutely no Apologies from Israel which are required.

1400 years of the Quran teachings DO matter.  You are not capable of seeing the connection between the first Muslim and what he did to the Jews then, and what his descendants which to do now.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
Click to expand...

I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.

I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.

Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?

If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> For confiscated property, for expelling them from their villages, and for the laws that deliberately prevented them from reclaiming it, yes.
> 
> But damn, I keep forgetting - Israel can do no wrong!
> 
> 
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.
> 
> Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's easy for You not to talk about "hundreds of years of event", because You'll be put in an impossible position to demand anything from Israel. You're just looking for excuses to find relativity where there's none.
> 
> Let's just talk about the Arab Pogroms in Syria Palestine that moved Jews to organize Zionism, shall we?....Yeah even there it all started with Arabs dispossessing Jews of their ancient holy cities.
> 
> There're simply no proportions in which You can compare 1400 years of displacement and dissolve the Arabs for the responsibility of losses, on both sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  What difference does what happened hundreds of years ago make in resolving today’s problems beyond imparting a greater understanding of what led to today?  Those people are dead and those regimes are gone.  These people are alive today.  Israel is a regional power.  No one can demand anything of Israel it does not CHOOSE to give.  Going back and rehashing thousands of years of history as justification for today’s actions is a page right out of the Balkans playbook.  Or I could say the Arab playbook since they too like to hold on to old angers.
> 
> 2.  Acknowledging that something wrong was done is not absolving the other of anything.  Israel is established, it has stood long enough that it can now afford to examine some of the chapters in its own history without fear of crumbling into dust.  If not now then when?  Never?  When Israel won its war it established and fiercely promoted its official narrative, a narrative that was not entirely true, as was shown when historians were finally allowed to examine old documents.  One of those was why the Palestinians fled their villages.  The official version was that Arab leaders told them to flee, they would slaughter the Jews, then they could return.  When historical documents were examined that accounted for very few.  Most fled either out of fear of the horrors of war or were forcibly expelled by Jewish militias.  Then Israel created absentee landowner laws, which confiscated unclaimed property and at the same time refused to allow them back.  The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.
> 
> 3.  Look at the Palestinian claim of right of return.  Where does that fit?  If we approach it with your view of all historical wrongs count towards some final tally defining justice TODAY, then they and all their descendents have a right to return regardless of the fact that most have never set foot there and that right will continue to exist in a thousand years because we can’t possibly resolve any injustice without looking at the accumulated tally of rights and wrongs by each party back to the dawn of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What remains of the Palestinians who followed their leaders orders, or were expelled because they took arms against Israel, is very small.  About 20,000 left.
> 
> What you may not be aware of is that Israel has already allowed many Arabs to return into Israel to reconnect with families which remained after 1948.
> 
> And many of those who were allowed to return have been found to attack Jews whenever they could.
> 
> And many Arabs who end up marrying Arab women who do live in Israel have been granted residence, some of them also have gone to murder Jews.
> 
> Are the Arabs throwing away the Quran and giving up on destroying Israel?  No.
> 
> Most Arabs in Gaza believe in destroying Israel.  Whether they are the ones who left or the next generations, truly does not matter.
> 
> As long as the Arabs continue to believe in, and educate every education that the only Good Jew is a dead one, or one who converted to Islam, there is nowhere to go from there .
> 
> And clearly, there are absolutely no Apologies from Israel which are required.
> 
> 1400 years of the Quran teachings DO matter.  You are not capable of seeing the connection between the first Muslim and what he did to the Jews then, and what his descendants which to do now.
Click to expand...

Should the Jews give up their holy book?  Why on earth should the Arabs throw away theirs?  Just bring it up to a modern day understanding.  Like Jews have.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would basically agree with You, if You didn't put it as if it's all relative.
> It's not - we have people with suicidal and genocidal intentions, who treat their own worse than their enemies, versus a civilized nation that has proven of it's peaceful intentions with the neighborhood.
Click to expand...

How is it that, as a civilized nation, you can’t acknowledge and remedy the wrongs?  Aren’t you painting all the Palestinians with a broad brush?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
Click to expand...

Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.

Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.

Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> That You have to reserve to such ridiculous strawman arguments only shows I've made my point clear.
> Compared to 1400 years of Arab murder and theft, how Israel responded is drop in the bucket. That Jews were expelled from virtually every Arab country, while there're actually more Arabs living in Jewish ancestral land today than ever before - just shows You who caused most of loss in the conflict, and who's aim it was from the beginning.
> 
> Using Your logic Spaniards owe restitutions to the Caliphate for liberating Spain.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no straw man argument being made. Israel deliberately expelled certain Palestinians then created laws to prevent them from returning.  That is wrong.  Just as wrong, just as wrong as when the Jews were forceably expelled.  Any kind of peace agreement would have to some how address that wrong even if it is simple acknowledgement.
> 
> Frankly I have yet to see any admission that Israel ever does anything wrong from most Team Israel supporters.  And to pretend that these Palestinians are owed anything or that no wrong was done by Israel in this case.  Was it ok for Jews to be expelled?  Of course not.  Was it ok for Palestinians to be expelled?  Apparently so.  I am not talking about hundreds or thousands of years of events.  I am talking about an event where those who were the victims are still alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's easy for You not to talk about "hundreds of years of event", because You'll be put in an impossible position to demand anything from Israel. You're just looking for excuses to find relativity where there's none.
> 
> Let's just talk about the Arab Pogroms in Syria Palestine that moved Jews to organize Zionism, shall we?....Yeah even there it all started with Arabs dispossessing Jews of their ancient holy cities.
> 
> There're simply no proportions in which You can compare 1400 years of displacement and dissolve the Arabs for the responsibility of losses, on both sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1.  What difference does what happened hundreds of years ago make in resolving today’s problems beyond imparting a greater understanding of what led to today?  Those people are dead and those regimes are gone.  These people are alive today.  Israel is a regional power.  No one can demand anything of Israel it does not CHOOSE to give.  Going back and rehashing thousands of years of history as justification for today’s actions is a page right out of the Balkans playbook.  Or I could say the Arab playbook since they too like to hold on to old angers.
> 
> 2.  Acknowledging that something wrong was done is not absolving the other of anything.  Israel is established, it has stood long enough that it can now afford to examine some of the chapters in its own history without fear of crumbling into dust.  If not now then when?  Never?  When Israel won its war it established and fiercely promoted its official narrative, a narrative that was not entirely true, as was shown when historians were finally allowed to examine old documents.  One of those was why the Palestinians fled their villages.  The official version was that Arab leaders told them to flee, they would slaughter the Jews, then they could return.  When historical documents were examined that accounted for very few.  Most fled either out of fear of the horrors of war or were forcibly expelled by Jewish militias.  Then Israel created absentee landowner laws, which confiscated unclaimed property and at the same time refused to allow them back.  The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.
> 
> 3.  Look at the Palestinian claim of right of return.  Where does that fit?  If we approach it with your view of all historical wrongs count towards some final tally defining justice TODAY, then they and all their descendents have a right to return regardless of the fact that most have never set foot there and that right will continue to exist in a thousand years because we can’t possibly resolve any injustice without looking at the accumulated tally of rights and wrongs by each party back to the dawn of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What remains of the Palestinians who followed their leaders orders, or were expelled because they took arms against Israel, is very small.  About 20,000 left.
> 
> What you may not be aware of is that Israel has already allowed many Arabs to return into Israel to reconnect with families which remained after 1948.
> 
> And many of those who were allowed to return have been found to attack Jews whenever they could.
> 
> And many Arabs who end up marrying Arab women who do live in Israel have been granted residence, some of them also have gone to murder Jews.
> 
> Are the Arabs throwing away the Quran and giving up on destroying Israel?  No.
> 
> Most Arabs in Gaza believe in destroying Israel.  Whether they are the ones who left or the next generations, truly does not matter.
> 
> As long as the Arabs continue to believe in, and educate every education that the only Good Jew is a dead one, or one who converted to Islam, there is nowhere to go from there .
> 
> And clearly, there are absolutely no Apologies from Israel which are required.
> 
> 1400 years of the Quran teachings DO matter.  You are not capable of seeing the connection between the first Muslim and what he did to the Jews then, and what his descendants which to do now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Should the Jews give up their holy book?  Why on earth should the Arabs throw away theirs?  Just bring it up to a modern day understanding.  Like Jews have.
Click to expand...

I did not say to throw it out, but it is difficult to change an ideology which is called Submission (Islam).

And many Muslims would like to see it happen, but where to start when they do not have the power and Islam continues to be geared towards making the Jews their servants.

Which is not what the Torah is about, at all.

That is the difference.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would basically agree with You, if You didn't put it as if it's all relative.
> It's not - we have people with suicidal and genocidal intentions, who treat their own worse than their enemies, versus a civilized nation that has proven of it's peaceful intentions with the neighborhood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How is it that, as a civilized nation, you can’t acknowledge and remedy the wrongs?  Aren’t you painting all the Palestinians with a broad brush?
Click to expand...

What are those wrongs you keep talking about?

Give us a list.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> 1.  What difference does what happened hundreds of years ago make in resolving today’s problems beyond imparting a greater understanding of what led to today?  Those people are dead and those regimes are gone.  These people are alive today.  Israel is a regional power.  No one can demand anything of Israel it does not CHOOSE to give.  Going back and rehashing thousands of years of history as justification for today’s actions is a page right out of the Balkans playbook.  Or I could say the Arab playbook since they too like to hold on to old angers.



I suggested we talk about the Pogroms  in Syria-Palestine that pushed Jews to organize Zionism.
Those happened just 40 years prior to the 1st Zionist immigration.

Though it's pretty telling how in a thread about indigenous people,  we're limited by a time line of merely 3-5 generations. If Arabs didn't have to hide their origins, or deflect from the Jewish ones in comparison - we'd be talking freely.



Coyote said:


> 2.  Acknowledging that something wrong was done is not absolving the other of anything.  Israel is established, it has stood long enough that it can now afford to examine some of the chapters in its own history without fear of crumbling into dust.  If not now then when?  Never?  When Israel won its war it established and fiercely promoted its official narrative, a narrative that was not entirely true, as was shown when historians were finally allowed to examine old documents.  One of those was why the Palestinians fled their villages.  The official version was that Arab leaders told them to flee, they would slaughter the Jews, then they could return.  When historical documents were examined that accounted for very few.  Most fled either out of fear of the horrors of war or were forcibly expelled by Jewish militias.  Then Israel created absentee landowner laws, which confiscated unclaimed property and at the same time refused to allow them back.  The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.



Again, a drop in the bucket compared to the losses cause by Arabs to both sides.
You'll of course prefer to stay in the beginning of the 20th century where the Arab narrative is all worked out, where it's convenient to put out a sad kitten face and claim victim-hood in a war they initiated.


Coyote said:


> 3.  Look at the Palestinian claim of right of return.  Where does that fit?  If we approach it with your view of all historical wrongs count towards some final tally defining justice TODAY, then they and all their descendents have a right to return regardless of the fact that most have never set foot there and that right will continue to exist in a thousand years because we can’t possibly resolve any injustice without looking at the accumulated tally of rights and wrongs by each party back to the dawn of history.



If we approach it from my view, they have no right to anything in Israel, they can ask, Israel can allow and it will be a great generosity. You still don't get that as a result of a war Arabs fought against the Jews - we've lost our ancestral lands to Syria, Jordan and Lebanon...it's all traditionally Israel and we've been living there long before Arab Muslim conquests. On the top of it we've lost BILLIONS in property all around the middle east. What did Arabs in Syria -Palestine loose - a couple of swamp dunes and mud houses in a piece of land barely seen on the map?.What did they get, Jew free countries 10 times bigger and all the Jewish property?


I'll give You the one for typical Israeli chutzpah, that You have is for sure. 
But You're out of any measurable proportions in this.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would basically agree with You, if You didn't put it as if it's all relative.
> It's not - we have people with suicidal and genocidal intentions, who treat their own worse than their enemies, versus a civilized nation that has proven of it's peaceful intentions with the neighborhood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How is it that, as a civilized nation, you can’t acknowledge and remedy the wrongs?  Aren’t you painting all the Palestinians with a broad brush?
Click to expand...


Good luck demanding an apology from an ant who bit an elephant's ass.
How can I be the one painting it with a broad brush when for You Palestinian means exclusively Arabs, just can't have it both ways - pointing to an Arab-Jewish war  suggesting that a tiny state holds the same responsibility as 7 bigger Arab ones that initiated the whole war.

That's just out of any possible proportions that can allow agreement.
And we both know why You go demanding it from me and not the Arabs,  Israel is the only side with whom conversation is possible - but don't mistake it for an invitation to shift the wight on our account and "ride on our backs".


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?



See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Define "indigenous?"

Prior to the 4th Century AD the inhabitants of the Middle East were very different. Greeks, Medes, Persians, Hittites. All white European like peoples. A great drought in Africa dried major parts of the Mediterranean providing a path from North Africa into the Middle East, the migration of the Arabs. 

The North Africans engaged in pretty much total genocide of the indigenous populations, who were sparse and weak from a thousand years of fighting each other.Even before Muhammad, the Arabs were invaders and a conquering force.

There is not, nor has there ever been, a nation called Palestine. The Arab Invaders conquered the holy lands in the 8th century AD. Prior to that the Hebrews were the inhabitants.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Indigenous means native.  Originally or occurring naturally in a particular place.  Palestinian-Arabs are just as indigenous as Palestinian-Jews.



Indigeneity describes a culture, not individuals.  The culture of the Palestinian Arab peoples originated (occurred naturally) in another place. * It did not occur naturally in Israel, Judea and Samaria -- it was brought there through invasion and conquest and migration.*  And it over-took the local, naturally occurring, indigenous culture.  (But that indigenous culture survived both inside Israel and outside Israel).

It is the same in the Americas. The descendants of European colonizers to the Americas are NOT indigenous to the Americas.  They have a foreign culture which was transplanted from another place (where they ARE indigenous).  It doesn't matter how many generations go by -- the European culture did not originate in the Americas.  Those who practice the European culture are not indigenous to the Americas.  That does not in any way limit or eliminate European rights in America, but it DOES give rights to sovereignty to the First Nations peoples of the Americas.  

This is not especially difficult to understand. And it does not in any way limit or eliminate Palestinian Arab rights.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> That's not as ridiculous as saying that's your land because God told you so!



Actually, most indigenous cultures have a strong spiritual connection to a particular land which is reflected in their religious faith and theology.  

Not just the Jewish peoples but nearly every North American First Nations People, the Irish, Korea.  Those are just a few examples I am personally familiar with.  Its actually so common as to be part of the UN definition of "indigenous".


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
Click to expand...

It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.

Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.

And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.


----------



## Uncensored2008

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.
> 
> Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.
> 
> And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.
Click to expand...



What is a "Palestinian?" Is that like a Unicorn?

The Arabs did not originate in the Middle East and migrated about 1600 years back.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Uncensored2008 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.
> 
> Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.
> 
> And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What is a "Palestinian?" Is that like a Unicorn?
> 
> The Arabs did not originate in the Middle East and migrated about 1600 years back.
Click to expand...

Two corrections:

1)  T one precise, the Arab Muslims came during the 630s on to invade all outside Arabia.

2)  That makes it about 1400 years, and not 1600 as in your last post.  And they did not migrate, at first.  They invaded.  Once they had the land, as with the Europeans with Australia, the Americas, etc, then one can say that they immigrated or migrated.

And still, they would like to say that they are indigenous from anywhere and everywhere they now live.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Sixties Fan said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.
> 
> Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.
> 
> And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What is a "Palestinian?" Is that like a Unicorn?
> 
> The Arabs did not originate in the Middle East and migrated about 1600 years back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Two corrections:
> 
> 1)  T one precise, the Arab Muslims came during the 630s on to invade all outside Arabia.
> 
> 2)  That makes it about 1400 years, and not 1600 as in your last post.  And they did not migrate, at first.  They invaded.  Once they had the land, as with the Europeans with Australia, the Americas, etc, then one can say that they immigrated or migrated.
> 
> And still, they would like to say that they are indigenous from anywhere and everywhere they now live.
Click to expand...



The Arabs predate Islam. They came from North Africa to the Middle East in the late 3rd, early 4th century. 

Pre-Islamic Arabia - Wikipedia

The Africans pushed into Phoenicia first and instituted complete genocide. They then pushed East and South until the region was entirely under Arab control. They did not take Persia at that time as the Persians repelled them through force of arms..


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> [
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?



Have you ever heard the expression, "Men are afraid women will laugh at them.  Women are afraid men will kill them." (Margaret Atwood)?  I think it is relevant.  

Arabs also created a number of laws which were unacceptable, actually much more so -- such as laws removing nationality from Jews, and laws stripping Jews of all their property and rights to own it.  Some Arab countries still have different laws for Jews than for everyone else.  (You know what that is, yes?)  But more than that, the Arab nations created a culture of hatred and oppression and savagery that was so toxic and so dangerous that nearly all the Jews in those nations just chose to leave.  There is no question of Jews returning to those lands.  None.  Its an issue of survival.  Jews do not believe it would be safe for them to live in those lands.  (Hard enough these days in Europe).

Contrast that to the situation in Israel/Palestine.  While there are absentee property laws in Israel, there is no culture of hatred and oppression in Israel against the Arabs.  Which is not to say there is not some level of discrimination.  But there is no danger for Arabs in Israel.  The survival of Arabs in Israel is not in question.  They feel safe in returning.  

Looking at it another way... Stealing a loaf of bread isn't "right".  But if a person is starving, they might do it anyway.  And, as an onlooker, you would have compassion for that starving person who performs what is normally considered an immoral act in order to survive.  And you would have some level of discomfort asking that starving person to return the bread and starve to death.  The immoral act thus becomes the moral one.  

So are absentee property laws immoral?  Sure.  By today's standards, absolutely.  (The standards have changed drastically in the past 100 years.)  But it was and STILL IS a matter of Jewish survival.  Not just the survival of Israel -- but the survival of Jews.  It still is.  The only way for the Jewish people to protect the Jewish people is to hold a sovereign nation.  

What happened, as was normal in cases of civil war in those times and even later, was an exchange of population between the Arabs and the Jews.  The exchange happened in the context of the conflict and it was mutual and should be seen that way.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Arabs don't say that and you took land that wasn't yours to begin with.
> 
> You can't move into an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there.



Odd, don't you think, that the Arab Holy Place is built on top of the Jewish Holy Place.  What was that about not taking land that wasn't yours to begin with?  Odd, don't you think, that Muslims can pray in their third most holy place and yet Jews can't pray in their most holy place.  What was that about having more rights than the people already living there?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever heard the expression, "Men are afraid women will laugh at them.  Women are afraid men will kill them." (Margaret Atwood)?  I think it is relevant.
> 
> Arabs also created a number of laws which were unacceptable, actually much more so -- such as laws removing nationality from Jews, and laws stripping Jews of all their property and rights to own it.  Some Arab countries still have different laws for Jews than for everyone else.  (You know what that is, yes?)  But more than that, the Arab nations created a culture of hatred and oppression and savagery that was so toxic and so dangerous that nearly all the Jews in those nations just chose to leave.  There is no question of Jews returning to those lands.  None.  Its an issue of survival.  Jews do not believe it would be safe for them to live in those lands.  (Hard enough these days in Europe).
> 
> Contrast that to the situation in Israel/Palestine.  While there are absentee property laws in Israel, there is no culture of hatred and oppression in Israel against the Arabs.  Which is not to say there is not some level of discrimination.  But there is no danger for Arabs in Israel.  The survival of Arabs in Israel is not in question.  They feel safe in returning.
Click to expand...


Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.



> Looking at it another way... Stealing a loaf of bread isn't "right".  But if a person is starving, they might do it anyway.  And, as an onlooker, you would have compassion for that starving person who performs what is normally considered an immoral act in order to survive.  And you would have some level of discomfort asking that starving person to return the bread and starve to death.  The immoral act thus becomes the moral one.
> 
> So are absentee property laws immoral?  Sure.  By today's standards, absolutely.  (The standards have changed drastically in the past 100 years.)  But it was and STILL IS a matter of Jewish survival.  Not just the survival of Israel -- but the survival of Jews.  It still is.  The only way for the Jewish people to protect the Jewish people is to hold a sovereign nation.
> 
> What happened, as was normal in cases of civil war in those times and even later, was an exchange of population between the Arabs and the Jews.  The exchange happened in the context of the conflict and it was mutual and should be seen that way.



I understand what you are saying, and agree with the principle, but do not see that the principle is rightly applied in this case.  It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.  That is one thing.  It was a terrible thing to do to those people who just wanted to live there and fled a war. And the Arab state expulsions of the Jews was just as terrible.  And wrong.  The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?  I don't think so.  I think the Arab states should also make reparations or even an apology of some sort.

I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Uncensored2008 said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.
> 
> Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.
> 
> And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What is a "Palestinian?" Is that like a Unicorn?
> 
> The Arabs did not originate in the Middle East and migrated about 1600 years back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Two corrections:
> 
> 1)  T one precise, the Arab Muslims came during the 630s on to invade all outside Arabia.
> 
> 2)  That makes it about 1400 years, and not 1600 as in your last post.  And they did not migrate, at first.  They invaded.  Once they had the land, as with the Europeans with Australia, the Americas, etc, then one can say that they immigrated or migrated.
> 
> And still, they would like to say that they are indigenous from anywhere and everywhere they now live.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs predate Islam. They came from North Africa to the Middle East in the late 3rd, early 4th century.
> 
> Pre-Islamic Arabia - Wikipedia
> 
> The Africans pushed into Phoenicia first and instituted complete genocide. They then pushed East and South until the region was entirely under Arab control. They did not take Persia at that time as the Persians repelled them through force of arms..
Click to expand...

Yes, Arabs, as an ethnic group predate Islam.

Do you not mean that they took over North Africa after the 7th century CE?

There was no Islam in the 3rd and 4th century CE, not until the 7th century.



Approximate locations of some of the important tribes and Empire of the Arabian Peninsula at the dawn of Islam (approximately 600 CE / 50 BH).

-----------
Who are you actually referring to who would have come to the Land of Israel, etc during the 3rd or 4th centuries CE from Africa?  Which region?

Which one of the Kingdoms or clans, in the article, are you referring to when saying that they came in the 3rd or 4th centuries (BCE or CE ? )


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are too fucking funny, Rocco. Where do you get this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See?  You've most eloquently proven Rocco's point -- the Arab Palestinians (and their team of useful idiots) entirely dismissing Israeli (Jewish) suffering as though it does not exist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Rocco's usual slime piece against the Palestinians.
> 
> Israel will attack Palestinians daily and kill them by the thousands but will piss and moan about one Israel getting attacked. The one attack may be true but the presentation is out of the park.
> 
> And besides, it is Israel's war. It can stop it any time it wants.
Click to expand...

How many pom poms are you holding in your hand right now?

Rah, rah, rah!!!!

Arabs have the right to infiltrate and destroy Israeli property and even kill with bullets or rockets.

Israel must be a good girl.  After all, she is Jewish.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering its sovereignty?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignty?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
Click to expand...


I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.


----------



## toobfreak

Coyote said:


> *who is considered indigenous to Palestine?*




If you really must know:

The Arabian Oryx
The Striped Hyena and
The Arabian Gazelle.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> I'm talking really, about a particular group of Palestinians.  You don't think even an apology or acknowledgement that what was done (absentee property laws) is acceptable?  That what Israel did in that case was fine?  I honestly get the feeling folks feel Israel *does no wrong* and can not be held accountable for anything because of - but but the Palestinians!
> 
> What does this have to do with Israel surrendering it's sovereignity?  I don't understand what you mean.    If the Turks apologize for the Armenian Genocide are they surrendering their sovereignity?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever heard the expression, "Men are afraid women will laugh at them.  Women are afraid men will kill them." (Margaret Atwood)?  I think it is relevant.
> 
> Arabs also created a number of laws which were unacceptable, actually much more so -- such as laws removing nationality from Jews, and laws stripping Jews of all their property and rights to own it.  Some Arab countries still have different laws for Jews than for everyone else.  (You know what that is, yes?)  But more than that, the Arab nations created a culture of hatred and oppression and savagery that was so toxic and so dangerous that nearly all the Jews in those nations just chose to leave.  There is no question of Jews returning to those lands.  None.  Its an issue of survival.  Jews do not believe it would be safe for them to live in those lands.  (Hard enough these days in Europe).
> 
> Contrast that to the situation in Israel/Palestine.  While there are absentee property laws in Israel, there is no culture of hatred and oppression in Israel against the Arabs.  Which is not to say there is not some level of discrimination.  But there is no danger for Arabs in Israel.  The survival of Arabs in Israel is not in question.  They feel safe in returning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at it another way... Stealing a loaf of bread isn't "right".  But if a person is starving, they might do it anyway.  And, as an onlooker, you would have compassion for that starving person who performs what is normally considered an immoral act in order to survive.  And you would have some level of discomfort asking that starving person to return the bread and starve to death.  The immoral act thus becomes the moral one.
> 
> So are absentee property laws immoral?  Sure.  By today's standards, absolutely.  (The standards have changed drastically in the past 100 years.)  But it was and STILL IS a matter of Jewish survival.  Not just the survival of Israel -- but the survival of Jews.  It still is.  The only way for the Jewish people to protect the Jewish people is to hold a sovereign nation.
> 
> What happened, as was normal in cases of civil war in those times and even later, was an exchange of population between the Arabs and the Jews.  The exchange happened in the context of the conflict and it was mutual and should be seen that way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand what you are saying, and agree with the principle, but do not see that the principle is rightly applied in this case.  It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.  That is one thing.  It was a terrible thing to do to those people who just wanted to live there and fled a war. And the Arab state expulsions of the Jews was just as terrible.  And wrong.  The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?  I don't think so.  I think the Arab states should also make reparations or even an apology of some sort.
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
Click to expand...

I am sorry, and I wrote this before.

It was NOT mutual.

The Jews who lived in the Arab conquered lands did NOT lift weapons against their hosts, or host countries and ended up being expelled, as it happened with the Arabs in the Mandate for Palestine who from 1920 to 1948, and beyond, have done nothing but to lift arms and more in order to destroy Israel and the Jews.

There is absolutely NO comparison between the two.

There was no Jewish revolt agains the Arabs in those Arab countries which would have justified the expulsion and taking of land and other properties from the Jews as they were forced to leave or stay under Nazi Arab rules.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> It is all connected.  It is a cascade of event that has not reached its end.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The time is not right, and the people are not mentally set to address each other.
> 
> There is no question, that given the amount of anguish, suffering, injury and damage the Arab Palestinian has inflicted upon the Israelis, → if the world were still using the WWI standards and rules of engagement, the Israelis would pound the remaining Arab Palestinians into oblivion.
> 
> Between 1920 and 1916, the Arab Palestinian terrorist has inflicted over 3,700 deaths to the Israelis.  "During the six years of the first uprising (Dec. 9, 1987 to Sep. 9, 1993), 200 people were murdered. More than 1,000 Israelis were killed during the Palestinian War (September 2000-September 2005)."
> _*Sources*: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Terrorism Deaths in Israel; In Memory of the Victims of Palestinian Terror); Jerusalem Post, (January 4, 2009) _
> 
> If the United States had been the victim of Palestinian Terrorism on this scale, the source of these attacks _(West Bank and Gaza Strip)_ would probably have been introduced to a level of destruction equivalent to Tora Bora _(Customary and IHL not-with-standing)_.  It is not the apology _(admission of wrong doing)_, but they do not trust the Arab Palestinian until such time as the Hostile Arab Palestinian becomes neutralized and out of the frame.  But no one believes that the Arab Palestinians will accept an apology and move-on.  What will happen _(as near to a sure thing as anything on the planet)_ is that any official statement of that type will be taken and amplified for propaganda purposes, and to hold Israel criminally and civilly liable; while at the same time, absolving the terrorism and war crimes the Arab Palestinians have inflicted upon the Israels.  Hell, the Palestinian attack on the Olympic Village in Munich is enough to villainy to prosecute the Palestinian Leadership and their successor villains.  And the recently immortalized terrorist Dalal al-Mughrabi for machine-gunning a bus of unarmed passengers, including 12 children and call it heroic, is justified.
> 
> Israel, is focused on sovereignty.  And they will not take any level of risk that might endanger their sovereignty.  There is no way that the Arab Palestinians will own-up to the terrorism they have committed, on the grounds that they see it as justified.  What position do you think the Israelis will take.
> 
> Israel did what it had to do to insure its survival and sovereignty.  That single cause is justified every single day that the Hostile Arab Palestinians instigate a violent event and call it justified.
> 
> If I sound a little harsh here, it is not directed at you.  But I find that kindness and understanding of some people who believe that the Palestinians are so heroic and fighting for a just cause, that the Palestinians _(95% of the Arab Palestinians prowling the border fence never lived in Israel, let alone had Israel take something from them)_ are justified in any war crime, terrorist act or just plain criminal activity.  If you have ever felt the heat of a suicide bomb or the shock and shaking of a car explode in front of you, --- you will then know what it is to be afraid of these poor downtrodden Palestinians that want to push their way inside of Israel to kill as many Israelis as the can.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
Click to expand...

You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?

I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.

So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ,,,,
> I will add that there is also no question of the amount of anguish and suffering the Israelis have inflicted such as the use of white phosphorous in dense urban areas, the treatment of juveniles when arrested or in the military justice system.  The way settlers are allowed to attack Palestinians but if Palestinians throw stones the get arrested.  It IS a two way street and ACKNOWLEDGING that Israel has done some wrong things is not absolving the Palestinians of any of their actions. It is recognizing that underneath all this are people, who do have rights and legitimate wrongs should be recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
Click to expand...


No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.



This is not a fair or true assessment of what the laws actually say.  And maybe this is the true foundation of the problem.  The implication tends to be that Israel was ethnically cleansing the territory because they somehow hate Arabs.  Not true.  Not what the laws say.  Evidence of this in the fact that there is a large percentage of Arabs still in Israel (and in contrast nearly zero Jews remaining in Arab lands).  What the laws try to do (perhaps unsuccessfully) is to prevent HOSTILE Arabs (Arabs who "sought to prevent the establishment of the State of Israel") from returning.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Keep reading mainly, if not only, Pro Palestinian sources and above will continue to be the only "truth" you will be allowed to understand.
> 
> And again, please......
> 
> Stop saying that Israel and its supporters believe that Israel Never Does Anything Wrong, because that also comes from the sites and pro Palestinian BDS aimed at Israel.
> 
> If you would care to spend anytime reading the Pro Israel sites, you just might realize that what you believe is not quite what you have led yourself to think.
> 
> I, and others, have given plenty of examples on how Israel constantly has helped any and all Arabs who seek education, health care and jobs, from Gaza or the PA territories in Judea and Samaria.
> 
> May you find anything which shows that the opposite occurs, from Arab governments in Gaza and the PA towards Israelis, especially Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
Click to expand...

In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?

Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'

Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post


Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?

Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified

I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country

2)  on reports from many different sources.


One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.

I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.

If it correct I will say so.

If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.

Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?

That is not up to me or any of the others here.

We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.

And why it continues to this day.

Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.

Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.

Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.

Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.


You refer to our side's posts as opinions.

Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote

-----------------
Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I try to read a variety of sites, and avoid strongly pro one or the other.  Perhaps you should do the same.  Or read pro Pali sites to balance your view.
> 
> I frequently acknowledge the good things they do, their right to defend themselves and protect their people from terrorism.
> 
> Why would I trust pro Israel sites any more than pro Pali  sites?
> 
> If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
Click to expand...


Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel usually acknowledges things it has done wrong.*
> 
> Now, if the things you want Israel to acknowledge as doing wrong are NOT things it did wrong, but mere allegations from the Arab Palestinian side, than definitely Israel is NOT going to acknowledge anything it did not do wrong.
> 
> Do you have a few examples of what you think Israel has not admitted doing wrong in the past 5 to ten years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.
Click to expand...

Feel free


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bar for Palestinians to reclaim property was set very high and the bar for Jews to reclaim property much lower.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *This is not a fair or true assessment of what the laws actually say.*  And maybe this is the true foundation of the problem.  The implication tends to be that Israel was ethnically cleansing the territory because they somehow hate Arabs.  Not true.  Not what the laws say.  Evidence of this in the fact that there is a large percentage of Arabs still in Israel (and in contrast nearly zero Jews remaining in Arab lands).  What the laws try to do (perhaps unsuccessfully) is to prevent HOSTILE Arabs (Arabs who "sought to prevent the establishment of the State of Israel") from returning.
Click to expand...


You know ... I'm going to put this in another thread also - I'll end up derailing it since it is not really on indiginous people history.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking to Israel - I'm talking to *you*, unless you are a spokesperson for Israel.  Your statements in this forum.
> 
> 
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Feel free
Click to expand...


What topic title would you like?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Coyote,  et al,

I think that it has been said by me (and several others) before; but I'll say it again.



Coyote said:


> ⇒ ...  If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.


*(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)*

In the ≈ 100 years of violence, between the 1920 Riots ⇔ right up to the March to Return, several actors have participated at one time or another.  But the Jewish/Israelis and all the variations and factions that compose the Arab Palestinian component, have been locked together in conflict → continuously → for the entire time.  And they continue to be locked in a form of conflict.  The conventional forces have passed through at various times, but most all of the external actors _(excluding Iran and the Shia Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon)_ have faded away; just leaving the Israelis and the Arab Palestinians to work it out themselves. 

I think I said previously, there are no clean hands in this conflict.  Each side has deviated, from what is considered today, Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL).

*(DILEMMA)*

Today, we see a stereotypical incitement operation under the cover and concealment that is billed as a non-violent protest.  HAMAS has organized daily an estimated  20,000 --- 30,000 people to gather along the Gaza-Israel Border for the launch of the six-week "March of Great Return" _(sometimes bigger and sometimes smaller)_.   Several times, it has been asked:  IS this is a threat to breach the border.  If HAMAS could arrange the protests to simultaneously swamp the border, even an Israeli Infantry Brigade _(4000 to 5000 strong)_ could not turn back such an assault in a "non-lethal" way.

ANSWER:  It is a threat to Israel from a physical security and sovereignty standpoint.  It is a threat to Israel from an economic, political and diplomatic standpoint.  AND it is a threat to the regional peace.  

QUESTION:  What action do you expect _(using the Principle of Sufficient Reason)_ Israel to take if the Palestinian begin to swarm and swamp the border?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> I think that it has been said by me (and several others) before; but I'll say it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ⇒ ...  If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> 
> 
> *(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)*
> 
> In the ≈ 100 years of violence, between the 1920 Riots ⇔ right up to the March to Return, several actors have participated at one time or another.  But the Jewish/Israelis and all the variations and factions that compose the Arab Palestinian component, have been locked together in conflict → continuously → for the entire time.  And they continue to be locked in a form of conflict.  The conventional forces have passed through at various times, but most all of the external actors _(excluding Iran and the Shia Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon)_ have faded away; just leaving the Israelis and the Arab Palestinians to work it out themselves.
> 
> I think I said previously, there are no clean hands in this conflict.  Each side has deviated, from what is considered today, Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
> 
> *(DILEMMA)*
> 
> Today, we see a stereotypical incitement operation under the cover and concealment that is billed as a non-violent protest.  HAMAS has organized daily an estimated  20,000 --- 30,000 people to gather along the Gaza-Israel Border for the launch of the six-week "March of Great Return" _(sometimes bigger and sometimes smaller)_.   Several times, it has been asked:  IS this is a threat to breach the border.  If HAMAS could arrange the protests to simultaneously swamp the border, even an Israeli Infantry Brigade _(4000 to 5000 strong)_ could not turn back such an assault in a "non-lethal" way.
> 
> ANSWER:  It is a threat to Israel from a physical security and sovereignty standpoint.  It is a threat to Israel from an economic, political and diplomatic standpoint.  AND it is a threat to the regional peace.
> 
> QUESTION:  What action do you expect _(using the Principle of Sufficient Reason)_ Israel to take if the Palestinian begin to swarm and swamp the border?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Rocco, I think you are applying an argument to me that I am not making.  I have repeatedly said that Israel is in the right to to take action in defending it's sovereignty and protecting it's citizens regarding the swamping of it's border by huge numbers of hostile people, in particular if they are armed.  It's the right of every country.  Now, as with any other country the caveat is - least amount of force necessary to do the job.  

Though honestly, maybe it's time to think outside the box for some of this...

What if they created and utilized chemical weapons made of laughing gas?  Since teargas and smoke bombs seem less affective, use laughing gas. It's hard to be a hostile if you are laughing hysterically.  In addition, all along the border fences create a ditch, filled with marijuana - and if hostiles start to try and breech it, they have run through a mile of pot smoke, and they are bound to get high.  It's hard to be hostile if your high.

Alright, it's silly but it could work and pot could be a cash crop in the process.  

I am not objecting to Israel's actions vis a vis it's borders and with Hamas' incitement, though there are instances where those actions need to be examined, such as the shooting of Murtaja.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *You keep telling us that Israel will not acknowledge most of what it has done wrong, and when asked for a list ........where is it?*
> 
> I cannot make a statement about what Israel has failed to acknowledge as doing wrong, give my opinion, if you will not tell me some of the things you believe have not been addressed by Israel and simply brushed under the rug.
> 
> So, please, may I have a list of what you believe Israel has not dealt with as doing wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Feel free
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What topic title would you like?
Click to expand...

What is the bottom line of what we were discussing?  LOL

Israel not acknowledging being wrong sometimes or was it more than that?  Some people's view that Israel sometimes does not acknowledge or changes things in order not to harm Palestinians?

We were also discussing facts vs opinions.

And also discussing if Israel owed anything to the Arabs, since the Jews were eventually expelled from most Arab countries only two years later.  If both were equal and if they should be viewed in the same way.

I am not sure what the title should be.

Can anyone else help with the title for the next thread Coyote will be starting on the subject we were discussing?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I don't keep saying that.  When I said what I did I was referring to the Pro-Israel team on these boards.  When you post, you are stating your opinions on various issues.  Not Israel's opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Feel free
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What topic title would you like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is the bottom line of what we were discussing?  LOL
> 
> Israel not acknowledging being wrong sometimes or was it more than that?  Some people's view that Israel sometimes does not acknowledge or changes things in order not to harm Palestinians?
> 
> We were also discussing facts vs opinions.
> 
> And also discussing if Israel owed anything to the Arabs, since the Jews were eventually expelled from most Arab countries only two years later.  If both were equal and if they should be viewed in the same way.
> 
> I am not sure what the title should be.
> 
> Can anyone else help with the title for the next thread Coyote will be starting on the subject we were discussing?
Click to expand...


Well Israel does acknowledge wrong doing at times, not at other times - my comments were all directed however at what posters HERE say...not what Israel says.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which of the wars did Israel use phosphorus.  Has it not stopped doing it?  Is that not an acknowledgment by the Israeli government that it was not the right thing to do?
> 
> Israel 'to scrap phosphorus shells'
> 
> Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza - Diplomacy & Politics - Jerusalem Post
> 
> 
> Besides the phosphorus, what else do I need to check on?
> 
> Whatever I post from Israeli, or other sources who have been on the ground, has been verified
> 
> I do state my opinions with the knowledge:
> 1)  How the Israeli government operates to defend the country
> 
> 2)  on reports from many different sources.
> 
> 
> One cannot say that facts written or said on television about the events, especially when checked by several sources are nothing but "My opinion" on the matter, on what has happened.
> 
> I read very carefully sites like Ma'an, Al Jazeera and others, which so many on these thread post, be it articles or videos, as much as Susha and others do.
> 
> If it correct I will say so.
> 
> If it is not, I will do the necessary research and debunk it with the evidence I have found.
> 
> Will I be believed?  Will the material be believed?  Will it change any minds who have decided that Israel likes to kill Palestinians and steal Palestinian land?
> 
> That is not up to me or any of the others here.
> 
> We state the facts about what has led to the conflict between Muslims and Jews.  And why there was such a rejection of Jews being sovereign over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> And why it continues to this day.
> 
> Before Israel, the Jews could not freely express themselves in most countries.
> 
> Now, we have our country back, even if only part of it, and we are free to fight for our land and the truth about what is happening in the area and debunk any and all lies attributed to Israel, or any Israeli or Jew.
> 
> Are we going to be believed?  Maybe.
> 
> Sometimes we will win and people will see what is true, and sometimes they will not.
> 
> 
> You refer to our side's posts as opinions.
> 
> Does not that delegitimize in any one's mind, who does not like Israel, that such an  opinion might be true, even if it is not based on  facts?
> 
> "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
> 
> Daniel Patrick Moynihan - Wikiquote
> 
> -----------------
> Besides the phosphorus, could you let me know what other things Israel did wrong so that I may research it and give you my opinion on it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties, would you object if I start a new thread and move this post and our discussion to it?  I think we'll end up derailing this thread otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Feel free
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What topic title would you like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is the bottom line of what we were discussing?  LOL
> 
> Israel not acknowledging being wrong sometimes or was it more than that?  Some people's view that Israel sometimes does not acknowledge or changes things in order not to harm Palestinians?
> 
> We were also discussing facts vs opinions.
> 
> And also discussing if Israel owed anything to the Arabs, since the Jews were eventually expelled from most Arab countries only two years later.  If both were equal and if they should be viewed in the same way.
> 
> I am not sure what the title should be.
> 
> Can anyone else help with the title for the next thread Coyote will be starting on the subject we were discussing?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well Israel does acknowledge wrong doing at times, not at other times - my comments were all directed however at what posters HERE say...not what Israel says.
Click to expand...

What I say, is based on what I see in the news, on videos, etc.

It is not my "opinion", but I am referring to what reporters who were there, or IDF, etc investigation does bring up about what has happened and I always ad a link to it.

I do not think I understand what we say has to do with what Israel says, or does not.

I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.

And sorry, I do not think that any country would actually think of utilizing laughing gas or pot to try to stop people who want to invade a country and kill its population.

I just did a research on it and came out with nothing of the kind.

And my opinion, based on how many countries have used it and what the enemy is after, is that it would not be effective at all.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.


Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.



> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.


It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex. 

Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.



> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?


It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.  

Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.



> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.


Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Coyote,  et al,
> 
> I think that it has been said by me (and several others) before; but I'll say it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ⇒ ...  If you want me to stop saying that it seems like Israel can do no wrong than acknowledge wrong doing sometimes e instead of automatically defending everything.
> 
> 
> 
> *(ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)*
> 
> In the ≈ 100 years of violence, between the 1920 Riots ⇔ right up to the March to Return, several actors have participated at one time or another.  But the Jewish/Israelis and all the variations and factions that compose the Arab Palestinian component, have been locked together in conflict → continuously → for the entire time.  And they continue to be locked in a form of conflict.  The conventional forces have passed through at various times, but most all of the external actors _(excluding Iran and the Shia Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon)_ have faded away; just leaving the Israelis and the Arab Palestinians to work it out themselves.
> 
> I think I said previously, there are no clean hands in this conflict.  Each side has deviated, from what is considered today, Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
> 
> *(DILEMMA)*
> 
> Today, we see a stereotypical incitement operation under the cover and concealment that is billed as a non-violent protest.  HAMAS has organized daily an estimated  20,000 --- 30,000 people to gather along the Gaza-Israel Border for the launch of the six-week "March of Great Return" _(sometimes bigger and sometimes smaller)_.   Several times, it has been asked:  IS this is a threat to breach the border.  If HAMAS could arrange the protests to simultaneously swamp the border, even an Israeli Infantry Brigade _(4000 to 5000 strong)_ could not turn back such an assault in a "non-lethal" way.
> 
> ANSWER:  It is a threat to Israel from a physical security and sovereignty standpoint.  It is a threat to Israel from an economic, political and diplomatic standpoint.  AND it is a threat to the regional peace.
> 
> QUESTION:  What action do you expect _(using the Principle of Sufficient Reason)_ Israel to take if the Palestinian begin to swarm and swamp the border?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rocco, I think you are applying an argument to me that I am not making.  I have repeatedly said that Israel is in the right to to take action in defending it's sovereignty and protecting it's citizens regarding the swamping of it's border by huge numbers of hostile people, in particular if they are armed.  It's the right of every country.  Now, as with any other country the caveat is - least amount of force necessary to do the job.
> 
> Though honestly, maybe it's time to think outside the box for some of this...
> 
> What if they created and utilized chemical weapons made of laughing gas?  Since teargas and smoke bombs seem less affective, use laughing gas. It's hard to be a hostile if you are laughing hysterically.  In addition, all along the border fences create a ditch, filled with marijuana - and if hostiles start to try and breech it, they have run through a mile of pot smoke, and they are bound to get high.  It's hard to be hostile if your high.
> 
> Alright, it's silly but it could work and pot could be a cash crop in the process.
> 
> I am not objecting to Israel's actions vis a vis it's borders and with Hamas' incitement, though there are instances where those actions need to be examined, such as the shooting of Murtaja.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Israel should address why the Palestinians are protesting.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.


Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?

What would your research say?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Perhaps Israel should address why the Palestinians are protesting.



The Palestinian Arabs, as well as other Arabs in history, are protesting the establishment of Israel and the self-determination of the indigenous Jewish people in their homeland.  There is no way for Israel to address that and survive.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
> 
> Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.
> 
> Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.
Click to expand...


It is mutual in the sense that both sets of people were horribly affected.  You think of it in terms of a people, I think of it in terms of people.  To those Palestinians, who saw their property taken through unjust laws - it is no less tragic or wrong becuse their existence as a people was not endangered.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Israel should address why the Palestinians are protesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian Arabs, as well as other Arabs in history, are protesting the establishment of Israel and the self-determination of the indigenous Jewish people in their homeland.  There is no way for Israel to address that and survive.
Click to expand...

*Not!*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
> 
> Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.
> 
> Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is mutual in the sense that both sets of people were horribly affected.  You think of it in terms of a people, I think of it in terms of people.  To those Palestinians, who saw their property taken through unjust laws - it is no less tragic or wrong becuse their existence as a people was not endangered.
Click to expand...

Yes it was (is). Israel has consistently denied the existence of Palestinians as a people and Palestine as a country. Wipe them off the map and out of history.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
> 
> Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.
> 
> Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is mutual in the sense that both sets of people were horribly affected.  You think of it in terms of a people, I think of it in terms of people.  To those Palestinians, who saw their property taken through unjust laws - it is no less tragic or wrong becuse their existence as a people was not endangered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes it was (is). Israel has consistently denied the existence of Palestinians as a people and Palestine as a country. Wipe them off the map and out of history.
Click to expand...


When did your Magical Kingdom of Disney Pally’land become a country?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
> 
> Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.
> 
> Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is mutual in the sense that both sets of people were horribly affected.  You think of it in terms of a people, I think of it in terms of people.  To those Palestinians, who saw their property taken through unjust laws - it is no less tragic or wrong becuse their existence as a people was not endangered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes it was (is). Israel has consistently denied the existence of Palestinians as a people and Palestine as a country. Wipe them off the map and out of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did your Magical Kingdom of Disney Pally’land become a country?
Click to expand...

More proof that we need a stupid post button.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree, that is well put and it makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate your acknowledgement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a horrible thing to drive people out and then create laws to prevent them from returning or even claiming their property.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is.  Just like stealing a loaf of bread is a horrible thing.  But if it is necessary for survival the morality becomes a lot more complex.
> 
> Remember the purpose of the separation is not to punish a people either individually or collectively -- but to prevent a hostile group from having access to the Jewish people in order to ensure the Jewish people's literal physical survival, as well as the survival of her identity, traditions, culture and religion.  The morality becomes a whole lot more complex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that it was mutual doesn't change that does it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It wasn't mutual.  That is not what I meant.  When one people is fighting for survival and the other is not there is nothing mutual about it.  Not one of those Arab nations was under threat of survival from the Jewish people.  Not one.  Yes, it does change that.
> 
> Edited to add:  my bad, I brought up the word 'mutual'.  To be clear, the exchange of population was mutual -- the causes for it were not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I DO understand what you are saying, but I am very conflicted about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you.  I appreciate you saying that.  And I appreciate you being conflicted about it.  That is what good conversation does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is mutual in the sense that both sets of people were horribly affected.  You think of it in terms of a people, I think of it in terms of people.  To those Palestinians, who saw their property taken through unjust laws - it is no less tragic or wrong becuse their existence as a people was not endangered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes it was (is). Israel has consistently denied the existence of Palestinians as a people and Palestine as a country. Wipe them off the map and out of history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did your Magical Kingdom of Disney Pally’land become a country?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More proof that we need a stupid post button.
Click to expand...


You’re angry because you were called out on another of your baseless statements.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?
> 
> What would your research say?
Click to expand...


Nabi Saleh is an exclusive settlement of the Tamimi tribe originating in Arabia.
The Tamimi tribe is centered mainly in Hebron,

Arab tradition says that the tribe descends from prophet's companion Tamim a-Deraei تميم الداري, who received a land deed from the prophet himself and later settled in the city.

While the Tamimi tribe has concentrated the Arab source of Hebron, there are testimonies of the people of Hebron themselves that half of the city origins are Kurdish.

The reason for this is the wars of Islam against the Crusaders. The war was not done by the Arabs but by the Kurds and the Turks (even before the Ottoman Empire) and the army of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi was composed of a Kurdish command. After the conquest of the land, he transferred a large part of his army to Hebron in order to preserve the borders of the country from the Arab Bedouin. Within Hebron, the Arabs opposed the leadership of the Tamimi tribe, and what characterized the history of Hebron were the many wars between the Kurds and the Arabs.

If we go further back, the Nabi-Saleh settlement has it's roots in the city of Madaan-Saleh northern Arabia.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Israel should address why the Palestinians are protesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian Arabs, as well as other Arabs in history, are protesting the establishment of Israel and the self-determination of the indigenous Jewish people in their homeland.  There is no way for Israel to address that and survive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Not!*
Click to expand...


That is not what they are protesting?


----------



## Shusha

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?
> 
> What would your research say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nabi Saleh is an exclusive settlement of the Tamimi tribe originating in Arabia.
> The Tamimi tribe is centered mainly in Hebron,
> 
> Arab tradition says that the tribe descends from prophet's companion Tamim a-Deraei تميم الداري, who received a land deed from the prophet himself and later settled in the city.
> 
> While the Tamimi tribe has concentrated the Arab source of Hebron, there are testimonies of the people of Hebron themselves that half of the city origins are Kurdish.
> 
> The reason for this is the wars of Islam against the Crusaders. The war was not done by the Arabs but by the Kurds and the Turks (even before the Ottoman Empire) and the army of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi was composed of a Kurdish command. After the conquest of the land, he transferred a large part of his army to Hebron in order to preserve the borders of the country from the Arab Bedouin. Within Hebron, the Arabs opposed the leadership of the Tamimi tribe, and what characterized the history of Hebron were the many wars between the Kurds and the Arabs.
> 
> If we go further back, the Nabi-Saleh settlement has it's roots in the city of Madaan-Saleh northern Arabia.
Click to expand...


Simple research also demonstrates clearly that the culture of the people of Nabi Saleh is Arab and not indigenous.


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?
> 
> What would your research say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nabi Saleh is an exclusive settlement of the Tamimi tribe originating in Arabia.
> The Tamimi tribe is centered mainly in Hebron,
> 
> Arab tradition says that the tribe descends from prophet's companion Tamim a-Deraei تميم الداري, who received a land deed from the prophet himself and later settled in the city.
> 
> While the Tamimi tribe has concentrated the Arab source of Hebron, there are testimonies of the people of Hebron themselves that half of the city origins are Kurdish.
> 
> The reason for this is the wars of Islam against the Crusaders. The war was not done by the Arabs but by the Kurds and the Turks (even before the Ottoman Empire) and the army of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi was composed of a Kurdish command. After the conquest of the land, he transferred a large part of his army to Hebron in order to preserve the borders of the country from the Arab Bedouin. Within Hebron, the Arabs opposed the leadership of the Tamimi tribe, and what characterized the history of Hebron were the many wars between the Kurds and the Arabs.
> 
> If we go further back, the Nabi-Saleh settlement has it's roots in the city of Madaan-Saleh northern Arabia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Simple research also demonstrates clearly that the culture of the people of Nabi Saleh is Arab and not indigenous.
Click to expand...


Yep, and showing deep knowledge of ones  ancestral homeland is a great example of what it is to be indigenous. Sometimes I get too cocky


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Indigeneity describes a culture, not individuals.  The culture of the Palestinian Arab peoples originated (occurred naturally) in another place. * It did not occur naturally in Israel, Judea and Samaria -- it was brought there through invasion and conquest and migration.*  And it over-took the local, naturally occurring, indigenous culture.  (But that indigenous culture survived both inside Israel and outside Israel).
> 
> It is the same in the Americas. The descendants of European colonizers to the Americas are NOT indigenous to the Americas.  They have a foreign culture which was transplanted from another place (where they ARE indigenous).  It doesn't matter how many generations go by -- the European culture did not originate in the Americas.  Those who practice the European culture are not indigenous to the Americas.  That does not in any way limit or eliminate European rights in America, but it DOES give rights to sovereignty to the First Nations peoples of the Americas.
> 
> This is not especially difficult to understand. And it does not in any way limit or eliminate Palestinian Arab rights.


You were not given rights to Palestine, you took them.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Actually, most indigenous cultures have a strong spiritual connection to a particular land which is reflected in their religious faith and theology.
> 
> Not just the Jewish peoples but nearly every North American First Nations People, the Irish, Korea.  Those are just a few examples I am personally familiar with.  Its actually so common as to be part of the UN definition of "indigenous".


Are you including muslims?


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Odd, don't you think, that the Arab Holy Place is built on top of the Jewish Holy Place.  What was that about not taking land that wasn't yours to begin with?  Odd, don't you think, that Muslims can pray in their third most holy place and yet Jews can't pray in their most holy place.  What was that about having more rights than the people already living there?


There you go, making shit up again.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?
> 
> What would your research say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nabi Saleh is an exclusive settlement of the Tamimi tribe originating in Arabia.
> The Tamimi tribe is centered mainly in Hebron,
> 
> Arab tradition says that the tribe descends from prophet's companion Tamim a-Deraei تميم الداري, who received a land deed from the prophet himself and later settled in the city.
> 
> While the Tamimi tribe has concentrated the Arab source of Hebron, there are testimonies of the people of Hebron themselves that half of the city origins are Kurdish.
> 
> The reason for this is the wars of Islam against the Crusaders. The war was not done by the Arabs but by the Kurds and the Turks (even before the Ottoman Empire) and the army of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi was composed of a Kurdish command. After the conquest of the land, he transferred a large part of his army to Hebron in order to preserve the borders of the country from the Arab Bedouin. Within Hebron, the Arabs opposed the leadership of the Tamimi tribe, and what characterized the history of Hebron were the many wars between the Kurds and the Arabs.
> 
> If we go further back, the Nabi-Saleh settlement has it's roots in the city of Madaan-Saleh northern Arabia.
Click to expand...

Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.

So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, this is a recommendation that has been made often.



P F Tinmore said:


> Perhaps Israel should address why the Palestinians are protesting.


*(POINTS of REFERENCE)*
*

*
*RAMALLAH, April 5 (Xinhua) -- *
The Palestinians insist that they will not accept the resumption of unconditioned peace talks with Israel, a senior official stated on Tuesday.


*Saeb Erekat, chief Palestinian negotiator and Secretary General of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), told "Voice of Palestine" Radio that the Palestinians reject the notion of restarting the peace talks with Israel unconditionally.*
*Source: Xinhua   2016-04-05*
​*•  Abbas spokesman denounces TV report in which US officials said PA won't negotiate with Israel as 'outrageous incitement'  •*
By Khaled Abu Toameh 3 February 2018, 12:40 am

EXCERPT:
Abu Rudaineh said that the PA did not reject any offer to engage in negotiations aimed at implementing the two-state solution. “We have not rejected negotiations in principle,” he added.

“We remain committed to serious negotiations as a course to the establishment of the Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, based on the 1967 borders.”​



•  *The Borders of Palestine: A Brief Background*  •
The 1967 border, which is defined as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th 1967,  is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine. A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967. The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the occupied State of Palestine, including East Jerusalem.​*(COMMENT)*

This is the hangup.  It is craftily worded, but essentially demands a territorial _(do over/ replay)_ setback to 4 June 1967.  The day before the 1967 War.  The Peace Treaties for the 1967 War _(Israel and Jordan & Egypt)_ have settled the matter.  While I'm certain that, somewhere in history, there is a case where a 'third State' _(by Treaty Law means a State not a party to the treaty)_ can make demands on the what is already settled by treaty between the parties in conflict; I cannot think of one.  What the Palestinian Authority is doing, is making negotiations tied to a precondition that Israel recognizes and accept the June 4th 1967 Borders at the outset; thisis wholely outside Customary and International Law and unacceptable.

This is a case of the "third quasi-state" _(the Gaza Strip being Autonomous from the West Bank and the Ramallah Government)_, not liking the outcome of the war, trying to make demands a half Century later.  There should be no pre-conditions on the opening of negotiations.  It is a sit down and talk affair.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Slyhunter

Raze Gaza to the ground. Seal their borders and let them starve. They get nothing until they beg for conditions of surrender.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Every one had citizenship to some entity somewhere.  The Allied Powers wanted to eliminate the category now called today:  "Stateless People."



P F Tinmore said:


> [
> Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.
> So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.


*(COMMENT)*

Citizenship after WWI was to the Government of Palestine _(The British Mandate Administrator)_.  
•  _*CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS*_  •

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Every one had citizenship to some entity somewhere.  The Allied Powers wanted to eliminate the category now called today:  "Stateless People."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.
> So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Citizenship after WWI was to the Government of Palestine _(The British Mandate Administrator)_.
> •  _*CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS*_  •
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The Mandate was not a place. It could have no citizens.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> You were not given rights to Palestine, you took them.



And this is where you are entirely wrong.  Rights are inherent.  Indigenous peoples have inherent, inviolable rights to sovereignty on their historical homeland.  They don't have to be granted.  They only have to be recognized.  And they WERE recognized for the Jewish people in the Mandate for Palestine.  

And there is absolutely no argument that you could make which would exclude the Jewish people from these rights that can not also be used to exclude Arab Palestinian rights.  No matter what argument you make it will also apply to the Jewish people.

Indigenous?  Jewish people.
People of long history?  Jewish people.
People with continued presence?  Jewish people.
People removed from their land and wish to return?  Jewish people.
People who migrated there?  Jewish people.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> You were not given rights to Palestine, you took them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this is where you are entirely wrong.  Rights are inherent.  Indigenous peoples have inherent, inviolable rights to sovereignty on their historical homeland.  They don't have to be granted.  They only have to be recognized.  And they WERE recognized for the Jewish people in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> And there is absolutely no argument that you could make which would exclude the Jewish people from these rights that can not also be used to exclude Arab Palestinian rights.  No matter what argument you make it will also apply to the Jewish people.
> 
> Indigenous?  Jewish people.
> People of long history?  Jewish people.
> People with continued presence?  Jewish people.
> People removed from their land and wish to return?  Jewish people.
> People who migrated there?  Jewish people.
Click to expand...

Where does it say that you can kick out the local citizens and steal their land?

Link?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Read the entire sentence.  British Mandate Administrator  _(a person who performs official duties in some sphere, in this case, the High Commissioner.) _ I recommend that your go for the content and the meaning and not quibble _(argue or raise objections about a trivial matter)_. 

Did you deduce the "content."  IN the first decades of the 20th century, "citizenship" was about the state having both responsibility and jurisdiction over the individual.  You are like so many people, you think the citizenship confers some special right.  No!  It is about government authorities putting people in certain boxes for various purposes (taxes, labor force, military eligible, aged, etc, etc, etc).  

vr
R



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every one had citizenship to some entity somewhere.  The Allied Powers wanted to eliminate the category now called today:  "Stateless People."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.
> So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Citizenship after WWI was to the Government of Palestine _(The British Mandate Administrator)_.
> •  _*CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS*_  •
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Mandate was not a place. It could have no citizens.
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Read the entire sentence.  British Mandate Administrator  _(a person who performs official duties in some sphere, in this case, the High Commissioner.) _ I recommend that your go for the content and the meaning and not quibble _(argue or raise objections about a trivial matter)_.
> 
> Did you deduce the "content."  IN the first decades of the 20th century, "citizenship" was about the state having both responsibility and jurisdiction over the individual.  You are like so many people, you think the citizenship confers some special right.  No!  It is about government authorities putting people in certain boxes for various purposes (taxes, labor force, military eligible, aged, etc, etc, etc).
> 
> vr
> R
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every one had citizenship to some entity somewhere.  The Allied Powers wanted to eliminate the category now called today:  "Stateless People."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.
> So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Citizenship after WWI was to the Government of Palestine _(The British Mandate Administrator)_.
> •  _*CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS*_  •
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Mandate was not a place. It could have no citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

States and governments are the product of the peoples rights not a prerequisite.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Where does it say that you can kick out the local citizens and steal their land?



Where did I say that you could?


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> And this is where you are entirely wrong.  Rights are inherent.  Indigenous peoples have inherent, inviolable rights to sovereignty on their historical homeland.  They don't have to be granted.  They only have to be recognized.  And they WERE recognized for the Jewish people in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> And there is absolutely no argument that you could make which would exclude the Jewish people from these rights that can not also be used to exclude Arab Palestinian rights.  No matter what argument you make it will also apply to the Jewish people.
> 
> Indigenous?  Jewish people.
> People of long history?  Jewish people.
> People with continued presence?  Jewish people.
> People removed from their land and wish to return?  Jewish people.
> People who migrated there?  Jewish people.


Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.

You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.

You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.


----------



## Slyhunter

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And this is where you are entirely wrong.  Rights are inherent.  Indigenous peoples have inherent, inviolable rights to sovereignty on their historical homeland.  They don't have to be granted.  They only have to be recognized.  And they WERE recognized for the Jewish people in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> And there is absolutely no argument that you could make which would exclude the Jewish people from these rights that can not also be used to exclude Arab Palestinian rights.  No matter what argument you make it will also apply to the Jewish people.
> 
> Indigenous?  Jewish people.
> People of long history?  Jewish people.
> People with continued presence?  Jewish people.
> People removed from their land and wish to return?  Jewish people.
> People who migrated there?  Jewish people.
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
Click to expand...

blah blah blah. All this bickering would be over with if the Jews would stop pussy footing around and fight a real war against their enemy. Kill on sight until they surrender unconditionally or leave whichever comes first. All those terrorist crowding the fence should've been machine gun downed, not pot shotted.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

I'm not sure where you get this unsophisticated views.  But on the level "we" _(you and I and many people here)_ converse, you need to crank up your perceptions as to what these terms mean.



P F Tinmore said:


> States and governments are the product of the peoples rights not a prerequisite.


*(COMMENT)*

You know that "States and governments are the product of the people's rights."  For ≈ 5000 years, the most common form a government took was a monarchy.   And in an absolute monarchy, the rights of the people are "granted" by the sovereign; policed through his command of power.

A "State" is what has capacity.  That capacity is expressed by the "power:" the power held by one (_AKA the absolute sovereign)_, by a few _(anywhere from a ruling elite to chambers of the → aristocracy)_, or by many _(anywhere from a republic to a democracy)_.  And there are even more complex developments in "governments" (the established organizational construct) which is necessary for most effective control and operation of the "state."

You know from experience, that the rights of the citizens in America, is radically different than the rights of the citizens of Iran.  _(Used to demonstrate the spectrum of civil, political, and religious rights.)_  What we call inherent rights in America, may not be inherent rights in the 49 dictatorships in the world _(19 in Sub-Saharan Africa, 12 in the Middle East and North Africa, 8 in Asia-Pacific, 7 in Eurasia 2 in Americas and 1 in Europe)_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_

It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.



Billo_Really said:


> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.


*(COMMENT)*

No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:

ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.

ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.

ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.

ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.  ​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Really Rocco,your belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts,should have any claim to Palestine is in error...how can these Converts have any claim to this Land ?????only the Semitic Palestinians and Jew have claim to this Land....not some Gypo's from Central Asia and their decendents...to claim anything else is Bull...…..all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin and leave the Semitic Peoples to enjoy life....with respect...steven


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I for one, do a lot of research around what is alleged that Israel has done or said about any event, as I did about the Phosphorus.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, what is the story about Nabi Saleh?
> 
> What would your research say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nabi Saleh is an exclusive settlement of the Tamimi tribe originating in Arabia.
> The Tamimi tribe is centered mainly in Hebron,
> 
> Arab tradition says that the tribe descends from prophet's companion Tamim a-Deraei تميم الداري, who received a land deed from the prophet himself and later settled in the city.
> 
> While the Tamimi tribe has concentrated the Arab source of Hebron, there are testimonies of the people of Hebron themselves that half of the city origins are Kurdish.
> 
> The reason for this is the wars of Islam against the Crusaders. The war was not done by the Arabs but by the Kurds and the Turks (even before the Ottoman Empire) and the army of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi was composed of a Kurdish command. After the conquest of the land, he transferred a large part of his army to Hebron in order to preserve the borders of the country from the Arab Bedouin. Within Hebron, the Arabs opposed the leadership of the Tamimi tribe, and what characterized the history of Hebron were the many wars between the Kurds and the Arabs.
> 
> If we go further back, the Nabi-Saleh settlement has it's roots in the city of Madaan-Saleh northern Arabia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting. That means they got Palestinian citizenship after WWI.
> 
> So, what is their relationship with the Israeli occupation. There have been problems there for years.
Click to expand...


Yes everyone who lived in the land those days became subjects of a British govt.
The village was an insignificant settlement of mere 5 houses during the Arab Revolt.

Basically the family took part in the creation of 1st Pan-Arab secret society along with Arabs from Lebanon, Northern Syria and Iraq. Their aim was supporting the war effort of the Emir of Mecca, and creation of a unified Arab Empire on lands of all East-Asia, stretching from the Arabian peninsula to the Mediterranean.

Today the family is divided in their opinion on politics and future of the conflict:
* *Tayysir Tamimi *the Chief Sharia Judge appointed by Arafat holds radical religious views and frames the conflict as a war for Waqf lands to be ruled exclusively by Muslims , he was twice condemned by Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II.
* *Bassem Tamimi* and his family who take a more militant approach, participating in terror attacks and violent demonstration supported by the govt of Turkey.
** Sheikh Abdallah Tamimi of Hebron* *( the head of the tribe) *- condemns all Palestinian political fractions as radical anarchists, and supports Israeli sovereignty over Hebron.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.



Again, the rights of an indigenous peoples are not GIVEN -- they are inherent, inviolable rights. Its not a grant, its only a recognition of inherent, inviolable rights.  

In 1923 the rights of the Jewish people to the Mandate for Palestine were recognized by the international community and in law.  Those rights are not conditional and those rights were not recognized for any other peoples.


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, the rights of an indigenous peoples are not GIVEN -- they are inherent, inviolable rights. Its not a grant, its only a recognition of inherent, inviolable rights.
> 
> In 1923 the rights of the Jewish people to the Mandate for Palestine were recognized by the international community and in law.  Those rights are not conditional and those rights were not recognized for any other peoples.
Click to expand...

If you believe that,then why did the Zionist BRIBE some countries to vote on Israel's side in the UN 1948 vote???????


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  theliq,  _et al,_

I'm not sure that you and I are in the same book, let alone on the same page.



theliq said:


> Really Rocco,your belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts,should have any claim to Palestine is in error...how can these Converts have any claim to this Land ?????only the Semitic Palestinians and Jew have claim to this Land....not some Gypo's from Central Asia and their decendents...to claim anything else is Bull...…..all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin and leave the Semitic Peoples to enjoy life....with respect...steven


*(COMMENT)*

•  I did not say that I had a:  "belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts, should have any claim to Palestine"

✪  However the current territorial allocation came about, 70 years ago, because Article 16 passed the authority to the Allied Powers.
 ✪  The territorial allocation and the authority for allocation 70 years ago did not make a distinction between the various sects within the Jewish faith.  And that distinction did not alter immigration or self-determination.​•  The national liberation movement for the Jewish people is often referred to as Zionism.  Zionism is not a faith, but an approach to immigration and settlement in Israel _(the Jewish National Home)_. 

•  As to your comment that → "all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin" → is totally off kilter.  The entire purpose of establishing a Jewish National Home was to get all Jewish people a place that they could land, a safe haven, to protect themselves from those anti-Jewish governments that would use the color of law to persecute the Jewish People; and to avoid another shameful case like the SS St Louis.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Rocco,your belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts,should have any claim to Palestine is in error...how can these Converts have any claim to this Land ?????only the Semitic Palestinians and Jew have claim to this Land....not some Gypo's from Central Asia and their decendents...to claim anything else is Bull...…..all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin and leave the Semitic Peoples to enjoy life....with respect...steven
Click to expand...


Only Jews themselves get to decide who is part of their tribe.
Your opinions are meaningless.

Are You an Aborigine kangaroo, 
or are You just parking Your racist ass on a foreign land without being called for?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does it say that you can kick out the local citizens and steal their land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I say that you could?
Click to expand...

That is what happened. You seem to agree with that.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.


That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders. The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.

The right to self determination without external interference.
The right to independence and sovereignty.
The right to territorial integrity.
*Nobody* has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.

The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders. The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.
> 
> The right to self determination without external interference.
> The right to independence and sovereignty.
> The right to territorial integrity.
> *Nobody* has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.
> 
> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.
Click to expand...


And how do You view the Arab attempt to cede the land to Syria under the rule of a King from Mecca in this context?


----------



## Slyhunter

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders. The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.
> 
> The right to self determination without external interference.
> The right to independence and sovereignty.
> The right to territorial integrity.
> *Nobody* has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.
> 
> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.
Click to expand...

Palestinians shouldn't be claiming land that belongs to the Israelites.


----------



## Billo_Really

Slyhunter said:


> blah blah blah. All this bickering would be over with if the Jews would stop pussy footing around and fight a real war against their enemy. Kill on sight until they surrender unconditionally or leave whichever comes first. All those terrorist crowding the fence should've been machine gun downed, not pot shotted.


You terrorize them on a daily basis, but call them the terrorists.

You're just an inhuman piece of shit.


----------



## Billo_Really

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel. ​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

You can't give what you don't have.  Those territories are not yours and they never will be yours.  Your only option, is to get the fuck off that land.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Again, the rights of an indigenous peoples are not GIVEN -- they are inherent, inviolable rights. Its not a grant, its only a recognition of inherent, inviolable rights.
> 
> In 1923 the rights of the Jewish people to the Mandate for Palestine were recognized by the international community and in law.  Those rights are not conditional and those rights were not recognized for any other peoples.


And those Arabs have rights to.


----------



## Slyhunter

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can't give what you don't have.  Those territories are not yours and they never will be yours.  Your only option, is to get the fuck off that land.
Click to expand...

Make them leave. Fight a real war. Win or Lose like a man. Then accept things the way they are when you lose.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can't give what you don't have.  Those territories are not yours and they never will be yours.  Your only option, is to get the fuck off that land.
Click to expand...


Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish people longer than London has been for the Brits.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Only Jews themselves get to decide who is part of their tribe.


That is why you are an apartheid country.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only Jews themselves get to decide who is part of their tribe.
> 
> 
> 
> That is why you are an apartheid country.
Click to expand...


How so?
Do You think a tribe is obliged to accept anyone, or is it just a special demand for Jews?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_

Let's see if we can find, find anything at all, that is actually "TRUE."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

First:  The boundary, like many boundaries throughout the world, changes over time to accommodate new conditions.  What you are calling an international border is not now, nor has it ever been, an international border.  It is a series of segments that today consist of the Borders of Egypt and Jordan (by treaty), the enforced border of the Golan Heights annexation and the Blue Line segment under the 2000 letter with Lebanon.

Second:  The territory the Hostile Arab Palestinians, and yourself, call the international border "which is a whole nation of the Palestinian" IS NOT the "nation of Palestine."  It was the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and considered the Government of Palestine as administered solely by British Serving Officers and Foreign Service Officers, as lead by the High Commissioner.  That government was a legal entity that dissolved on the termination of the Mandate and was succeeded by the UN Palestine Commission, the successor government.  The State of Israel was declared and recognized and altered the boundaries yet again.  The 1948 War initiated by the Arab League, washed-out the opening boundaries of Israel and substituted the demarcations of the four Armistice Agreements, with Israel and the four principle conflict parties.  The Armistice Lines with Egypt were dissolved in 1979 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Egypt.  The Armistice Lines with Jordan were dissolved in 1994 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Jordan.  the formed Armistice Line with Syria was dissolved under the Annexation Law.   The Armistice Line or border with Lebanon is currently under the demarcation agreed upon in the Letter dated 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon.

Third:  The so-called "State of Palestine," does not have any actual sovereign borders it controls.  The Term Palestine, since 2012, can only now → generally recognized as the Government of Palestine.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.


*(COMMENT)*

None of this gets them citizenship.  The Article 30, Treaty of Lausanne, only formalizes the citizenship already in force by the High Commissioner.



P F Tinmore said:


> The right to self determination without external interference.
> The right to independence and sovereignty.
> The right to territorial integrity.



*(COMMENT)*

These three "Rights" that the Arab Palestinians claim are just as applicable to the  →  (wait for it)   →  the Israelis.  The difference is that the Jewish people participated in the program if establishing self-governing institutions  →  and the Steps Preparatory to Independence.  →  That culminated in the creation of a nation in 1948.  The Arab Palestinians rejected each invitation to join the process and instead decided to issue threats and embark on a path of violence.




P F Tinmore said:


> Nobody





P F Tinmore said:


> has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.


*(COMMENT)*

These three RIGHTS of the Palestinians do not establish an obligation for any nation  →  least of all the State of Israel.  

_*AND*_​I think that the currents events of the day show that the Hostile Arab Palestinian puppets of HAMAS do not have the slightest respect for those very same rights when dealing with Israel; which built a nation that is higher on the Human Development Index than any other nation in the Middle East _(including oil-rich nations)_.


P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.


*(COMMENT)*

"RESPECT" is earned.  And what have the Arab Palestinians done that the Israels, or anyone else, should give them respect?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Let's see if we can find, find anything at all, that is actually "TRUE."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> First:  The boundary, like many boundaries throughout the world, changes over time to accommodate new conditions.  What you are calling an international border is not now, nor has it ever been, an international border.  It is a series of segments that today consist of the Borders of Egypt and Jordan (by treaty), the enforced border of the Golan Heights annexation and the Blue Line segment under the 2000 letter with Lebanon.
> 
> Second:  The territory the Hostile Arab Palestinians, and yourself, call the international border "which is a whole nation of the Palestinian" IS NOT the "nation of Palestine."  It was the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and considered the Government of Palestine as administered solely by British Serving Officers and Foreign Service Officers, as lead by the High Commissioner.  That government was a legal entity that dissolved on the termination of the Mandate and was succeeded by the UN Palestine Commission, the successor government.  The State of Israel was declared and recognized and altered the boundaries yet again.  The 1948 War initiated by the Arab League, washed-out the opening boundaries of Israel and substituted the demarcations of the four Armistice Agreements, with Israel and the four principle conflict parties.  The Armistice Lines with Egypt were dissolved in 1979 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Egypt.  The Armistice Lines with Jordan were dissolved in 1994 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Jordan.  the formed Armistice Line with Syria was dissolved under the Annexation Law.   The Armistice Line or border with Lebanon is currently under the demarcation agreed upon in the Letter dated 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon.
> 
> Third:  The so-called "State of Palestine," does not have any actual sovereign borders it controls.  The Term Palestine, since 2012, can only now → generally recognized as the Government of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> None of this gets them citizenship.  The Article 30, Treaty of Lausanne, only formalizes the citizenship already in force by the High Commissioner.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The right to self determination without external interference.
> The right to independence and sovereignty.
> The right to territorial integrity.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> These three "Rights" that the Arab Palestinians claim are just as applicable to the  →  (wait for it)   →  the Israelis.  The difference is that the Jewish people participated in the program if establishing self-governing institutions  →  and the Steps Preparatory to Independence.  →  That culminated in the creation of a nation in 1948.  The Arab Palestinians rejected each invitation to join the process and instead decided to issue threats and embark on a path of violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> These three RIGHTS of the Palestinians do not establish an obligation for any nation  →  least of all the State of Israel.
> 
> _*AND*_​I think that the currents events of the day show that the Hostile Arab Palestinian puppets of HAMAS do not have the slightest respect for those very same rights when dealing with Israel; which built a nation that is higher on the Human Development Index than any other nation in the Middle East _(including oil-rich nations)_.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> "RESPECT" is earned.  And what have the Arab Palestinians done that the Israels, or anyone else, should give them respect?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

I know, the Palestinians don't have rights, blah, blah, blah.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Let's see if we can find, find anything at all, that is actually "TRUE."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ψ The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> 
> 
> That is true. That is Palestinian land as defined by international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> First:  The boundary, like many boundaries throughout the world, changes over time to accommodate new conditions.  What you are calling an international border is not now, nor has it ever been, an international border.  It is a series of segments that today consist of the Borders of Egypt and Jordan (by treaty), the enforced border of the Golan Heights annexation and the Blue Line segment under the 2000 letter with Lebanon.
> 
> Second:  The territory the Hostile Arab Palestinians, and yourself, call the international border "which is a whole nation of the Palestinian" IS NOT the "nation of Palestine."  It was the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and considered the Government of Palestine as administered solely by British Serving Officers and Foreign Service Officers, as lead by the High Commissioner.  That government was a legal entity that dissolved on the termination of the Mandate and was succeeded by the UN Palestine Commission, the successor government.  The State of Israel was declared and recognized and altered the boundaries yet again.  The 1948 War initiated by the Arab League, washed-out the opening boundaries of Israel and substituted the demarcations of the four Armistice Agreements, with Israel and the four principle conflict parties.  The Armistice Lines with Egypt were dissolved in 1979 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Egypt.  The Armistice Lines with Jordan were dissolved in 1994 and replaced by the new Treaty negotiated International Boundary with Jordan.  the formed Armistice Line with Syria was dissolved under the Annexation Law.   The Armistice Line or border with Lebanon is currently under the demarcation agreed upon in the Letter dated 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon.
> 
> Third:  The so-called "State of Palestine," does not have any actual sovereign borders it controls.  The Term Palestine, since 2012, can only now → generally recognized as the Government of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are citizens of their territory by treaty, by international and domestic law. With this comes the universal, inherent, inalienable rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> None of this gets them citizenship.  The Article 30, Treaty of Lausanne, only formalizes the citizenship already in force by the High Commissioner.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The right to self determination without external interference.
> The right to independence and sovereignty.
> The right to territorial integrity.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> These three "Rights" that the Arab Palestinians claim are just as applicable to the  →  (wait for it)   →  the Israelis.  The difference is that the Jewish people participated in the program if establishing self-governing institutions  →  and the Steps Preparatory to Independence.  →  That culminated in the creation of a nation in 1948.  The Arab Palestinians rejected each invitation to join the process and instead decided to issue threats and embark on a path of violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> has the right to violate the rights of others. So, when the Palestinians make this claim it is in compliance with international law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> These three RIGHTS of the Palestinians do not establish an obligation for any nation  →  least of all the State of Israel.
> 
> _*AND*_​I think that the currents events of the day show that the Hostile Arab Palestinian puppets of HAMAS do not have the slightest respect for those very same rights when dealing with Israel; which built a nation that is higher on the Human Development Index than any other nation in the Middle East _(including oil-rich nations)_.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> "RESPECT" is earned.  And what have the Arab Palestinians done that the Israels, or anyone else, should give them respect?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know, the Palestinians don't have rights, blah, blah, blah.
Click to expand...


Of course they do, the Jewish Palestinians worked and established a vibrant state,
those on the other side of the river should try that too, rather than trying to overthrow governments and drag their own dead on the streets.

But who need life when there's Jihad and _"honor"_...


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> And those Arabs have rights to.


Never, ever have I argued otherwise.  I consistently argue in favor of the rights of BOTH people.  You are the one who consistently argues against the rights of the Jewish people.  Case in point.  Your post right above this one:



Billo_Really said:


> You can't give what you don't have.  Those territories are not yours and they never will be yours.  Your only option, is to get the fuck off that land.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does it say that you can kick out the local citizens and steal their land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I say that you could?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is what happened. You seem to agree with that.
Click to expand...


What happened was some of the local citizens were hostile and began a civil war to prevent the establishment of the Jewish State.  As a result of that conflict (still on-going) a great many people on both sides were displaced.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians are not asking for anything special. They merely ask that their inalienable rights be respected.



Their inalienable rights will be respected.  As soon as the hostilities cease.  

One of the requirements of Statehood and recognition is peace and security.  And recognition of equal rights and self-determination.  

*Article 1*
_The Purposes of the United Nations are:_

_To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;_
_To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;_
_To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and_
_To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends._


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Their inalienable rights will be respected. As soon as the hostilities cease.


So, when is Israel going to cease hostilities.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their inalienable rights will be respected. As soon as the hostilities cease.
> 
> 
> 
> So, when is Israel going to cease hostilities.
Click to expand...


Israel ceased hostilities in 1947, again in 1949, again in 1967, in 1973, in 1979, in 1993, in 1994, again in 2005, and again in 2009, and 2012, and 2014.  

When will Arab Palestinians cease the hostilities?  For example, the ones they started just this spring?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their inalienable rights will be respected. As soon as the hostilities cease.
> 
> 
> 
> So, when is Israel going to cease hostilities.
Click to expand...


You obviously missed it but it's your islamic terrorist heroes who are creating the hostilities. 

The IDF is protecting Israel citizens from the barbarians at the security fence who are trying to invade.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> How so?
> Do You think a tribe is obliged to accept anyone, or is it just a special demand for Jews?


If only Jews can decide, you are obviously not a democracy.

You are an apartheid nation, worse than South Africa.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> How so?
> Do You think a tribe is obliged to accept anyone, or is it just a special demand for Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> If only Jews can decide, you are obviously not a democracy.
> 
> You are an apartheid nation, worse than South Africa.
Click to expand...

This is off topic, BUT.....

You do not care that there are Arabs and other non Jews in the Knesset, aka, Israeli Parliament.

SO MUCH  FOR APARTHEID IN  ISRAEL.

Find us ONE  Non Muslim  in ANY of the Parliaments in the Muslim/ Arab world

Take your time


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Never, ever have I argued otherwise.  I consistently argue in favor of the rights of BOTH people.  You are the one who consistently argues against the rights of the Jewish people.  Case in point.  Your post right above this one:


I was referring to the occupied territories.  You don't occupy something you own.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never, ever have I argued otherwise.  I consistently argue in favor of the rights of BOTH people.  You are the one who consistently argues against the rights of the Jewish people.  Case in point.  Your post right above this one:
> 
> 
> 
> I was referring to the occupied territories.  You don't occupy something you own.
Click to expand...

Jews do not "Occupy" their own ancestral homeland of Judea and Samaria.

Judea, from the word Judah, one of Jacob's sons, one of the 12 tribes of Israel.

It belongs to the Jewish people.  It is in dispute because the Arab Hashemites had taken it by force in 1948 and expelled all of the Jews from their homes and lands there.

And it was not the first time they did it in that century.  And then, they tried it again in 1973.

Jewish Ancient homeland cannot ever be considered Arab land, or Roman Land, or Greek Land, or Crusader's land, or British Land, or Ottoman Land...........

It has always been, and will continue to be (including all of TranJordan and Samaria,   Jewish ancient homeland.


Repeat your nonsense until all the vultures come down on your garbage.  It will not change a thing.


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> This is off topic, BUT.....
> 
> You do not care that there are Arabs and other non Jews in the Knesset, aka, Israeli Parliament.
> 
> SO MUCH  FOR APARTHEID IN  ISRAEL.
> 
> Find us ONE  Non Muslim  in ANY of the Parliaments in the Muslim/ Arab world
> 
> Take your time


In East Jerusalem, what do you call...

_...the  *“Center of Life Policy,”* where people who are Palestinian have to continually prove that they live there.  And if, for example, Palestinians spend too much time in the West Bank, they lose their residency.
_​What do you call...

_...the *Citizenship and Entry Law*. It blocks people who have residency in Gaza or the West Bank from marrying people who are citizens of Israel. The point is to prevent a growth of the Palestinian population within Israel.
_​That's apartheid!


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> Jews do not "Occupy" their own ancestral homeland of Judea and Samaria.
> 
> Judea, from the word Judah, one of Jacob's sons, one of the 12 tribes of Israel.
> 
> It belongs to the Jewish people.  It is in dispute because the Arab Hashemites had taken it by force in 1948 and expelled all of the Jews from their homes and lands there.
> 
> And it was not the first time they did it in that century.  And then, they tried it again in 1973.
> 
> Jewish Ancient homeland cannot ever be considered Arab land, or Roman Land, or Greek Land, or Crusader's land, or British Land, or Ottoman Land...........
> 
> It has always been, and will continue to be (including all of TranJordan and Samaria,   Jewish ancient homeland.


If Judea and Samaria is in the West Bank, then yes you do.  That is land you took during a war.  And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.



Sixties Fan said:


> Repeat your nonsense until all the vultures come down on your garbage.  It will not change a thing.


That's not surprising, since you treat everyone like garbage.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is off topic, BUT.....
> 
> You do not care that there are Arabs and other non Jews in the Knesset, aka, Israeli Parliament.
> 
> SO MUCH  FOR APARTHEID IN  ISRAEL.
> 
> Find us ONE  Non Muslim  in ANY of the Parliaments in the Muslim/ Arab world
> 
> Take your time
> 
> 
> 
> In East Jerusalem, what do you call...
> 
> _...the  *“Center of Life Policy,”* where people who are Palestinian have to continually prove that they live there.  And if, for example, Palestinians spend too much time in the West Bank, they lose their residency.
> _​What do you call...
> 
> _...the *Citizenship and Entry Law*. It blocks people who have residency in Gaza or the West Bank from marrying people who are citizens of Israel. The point is to prevent a growth of the Palestinian population within Israel.
> _​That's apartheid!
Click to expand...

You know nothing about the laws and why they do exist.
The Arabs are welcome to apply for citizenship if they live in Israel.  Some do, some don't .

If anyone with a green card spends over 6 months outside they USA, goodbye green card  

There are enough Arab terrorists already living in Israel, as residents or citizens, for Israel to want to have even more of them.

Gotta protect the whole population somehow.

That insults your senses, too bad.   That is what vultures do.  Feel insulted when things do not go their way, and there aren't enough dead Jews to munch on.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews do not "Occupy" their own ancestral homeland of Judea and Samaria.
> 
> Judea, from the word Judah, one of Jacob's sons, one of the 12 tribes of Israel.
> 
> It belongs to the Jewish people.  It is in dispute because the Arab Hashemites had taken it by force in 1948 and expelled all of the Jews from their homes and lands there.
> 
> And it was not the first time they did it in that century.  And then, they tried it again in 1973.
> 
> Jewish Ancient homeland cannot ever be considered Arab land, or Roman Land, or Greek Land, or Crusader's land, or British Land, or Ottoman Land...........
> 
> It has always been, and will continue to be (including all of TranJordan and Samaria,   Jewish ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> If Judea and Samaria is in the West Bank, then yes you do.  That is land you took during a war.  And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeat your nonsense until all the vultures come down on your garbage.  It will not change a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not surprising, since you treat everyone like garbage.
Click to expand...

You have it upside down.

It was Judea and Samaria for thousands of years, and called the "West bank" only as long as the Hashemite Jordanians managed to steal it, for about 19 years.

It continues to be Judea and Samaria, and always will be.


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Rocco,your belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts,should have any claim to Palestine is in error...how can these Converts have any claim to this Land ?????only the Semitic Palestinians and Jew have claim to this Land....not some Gypo's from Central Asia and their decendents...to claim anything else is Bull...…..all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin and leave the Semitic Peoples to enjoy life....with respect...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only Jews themselves get to decide who is part of their tribe.
> Your opinions are meaningless.
> 
> Are You an Aborigine kangaroo,
> or are You just parking Your racist ass on a foreign land without being called for?
Click to expand...

I'm right though as always...no need to be nasty about our First Nation Peoples,the Aboriginals who mastered this Land over 60,000 years ago.

You have a problem...….It is you yourself


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, Sour Grapes, _et al,_
> 
> It makes absolutely no difference today, on the accuracy of your tear-jerking criticism of the decisions made between 1918 _(Armistice of Mudros when the Ottoman Empire surrendered)_ and 1949 _(when the four Israel-Arab took effect)_.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those rights were recognized _*PROVIDED*_ you did not prejudice the existing, indigenous, non-Jewish population.  But you did.  Then, as the British were leaving, you took even more land that you were originally given.
> 
> You violated the Mandate, you violated the rights of the non-Jewish population, which was the majority at that time; and you've been violating human rights and dignity ever since.
> 
> You are an evil, apartheid nation, with no regard for human life.  And your actions have completely shit on the memories of everyone who lost their lives in the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No criticism you make today, makes any different on the effective control the Israelis not maintain.  There is no practical way of giving a territorial advantage to the Hostile Arab Palestinians that have a standing policy:
> 
> ψ  The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
> 
> ψ  Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.
> 
> ψ  The unity of the Palestinian land: The West Bank (including Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip and the occupied land of 1948, one land with all its geography, it is one unit, not part separated from the other, which is a whole nation of the Palestinian people.
> 
> ψ  Hamas and its allies told the protesters that the “March of Return” marked the beginning of the “liberation of all of Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.” In other words, the Palestinians were told that infiltrating the border with Israel would be the first step toward destroying Israel.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Rocco,your belief that a load of NON JEWISH converts,should have any claim to Palestine is in error...how can these Converts have any claim to this Land ?????only the Semitic Palestinians and Jew have claim to this Land....not some Gypo's from Central Asia and their decendents...to claim anything else is Bull...…..all Zionists should be returned to their Country of Origin and leave the Semitic Peoples to enjoy life....with respect...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only Jews themselves get to decide who is part of their tribe.
> Your opinions are meaningless.
> 
> Are You an Aborigine kangaroo,
> or are You just parking Your racist ass on a foreign land without being called for?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm right though as always...no need to be nasty about our First Nation Peoples,the Aboriginals who mastered this Land over 60,000 years ago.
> 
> You have a problem...….It is you yourself
Click to expand...


What is the problem?

Tell me, You don't call Yourself indigenous or even native Australian right?
My wive's uncles who have been living in Australia for 4 generations don't call themselves that either, they're simply Jews citizens of Australia, as there're Afghani and Japanese citizens of Australia.

The problem is on Team P side which needs Jews to make Arabs indigenous to Judea. 
It doesn't really go further than that, even the Canaanite claim was taught to Arabs by a Jewish Youth movement, Canaanism was an alternative political philosophy. Certain Jews thought that by bringing the Hebrew to the whole region would also revive an alternative culture to the Arab one, on the basis of which we could find more common ground.

But the Arabs in Levant really have no idea of who or what were the Canaanites, they always end up comparing them to Arabs. If they knew they wouldn't claim to be a tribe of Greek sea people, but Moabites, just to have a basic royal family claim .But they insist on calling themselves "invaders" in the Canaanite language.

Anyhow the only traces of indigenous culture of the Canaanite period can be seen in the Jewish Hebrew culture, the only ones who have the language, bases all its' heritage on the seasons of that specific land...and basically the only extensive source of knowledge about that culture.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> How so?
> Do You think a tribe is obliged to accept anyone, or is it just a special demand for Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> If only Jews can decide, you are obviously not a democracy.
> 
> You are an apartheid nation, worse than South Africa.
Click to expand...


Using Your logic Greece is an apartheid as well, because Arabs and Turks who live in Greece are not called ethnic Greeks, what's that has to do with democracy?

I don't think there're many places in the middle east such as Israel, where a wide variety of ethnicities, cultures and religions feel comfortable to express their identity simultaniously without stepping on each other's feet, in spite of all the clashes it's not Vatican or Mecca and Medina. It's not even Italy where mosques were banned.


----------



## fncceo

Billo_Really said:


> And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.



Well ... see ... you _say _that.







There isn't a power on earth that can take it away.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews do not "Occupy" their own ancestral homeland of Judea and Samaria.
> 
> Judea, from the word Judah, one of Jacob's sons, one of the 12 tribes of Israel.
> 
> It belongs to the Jewish people.  It is in dispute because the Arab Hashemites had taken it by force in 1948 and expelled all of the Jews from their homes and lands there.
> 
> And it was not the first time they did it in that century.  And then, they tried it again in 1973.
> 
> Jewish Ancient homeland cannot ever be considered Arab land, or Roman Land, or Greek Land, or Crusader's land, or British Land, or Ottoman Land...........
> 
> It has always been, and will continue to be (including all of TranJordan and Samaria,   Jewish ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> If Judea and Samaria is in the West Bank, then yes you do.  That is land you took during a war.  And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Repeat your nonsense until all the vultures come down on your garbage.  It will not change a thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not surprising, since you treat everyone like garbage.
Click to expand...




Billo_Really said:


> If Judea and Samaria is in the West Bank, then yes you do. That is land you took during a war. And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.


The Palestinians just call it occupied Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

fncceo said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well ... see ... you _say _that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't a power on earth that can take it away.
Click to expand...

And Israel can *mooch* the guns to do it.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> And it is land, you will not ever be allowed to keep.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well ... see ... you _say _that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't a power on earth that can take it away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And Israel can *mooch* the guns to do it.
Click to expand...


Link?


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> You know nothing about the laws and why they do exist.
> The Arabs are welcome to apply for citizenship if they live in Israel.  Some do, some don't .
> 
> If anyone with a green card spends over 6 months outside they USA, goodbye green card
> 
> There are enough Arab terrorists already living in Israel, as residents or citizens, for Israel to want to have even more of them.
> 
> Gotta protect the whole population somehow.
> 
> That insults your senses, too bad.   That is what vultures do.  Feel insulted when things do not go their way, and there aren't enough dead Jews to munch on.


Don't give me that shit!  Those same laws don't apply to Jews.  That is an apartheid system.


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> You have it upside down.
> 
> It was Judea and Samaria for thousands of years, and called the "West bank" only as long as the Hashemite Jordanians managed to steal it, for about 19 years.
> 
> It continues to be Judea and Samaria, and always will be.


The bible doesn't hold up in court.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Using Your logic Greece is an apartheid as well, because Arabs and Turks who live in Greece are not called ethnic Greeks, what's that has to do with democracy?
> 
> I don't think there're many places in the middle east such as Israel, where a wide variety of ethnicities, cultures and religions feel comfortable to express their identity simultaniously without stepping on each other's feet, in spite of all the clashes it's not Vatican or Mecca and Medina. It's not even Italy where mosques were banned.


Palestinians are treated like 2nd class citizens and don't live under the same laws as Jewish-Israelis do.


----------



## Billo_Really

fncceo said:


> Well ... see ... you _say _that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't a power on earth that can take it away.


Funny, Germany thought the same thing.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well ... see ... you _say _that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There isn't a power on earth that can take it away.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny, Germany thought the same thing.
Click to expand...


Isn't Britain ruled by a German dynasty, like Russia was once...or still?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using Your logic Greece is an apartheid as well, because Arabs and Turks who live in Greece are not called ethnic Greeks, what's that has to do with democracy?
> 
> I don't think there're many places in the middle east such as Israel, where a wide variety of ethnicities, cultures and religions feel comfortable to express their identity simultaniously without stepping on each other's feet, in spite of all the clashes it's not Vatican or Mecca and Medina. It's not even Italy where mosques were banned.
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians are treated like 2nd class citizens and don't live under the same laws as Jewish-Israelis do.
Click to expand...


What do You mean that there's a law that Rabbis are not allowed to circumcise Arabs?
In Israel an Arab Judge sends a President and PM's to jail.
There's no other country in the middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy more rights and freedom.

If You have a better settlement, show me an example.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Using Your logic Greece is an apartheid as well, because Arabs and Turks who live in Greece are not called ethnic Greeks, what's that has to do with democracy?
> 
> I don't think there're many places in the middle east such as Israel, where a wide variety of ethnicities, cultures and religions feel comfortable to express their identity simultaniously without stepping on each other's feet, in spite of all the clashes it's not Vatican or Mecca and Medina. It's not even Italy where mosques were banned.
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians are treated like 2nd class citizens and don't live under the same laws as Jewish-Israelis do.
Click to expand...



Do you mean Israeli Arabs?  They are full citizens.  My grandmother was treated by Arab doctors and nurses in Haifa.  Do you mean Palestinians on the West Bank?  They are under the PA's control.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Isn't Britain ruled by a German dynasty, like Russia was once...or still?


They were ruled by the Romans.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> What do You mean that there's a law that Rabbis are not allowed to circumcise Arabs?
> In Israel an Arab Judge sends a President and PM's to jail.
> There's no other country in the middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy more rights and freedom.
> 
> If You have a better settlement, show me an example.


You're full of shit!

_*Laws pertaining to Citizenship and Identity*
Palestinian identity is not recognized in Israeli law or society: Palestinians are referred to as Arab Israelis

The most important immigration laws—including *the Law of Return {1950}1 and the Citizenship Law {1952}*,- privilege Jews and Jewish immigration over non-Jews. Jews are granted the right to immigrate and become Israeli citizens even if they have no connection to Israel,* while 750,000 Palestinians and their descendants expelled in 1948 have no such right*. It is nearly impossible for Palestinians outside Israel to become Israeli citizens.

*Population Registry Law {1965}* –Requires all residents of Israel to register their nationality [i.e., Jewish, Arab, Druze] with the Population Registry and obtain an identity card carrying this information. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Says: *“a dual system of law discriminates between Jewish Israelis and indigenous Palestinians based on a constructed status of 'Jewish nationality'*. This prejudicial application of law is apparent in all processes of the legal system, from the rights to information and fair trial to detention and prison treatment.”

*Identity Certificate [Possession and Presentation] Law {1982}* –Residents must carry identity cards at all times and present them to "senior police officers,” to the heads of local authorities, or to police officers or soldiers on duty when requested to do so. *Jewish citizens are seldom asked to present their cards, while Palestinians often are.*

*Family Unification {2003} *– Under the 2003 policy for "family unification" non-citizen spouses and children of Arab Israeli citizens are prohibited from entering Israel [and living with their spouse/parent]. This means* if you are a Palestinian from outside Israel, married to an Israeli, you are barred from living with your spouse in Israel. *This does not apply to any other nationality beside Arabs. This “interim” provision has been regularly extended, most recently in January, 2011.

*Serving in the armed forces* -Israeli Jews (except some orthodox Jews) have to serve in the Israeli army when they turn 18.* Most Palestinians are forbidden to serve in the army.* Many of the benefits of society are given to people who have served. Preferential treatment of housing, education and other services are given to army veterans. 

*The Citizenship Law{2008} * -Several attempts have been made in recent years to make it possible to strip Israeli citizenship for various reasons related to alleged “disloyalty” to the state or “breach of trust.” All of these attempts have indirectly targeted the citizenship rights of Palestinian citizens.* This law allows the citizenship of an Israeli citizen to be revoked on the grounds of “breach of trust or disloyalty to the state.”* “Breach of trust” is broadly defined._​Fuck you and your apartheid state!


----------



## Hollie

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do You mean that there's a law that Rabbis are not allowed to circumcise Arabs?
> In Israel an Arab Judge sends a President and PM's to jail.
> There's no other country in the middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy more rights and freedom.
> 
> If You have a better settlement, show me an example.
> 
> 
> 
> You're full of shit!
> 
> _*Laws pertaining to Citizenship and Identity*
> Palestinian identity is not recognized in Israeli law or society: Palestinians are referred to as Arab Israelis
> 
> The most important immigration laws—including *the Law of Return {1950}1 and the Citizenship Law {1952}*,- privilege Jews and Jewish immigration over non-Jews. Jews are granted the right to immigrate and become Israeli citizens even if they have no connection to Israel,* while 750,000 Palestinians and their descendants expelled in 1948 have no such right*. It is nearly impossible for Palestinians outside Israel to become Israeli citizens.
> 
> *Population Registry Law {1965}* –Requires all residents of Israel to register their nationality [i.e., Jewish, Arab, Druze] with the Population Registry and obtain an identity card carrying this information. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Says: *“a dual system of law discriminates between Jewish Israelis and indigenous Palestinians based on a constructed status of 'Jewish nationality'*. This prejudicial application of law is apparent in all processes of the legal system, from the rights to information and fair trial to detention and prison treatment.”
> 
> *Identity Certificate [Possession and Presentation] Law {1982}* –Residents must carry identity cards at all times and present them to "senior police officers,” to the heads of local authorities, or to police officers or soldiers on duty when requested to do so. *Jewish citizens are seldom asked to present their cards, while Palestinians often are.*
> 
> *Family Unification {2003} *– Under the 2003 policy for "family unification" non-citizen spouses and children of Arab Israeli citizens are prohibited from entering Israel [and living with their spouse/parent]. This means* if you are a Palestinian from outside Israel, married to an Israeli, you are barred from living with your spouse in Israel. *This does not apply to any other nationality beside Arabs. This “interim” provision has been regularly extended, most recently in January, 2011.
> 
> *Serving in the armed forces* -Israeli Jews (except some orthodox Jews) have to serve in the Israeli army when they turn 18.* Most Palestinians are forbidden to serve in the army.* Many of the benefits of society are given to people who have served. Preferential treatment of housing, education and other services are given to army veterans.
> 
> *The Citizenship Law{2008} * -Several attempts have been made in recent years to make it possible to strip Israeli citizenship for various reasons related to alleged “disloyalty” to the state or “breach of trust.” All of these attempts have indirectly targeted the citizenship rights of Palestinian citizens.* This law allows the citizenship of an Israeli citizen to be revoked on the grounds of “breach of trust or disloyalty to the state.”* “Breach of trust” is broadly defined._​Fuck you and your apartheid state!
Click to expand...


I was hoping you could provide some examples of Islamist sharia as it applies to Jews in Gaza’istan so we can make some relevant comparisons  to your screeching tirades and silly “apartheid” slogans. 

Ok, Pumpkin?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> _*Laws pertaining to Citizenship and Identity*_
> _Palestinian identity is not recognized in Israeli law or society: Palestinians are referred to as Arab Israelis
> 
> The most important immigration laws—including *the Law of Return {1950}1 and the Citizenship Law {1952}*,- privilege Jews and Jewish immigration over non-Jews. Jews are granted the right to immigrate and become Israeli citizens even if they have no connection to Israel,* while 750,000 Palestinians and their descendants expelled in 1948 have no such right*. It is nearly impossible for Palestinians outside Israel to become Israeli citizens._​


_No nation is obliged to accept hostile population into its' society, Jews who're suspected of having a potential to hurt our society are excluded from this right as well.
Practiced by every nation.


Billo_Really said:



*Population Registry Law {1965}* –Requires all residents of Israel to register their nationality [i.e., Jewish, Arab, Druze] with the Population Registry and obtain an identity card carrying this information. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Says: *“a dual system of law discriminates between Jewish Israelis and indigenous Palestinians based on a constructed status of 'Jewish nationality'*. This prejudicial application of law is apparent in all processes of the legal system, from the rights to information and fair trial to detention and prison treatment.”.
		
Click to expand...

Indigenous Palestinians are Jews.
Such distinctions are not registered in the passport.
In many nations ethnic identity is displayed for any govt worker to see. Jew have suffered because of it in many countries, in our countries it's not written neither in driving license nor in the passport.
All information is available in Hebrew and Arabic.


Billo_Really said:



*Identity Certificate [Possession and Presentation] Law {1982}* –Residents must carry identity cards at all times and present them to "senior police officers,” to the heads of local authorities, or to police officers or soldiers on duty when requested to do so. *Jewish citizens are seldom asked to present their cards, while Palestinians often are..”.*

Click to expand...

_Outright BS.
Everyone is obliged to show identification, everyone gets searched on the entrance to public places.
This is practiced in every country.​


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> _*Family Unification {2003} *– Under the 2003 policy for "family unification" non-citizen spouses and children of Arab Israeli citizens are prohibited from entering Israel [and living with their spouse/parent]. This means* if you are a Palestinian from outside Israel, married to an Israeli, you are barred from living with your spouse in Israel. *This does not apply to any other nationality beside Arabs. This “interim” provision has been regularly extended, most recently in January, 2011_​


This is law works in almost every nation.
Any Israeli who marries subjects of other countries goes through a long a difficult process of examination. Civil marriage alone is not enough to become a citizen, one has to prove this is not either a fraud or a scam to bring in a population hostile to the society.
​


----------



## rylah

_*"Serving in the armed forces* -Israeli Jews (except some orthodox Jews) have to serve in the Israeli army when they turn 18.* Most Palestinians are forbidden to serve in the army.* Many of the benefits of society are given to people who have served. Preferential treatment of housing, education and other services are given to army veterans. *"*_

Another outright BS lie.
All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
​


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> _*The Citizenship Law{2008} * -Several attempts have been made in recent years to make it possible to strip Israeli citizenship for various reasons related to alleged “disloyalty” to the state or “breach of trust.” All of these attempts have indirectly targeted the citizenship rights of Palestinian citizens.* This law allows the citizenship of an Israeli citizen to be revoked on the grounds of “breach of trust or disloyalty to the state.”* “Breach of trust” is broadly defined.._​



Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Fuck you and your apartheid state!


For You the mere fact that a Cherokee doesn't call Trump an Indian is apartheid,
while at the same time You support a group that openly and officially demands another Judenrhein Arab state in Judea.

At the end of the day You didn't present one country in the whole of middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy the same equality as in Israel, apartheid what happens on Your side, and that's exactly what You and Your Jihadi heroes have promoted here for centuries, to the letter.* Israel is the antidote.*


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> _No nation is obliged to accept hostile population into its' society, Jews who're suspected of having a potential to hurt our society are excluded from this right as well.
> Practiced by every nation.
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians are Jews.
> Such distinctions are not registered in the passport.
> In many nations ethnic identity is displayed for any govt worker to see. Jew have suffered because of it in many countries, in our countries it's not written neither in driving license nor in the passport.
> All information is available in Hebrew and Arabic.
> _
> Outright BS.
> Everyone is obliged to show identification, everyone gets searched on the entrance to public places.
> This is practiced in every country.​


According to the total number of dead since WWI...

_The obscene disproportionality of 100,000 Palestinians killed violently by the British or Zionists since WW1, as compared to 4,000 Zionists killed by Palestinians in the same period._​...it is Zionists, who are the hostile population.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Who are the indiginous people(s) of the Palestine region?
※→  et al,

OK!  Now tell me.  How did we get from a discussion of "Indigenous People" to "Apartheid?"  One has nothing to do with the other.  The primary component to apartheid is "racial."

Virtually everything in "BILLO_REALLY" Posting #2082 is flawed in one way or another.  The three biggest flaws are:

•  I cannot find a single thing in Posting #2082 that is not within the *"Domestic Jurisdiction"* of the State of Israel.   If it is a Domestic Law to Israel, and it only covers Israeli Sovereignty, then it is outside any prohibition by the Internation Community through the UN.  *AND*  "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII."  [See; Article 2(7) of the Charter of the United Nations → Chapter I]

•  "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination* by one racial group over any other racial group or groups* and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;  [See:  Article 7, Para 2h Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court]  Israeli is many more times racially and ethnically diverse than the combined populations of the Arab Palestinians.

•  While A/RES/3379 (XXX) Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination initially made the determination that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination, → the General Assembly decided to *revoke the determination* which contained in its Resolution 3379 (XXX)


 of 10 November 1975.  This is essentially saying that there is no racial component.​
As "rylah" and "Hollie" have already made abundantly clear, this is just an attempt to twist the facts, so the Arab Palestinian can be the drama queen and play the role of the victim.

The principle question in this discussion is a question of "indigenous people."   And again, this is quite flawed.

•  Let's assume that all the people we are talking about, what "BILLO_REALLY" counts as 750,000(+),  would be at least 70 years of age (as of last month).  That would be in the leading edge of the expected life span of Arab Palestinians.

•  The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples A/RES/61/295, is not law.  But even if it was law, it does not really define the term "Indigenous Peoples."   Further, the Declaration says that:  _"_indigenous peoples" are equal to all other peoples.  This is KEY!  It says "equal to all other peoples."  NOT less than and not greater than.​
Being classed as "indigenous" does NOT grant any special advantage over any other peoples.  That would include the Israelis.  End of Story.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> This is law works in almost every nation.
> Any Israeli who marries subjects of other countries goes through a long a difficult process of examination. Civil marriage alone is not enough to become a citizen, one has to prove this is not either a fraud or a scam to bring in a population hostile to the society.
> ​


Stop insulting the intelligence of the reader.  Jews from all over the world can come to Israel and be automatic citizens.  It is only the Palestinian Arabs this law applies to in your discriminating, apartheid society.


----------



## Hollie

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> _No nation is obliged to accept hostile population into its' society, Jews who're suspected of having a potential to hurt our society are excluded from this right as well.
> Practiced by every nation.
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians are Jews.
> Such distinctions are not registered in the passport.
> In many nations ethnic identity is displayed for any govt worker to see. Jew have suffered because of it in many countries, in our countries it's not written neither in driving license nor in the passport.
> All information is available in Hebrew and Arabic.
> _
> Outright BS.
> Everyone is obliged to show identification, everyone gets searched on the entrance to public places.
> This is practiced in every country.​
> 
> 
> 
> According to the total number of dead since WWI...
> 
> _The obscene disproportionality of 100,000 Palestinians killed violently by the British or Zionists since WW1, as compared to 4,000 Zionists killed by Palestinians in the same period._​...it is Zionists, who are the hostile population.
Click to expand...


 Cutting and pasting from internet tabloids is a fool's errand. The reasons for the greater numbers of dead islamics are many. One can be summed up by "we love death as you love life".

Yee haw.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​


God, you are such a fucking liar!

Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​


Those people were convicted of war crimes.  Their citizenship wasn't revoked for merely criticizing the government.  In Israel, dissent is a crime.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> For You the mere fact that a Cherokee doesn't call Trump an Indian is apartheid,
> while at the same time You support a group that openly and officially demands another Judenrhein Arab state in Judea.
> 
> At the end of the day You didn't present one country in the whole of middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy the same equality as in Israel, apartheid what happens on Your side, and that's exactly what You and Your Jihadi heroes have promoted here for centuries, to the letter.* Israel is the antidote.*


When do Palestinians get their casinos?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*The Citizenship Law{2008} * -Several attempts have been made in recent years to make it possible to strip Israeli citizenship for various reasons related to alleged “disloyalty” to the state or “breach of trust.” All of these attempts have indirectly targeted the citizenship rights of Palestinian citizens.* This law allows the citizenship of an Israeli citizen to be revoked on the grounds of “breach of trust or disloyalty to the state.”* “Breach of trust” is broadly defined.._​
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
Click to expand...

Only foreigners who obtain citizenship can be denaturalized. Born citizens cannot.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> _No nation is obliged to accept hostile population into its' society, Jews who're suspected of having a potential to hurt our society are excluded from this right as well.
> Practiced by every nation.
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians are Jews.
> Such distinctions are not registered in the passport.
> In many nations ethnic identity is displayed for any govt worker to see. Jew have suffered because of it in many countries, in our countries it's not written neither in driving license nor in the passport.
> All information is available in Hebrew and Arabic.
> _
> Outright BS.
> Everyone is obliged to show identification, everyone gets searched on the entrance to public places.
> This is practiced in every country.​
> 
> 
> 
> According to the total number of dead since WWI...
> 
> _The obscene disproportionality of 100,000 Palestinians killed violently by the British or Zionists since WW1, as compared to 4,000 Zionists killed by Palestinians in the same period._​...it is Zionists, who are the hostile population.
Click to expand...


Palestinian Arabs have taken active part in every attempt to overthrow Arab governments in the neighboring countries.  Those numbers are not included.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Palestinian Arabs have taken active part in every attempt to overthrow Arab governments in the neighboring countries.  Those numbers are not included.


Those country's do not kill medics.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> _*The Citizenship Law{2008} * -Several attempts have been made in recent years to make it possible to strip Israeli citizenship for various reasons related to alleged “disloyalty” to the state or “breach of trust.” All of these attempts have indirectly targeted the citizenship rights of Palestinian citizens.* This law allows the citizenship of an Israeli citizen to be revoked on the grounds of “breach of trust or disloyalty to the state.”* “Breach of trust” is broadly defined.._​
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Only foreigners who obtain citizenship can be denaturalized. Born citizens cannot.
Click to expand...


How does that change the fact that most Western (if not all) countries have special directives to renounce citizenship of persons whom they deem as dangerous and hostile to their society?

Theresa May deprived 33 individuals of British citizenship in 2015
"All 33 individuals were deprived of their citizenship because it was ‘conducive to the public good’ to do so. This usually means the person is suspected of terror related activity, but can also include people suspected of espionage and war crimes."


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is law works in almost every nation.
> Any Israeli who marries subjects of other countries goes through a long a difficult process of examination. Civil marriage alone is not enough to become a citizen, one has to prove this is not either a fraud or a scam to bring in a population hostile to the society.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> Stop insulting the intelligence of the reader.  Jews from all over the world can come to Israel and be automatic citizens.  It is only the Palestinian Arabs this law applies to in your discriminating, apartheid society.
Click to expand...


This law applies to every Arab as it applies to a Jew who wants to bring  a dozen Ukraininan "brides", as an Iranian who puts a yarmulke and attempts to get into the country.

On the other hand Palestinian Arabs demand a Jew-Free Palestine, *that's apartheid.*


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
Click to expand...


What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
 Where does it say they're barred?

Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
> 
> 
> 
> Those people were convicted of war crimes.  Their citizenship wasn't revoked for merely criticizing the government.  In Israel, dissent is a crime.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.
In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> For You the mere fact that a Cherokee doesn't call Trump an Indian is apartheid,
> while at the same time You support a group that openly and officially demands another Judenrhein Arab state in Judea.
> 
> At the end of the day You didn't present one country in the whole of middle east where Palestinian Arabs enjoy the same equality as in Israel, apartheid what happens on Your side, and that's exactly what You and Your Jihadi heroes have promoted here for centuries, to the letter.* Israel is the antidote.*
> 
> 
> 
> When do Palestinians get their casinos?
Click to expand...


Indigenous Palestinians already got their Casino and moved on...about a century forward...
Israel is nothing but a small casino that was left after Arabs got the most from the tiny reservation that was promised to the indigenous people.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
Click to expand...

They can.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinian Arabs have taken active part in every attempt to overthrow Arab governments in the neighboring countries.  Those numbers are not included.
> 
> 
> 
> Those country's do not kill medics.
Click to expand...


Medics die in every confrontation and war.
Show me one country that doesn't .

The definition of indigenous  has nothing to with it neither.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
Click to expand...


Yeah You've been trying to sell that bridge for 9 years,
in the meantime it's the Gazans themselves who get publicly executed for mere suspicion of connection to Israeli Jews.

Then again running towards Jews while covered in a swastika and screaming of Jihad has always been call for Jews to join a tea party?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
> 
> 
> 
> Those people were convicted of war crimes.  Their citizenship wasn't revoked for merely criticizing the government.  In Israel, dissent is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it doesn't.
> In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.
Click to expand...

That is not for descent, that is for treason.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah You've been trying to sell that bridge for 9 years,
> in the meantime it's the Gazans themselves who get publicly executed for mere suspicion of connection to Israelis.
Click to expand...

Deflection.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
Click to expand...


A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely. 

Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
> 
> 
> 
> Those people were convicted of war crimes.  Their citizenship wasn't revoked for merely criticizing the government.  In Israel, dissent is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it doesn't.
> In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is not for descent, that is for treason.
Click to expand...


Nonsense, as usual. Mere suspicion of collaboration means the Islamic terrorist goon squads come calling.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again a basic law that works in every society since the dawn of history.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States​
> 
> 
> 
> Those people were convicted of war crimes.  Their citizenship wasn't revoked for merely criticizing the government.  In Israel, dissent is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it doesn't.
> In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is not for descent, that is for treason.
Click to expand...


Great recruiting strategy.
I'm sure that's an invitation for Jews to join the tea party?

Now let's practice that poor kitten face, and pretend they didn't ruin their life trying to murder the Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
Click to expand...

There are no religious restrictions on running for office.

I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
Click to expand...

Joking right?


----------



## rylah

*Hamas Official: There are no Palestinian people. *
*They are Egyptian and Saudis.*


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
Click to expand...


I can enlighten you on the travel restrictions.  No Israeli Jew can visit Jew-free Bethlehem (where King David was born), Nablus (where Joseph's Tomb is located, except for once-a-month, middle-of-the-night excursions), or Jericho (where an ancient synagogue was destroyed).  The Tomb of Rachel now has an ugly fortress around it (it was attacked for 41 days in the last intifada, while Joseph's Tomb was completely destroyed).


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Joking right?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to my post.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another outright BS lie.
> All Israeli citizens are free to choose between civil service or army.
> Benefits are given to citizens who served their country in every country.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
Click to expand...


Odd that you would claim the islamic terrorists in Gaza'istan have no religious restrictions when they maintain a _Judenrein_ 
mini-caliphate


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can enlighten you on the travel restrictions.  No Israeli Jew can visit Jew-free Bethlehem (where King David was born), Nablus (where Joseph's Tomb is located, except for once-a-month middle-of-the-night excursions), or Jericho (where an ancient synagogue was destroyed).  The Tomb of Rachel now has an ugly fortress around it (it was attacked for 41 days in the last intifada, while Joseph's Tomb was completely destroyed).
Click to expand...

Israelis are not welcome because they bring Israel with them.

Jews visit Palestine all of the time.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> God, you are such a fucking liar!
> 
> Military service is mandatory in Israel for everyone turning 18 (except for Palestinians).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Odd that you would claim the islamic terrorists in Gaza'istan have no religious restrictions when they maintain a _Judenrein_
> mini-caliphate
Click to expand...

Deflection.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> 
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Joking right?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Irrelevant to my post.
Click to expand...


So where are the Jewish ministers of Hamas and PA parliament?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> 
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can enlighten you on the travel restrictions.  No Israeli Jew can visit Jew-free Bethlehem (where King David was born), Nablus (where Joseph's Tomb is located, except for once-a-month middle-of-the-night excursions), or Jericho (where an ancient synagogue was destroyed).  The Tomb of Rachel now has an ugly fortress around it (it was attacked for 41 days in the last intifada, while Joseph's Tomb was completely destroyed).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israelis are not welcome because they bring Israel with them.
> 
> Jews visit Palestine all of the time.
Click to expand...


The PA demand a Jew free state, Hamas already has got one.
There's Jordan.

 Arabs can explode in rage, but this tiny Jewish reservation will stay, they have whole countries ruled exclusively by their tribes in the Gulf, and practically the whole middle east.
 Enough is enough.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> 
> 
> They can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Jew-free Gaza'istan would make a Jew in an islamic terrorist "parliament" unlikely.
> 
> Your alternate reality is quite a magical place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no religious restrictions on running for office.
> 
> I don't know the immigration policies in Palestine. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can enlighten you on the travel restrictions.  No Israeli Jew can visit Jew-free Bethlehem (where King David was born), Nablus (where Joseph's Tomb is located, except for once-a-month middle-of-the-night excursions), or Jericho (where an ancient synagogue was destroyed).  The Tomb of Rachel now has an ugly fortress around it (it was attacked for 41 days in the last intifada, while Joseph's Tomb was completely destroyed).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israelis are not welcome because they bring Israel with them.
> 
> Jews visit Palestine all of the time.
Click to expand...


But You demand the opposite from Israelis..
Which rights do Jews have under PA and Hamas rule that Arabs lack in Israel?


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is law works in almost every nation.
> Any Israeli who marries subjects of other countries goes through a long a difficult process of examination. Civil marriage alone is not enough to become a citizen, one has to prove this is not either a fraud or a scam to bring in a population hostile to the society.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> Stop insulting the intelligence of the reader.  Jews from all over the world can come to Israel and be automatic citizens.  It is only the Palestinian Arabs this law applies to in your discriminating, apartheid society.
Click to expand...


Just like dozens of other countries where someone with a grandparent of that ethnicity/nationality can receive citizenship. 

Palestinian Arabs can make up whatever citizenship rules they want in their own country. Including giving preference to people with Palestinian grandparents just like those dozens of other countries.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Only foreigners who obtain citizenship can be denaturalized. Born citizens cannot.



That would depend on the citizenship laws of each country and whether citizenship is based on_ jus soli_ or _jus sanguinis_.  However, generally a person can no be made stateless by the removal of their sole citizenship if they do not hold or are not eligible for another citizenship.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?


Well thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> No it doesn't.
> In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.


Without a link to confirm, I guess I'll have to take your word for it.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Indigenous Palestinians already got their Casino and moved on...about a century forward...
> Israel is nothing but a small casino that was left after Arabs got the most from the tiny reservation that was promised to the indigenous people.


Why can't you be nice to Palestinians and treat them with respect?


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Medics die in every confrontation and war.
> Show me one country that doesn't .
> 
> The definition of indigenous  has nothing to with it neither.


The medic didn't die, she was murdered.  And that is a war crime.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Just like dozens of other countries where someone with a grandparent of that ethnicity/nationality can receive citizenship.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs can make up whatever citizenship rules they want in their own country. Including giving preference to people with Palestinian grandparents just like those dozens of other countries.


We're talking about Arab-Israelis, twisted sister.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it doesn't.
> In PA and Gaza dessent means You lose the head and get dragged in the street.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without a link to confirm, I guess I'll have to take your word for it.
Click to expand...


Let's do the opposite, because what You ask is too easy:

I state a fact- "Hamas does public executions of its' citizens".

Let's see You find a link to contradict that.

This is Gaza under Hamas rule:


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Medics die in every confrontation and war.
> Show me one country that doesn't .
> 
> The definition of indigenous  has nothing to with it neither.
> 
> 
> 
> The medic didn't die, she was murdered.  And that is a war crime.
Click to expand...


So Jews having an ethnic identity is called an apartheid, but demanding a Jew-free Arab state is ok .A medic dying during Hams provocation is a war crime, suicide bombing and open calls to go kill Jews and die together are all dandy.

You can shove Your judgment where the sun doesn't shine.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians already got their Casino and moved on...about a century forward...
> Israel is nothing but a small casino that was left after Arabs got the most from the tiny reservation that was promised to the indigenous people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why can't you be nice to Palestinians and treat them with respect?
Click to expand...

It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood

What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What it means is that nobody forces Israeli Arabs into IDF service, although many volunteer.
> Army service is mandatory, but one can choose a civil service instead, Israeli Arabs  and Jews do both.
> Where does it say they're barred?
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of parliament in Hamas or PA?
> 
> 
> 
> Well thanks for clearing that up.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile:

*So, you think it would be necessary to first transfer and remove every Jew—*

_"Absolutely. No, I’m not saying to transfer every Jew, I’m saying transfer Jews who, after an agreement with Israel, fall under the jurisdiction of a Palestinian state."_

*Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave?*

_"Absolutely. I think this is a very necessary step, before we can allow the two states to somehow develop their separate national identities, and then maybe open up the doors for all kinds of cultural, social, political, economic exchanges, that freedom of movement of both citizens of Israelis and Palestinians from one area to another. You know you have to think of the day after."

*MAEN RASHID AREIKAT*
*The Palestinian ambassador to Washington*_






Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Let's do the opposite, because what You ask is too easy:
> 
> I state a fact- "Hamas does public executions of its' citizens".
> 
> Let's see You find a link to contradict that.


I'm not arguing it doesn't.  I'm just saying Israel conducts far more public executions than Hamas ever will.  And that is pretty easy to prove as well.



rylah said:


> This is Gaza under Hamas rule:


There are no executions in that picture.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> So Jews having an ethnic identity is called an apartheid, but demanding a Jew-free Arab state is ok .A medic dying during Hams provocation is a war crime, suicide bombing and open calls to go kill Jews and die together are all dandy.
> 
> You can shove Your judgment where the sun doesn't shine.


Treating Palestinians like they are subhuman, is racist.  Making laws to back up your racism, is apartheid.  

Hamas wasn't provoking anything.  That was a grass roots protest from people who are sick of the way you've been treating them for the last 5 decades.  

BTW, shooting a medic is a war crime under any conditions.  Trying to justify the deliberate killing of someone giving care to the wounded, just shows your lack of humanity.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.


Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Meanwhile:
> 
> *So, you think it would be necessary to first transfer and remove every Jew—*
> 
> _"Absolutely. No, I’m not saying to transfer every Jew, I’m saying transfer Jews who, after an agreement with Israel, fall under the jurisdiction of a Palestinian state."_
> 
> *Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave?*
> 
> _"Absolutely. I think this is a very necessary step, before we can allow the two states to somehow develop their separate national identities, and then maybe open up the doors for all kinds of cultural, social, political, economic exchanges, that freedom of movement of both citizens of Israelis and Palestinians from one area to another. You know you have to think of the day after."
> 
> *MAEN RASHID AREIKAT*
> *The Palestinian ambassador to Washington*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?


You are cherry-picking what he said.  This is what he stated just before that comment...

*When you imagine a future Palestinian state, do you imagine it being a place where Jews, if they wish to become Palestinian citizens, could own property, vote in elections, and practice their religion freely?*
_
I remember in the mid-’90s, the late [PLO official] Faisal Husseini said repeatedly “OK, if Israelis choose to stay in a future Palestinian state, they are more than welcome to do that. But under one condition: They have to respect and obey Palestinian laws, they cannot be living as Israelis. They have to respect Palestinian laws and abide by them.” _​Here's a few other things he said...

_ We have seen at least, from the Palestinian side, since 1988, a clear acceptance of the existence of the State of Israel._​Isn't that what you wanted?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  rylah,  _et al,_

Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.



rylah said:


> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?


*(COMMENT)*

The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.

Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Billo_Really, et al,

OFF TOPIC:  I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a public execution in Israel. 



Billo_Really said:


> ...  I'm just saying Israel conducts far more public executions than Hamas ever will.  And that is pretty easy to prove as well.


*(COMMENT)*

Executions in the Middle East and Persian Gulf States  are not unusual.

v/r R


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's do the opposite, because what You ask is too easy:
> 
> I state a fact- "Hamas does public executions of its' citizens".
> 
> Let's see You find a link to contradict that.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not arguing it doesn't.  I'm just saying Israel conducts far more public executions than Hamas ever will.  And that is pretty easy to prove as well.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is Gaza under Hamas rule:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no executions in that picture.
Click to expand...

Let me see You prove Israel executes people without proving that Your country, does that even more.

I just wonder, by Your standards Hamas hanging people for mere suspicion of homosexuality is not public execution, shooting them in the public then dragging their bodies on the streets of Gaza neither does the job.But let the same Jihadis go to war against Israel, and all of a sudden every dead Gazan is "executed". 

Anyway does that magically turn Arabs into the indigenous people of the land?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Jews having an ethnic identity is called an apartheid, but demanding a Jew-free Arab state is ok .A medic dying during Hams provocation is a war crime, suicide bombing and open calls to go kill Jews and die together are all dandy.
> 
> You can shove Your judgment where the sun doesn't shine.
> 
> 
> 
> Treating Palestinians like they are subhuman, is racist.  Making laws to back up your racism, is apartheid.
> 
> Hamas wasn't provoking anything.  That was a grass roots protest from people who are sick of the way you've been treating them for the last 5 decades.
> 
> BTW, shooting a medic is a war crime under any conditions.  Trying to justify the deliberate killing of someone giving care to the wounded, just shows your lack of humanity.
Click to expand...


Nah...
Hamas has contradicted every one of these claims.
Repeating it a hundred times more won't make it less bs.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.
Click to expand...


That doesn't address my post.

What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> OFF TOPIC: I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a public execution in Israel.


Israel shoots unarmed people all of the time. Are those executions?


----------



## yiostheoy

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, et al,
> 
> OFF TOPIC:  I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a public execution in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...  I'm just saying Israel conducts far more public executions than Hamas ever will.  And that is pretty easy to prove as well.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Executions in the Middle East and Persian Gulf States  are not unusual.
> 
> v/r R
Click to expand...

The last Israeli execution was of Adolf Eichmann in 1954.

Capital punishment in Israel - Wikipedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.
Click to expand...

There are no laws in Palestine that would discriminate against Jewish citizens.


----------



## yiostheoy

I don't remember anything about 1954.  I was too young.

My earliest memory was of May 28, 1956 when my sister was born.  I remember that day distinctly.


----------



## yiostheoy

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Well, you must remember that India and Pakistan effected a mutual split between Islam and Hindu, as did Greece and Turkey between Islam and Greek Orthodox, respectively.

It could be done.  Muslims have been deported and resettled before.

If Israel chose to do it, they could provide land somewhere, mostly likely in the southern "occupied territories" next to Gaza.

All Muslims could be forcibly expelled from the rest of Israel and relocated to these southern areas.

There would need to be a buffer zone between the two States so that the Palestinians could not lob mortars and rockets from them across the new borders.


----------



## yiostheoy

I have iggy'ed so many spammers and trolls in this thread that there are pages and pages which are empty as I scroll back.

I am not sympathetic nor afraid of Palestinian violence.

If the Israelis ever needed my help, I would be happy to get on the next El Al flight back to Tel Aviv with my arsenal and start greasing Palestinians and/or Arabs attacking Israelis.

I would bring my own Remington 700 and ammo in 300 RUM in 150 grains with me.

And also my trusty 45ACP and Ruger Mini 14.  They have plenty of ammo for these in Israel already.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile:
> 
> *So, you think it would be necessary to first transfer and remove every Jew—*
> 
> _"Absolutely. No, I’m not saying to transfer every Jew, I’m saying transfer Jews who, after an agreement with Israel, fall under the jurisdiction of a Palestinian state."_
> 
> *Any Jew who is inside the borders of Palestine will have to leave?*
> 
> _"Absolutely. I think this is a very necessary step, before we can allow the two states to somehow develop their separate national identities, and then maybe open up the doors for all kinds of cultural, social, political, economic exchanges, that freedom of movement of both citizens of Israelis and Palestinians from one area to another. You know you have to think of the day after."
> 
> *MAEN RASHID AREIKAT*
> *The Palestinian ambassador to Washington*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> You are cherry-picking what he said.  This is what he stated just before that comment...
> 
> *When you imagine a future Palestinian state, do you imagine it being a place where Jews, if they wish to become Palestinian citizens, could own property, vote in elections, and practice their religion freely?*
> _
> I remember in the mid-’90s, the late [PLO official] Faisal Husseini said repeatedly “OK, if Israelis choose to stay in a future Palestinian state, they are more than welcome to do that. But under one condition: They have to respect and obey Palestinian laws, they cannot be living as Israelis. They have to respect Palestinian laws and abide by them.” _​Here's a few other things he said...
> 
> _ We have seen at least, from the Palestinian side, since 1988, a clear acceptance of the existence of the State of Israel._​Isn't that what you wanted?
Click to expand...


Yes it was right before he said that as Faisal died,_ "basically no Palestinian leader has publicly supported the notion that they (Jews) can stay". 
_
He then went further explaining that all Jews indeed will have to be removed from the future Palestinian state.
Jews have been ethnically cleansed virtually from all of middle east, Arabs now demand another* Jew-free state in the middle of Judea...*If that's not Arab apartheid then what is?






The tiny Jewish reservation stays, Arabs can explode with rage.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
Click to expand...


Link?

Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no laws in Palestine that would discriminate against Jewish citizens.
Click to expand...


How about Jews pray on the Temple mount?

...Maybe Hebrew as a national language?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no laws in Palestine that would discriminate against Jewish citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How about Jews pray on the Temple mount?
> 
> ...Maybe Hebrew as a national language?
Click to expand...



I bet none of these Israel-haters even know that Israel has TWO national languages--Hebrew and Arabic.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
Click to expand...



Jews who live in the territories are citizens of Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the PA and Hamas themselves who keep their citizens in camps, not to mention the other Arab states in the neighborhood
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel. I have asked for that before, You didn't answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Show me an Israeli that takes responsibility for their own actions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are no laws in Palestine that would discriminate against Jewish citizens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How about Jews pray on the Temple mount?
> 
> ...Maybe Hebrew as a national language?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I bet none of these Israel-haters even know that Israel has TWO national languages--Hebrew and Arabic.
Click to expand...

During the Mandate period it was Hebrew, Arabic, and English. English is still pretty common among both groups.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
Click to expand...


Who were the Jews that were allowed to vote in any of the PA or Hamas elections?
We both know You try to play the_ "I don't see the Swastika in my yard" _game here...


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Jews who live in the territories are citizens of Israel.
Click to expand...

OK?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Q. Can a Jew become a member of Hamas or PA government?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who were the Jews who were allowed to vote in any of the PA or Hamas elections?
> We both know You try to play the_ "I don't see the Swastika in my yard" _game here...
Click to expand...

Uh, there were no Hamas elections.

I believe the Samaritans in Nablus were allowed to vote. I haven't heard otherwise.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who were the Jews who were allowed to vote in any of the PA or Hamas elections?
> We both know You try to play the_ "I don't see the Swastika in my yard" _game here...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh, there were no Hamas elections.
> 
> I believe the Samaritans in Nablus were allowed to vote. I haven't heard otherwise.
Click to expand...


What does this change, there're less than a thousand Samaritans in each community, and from what I gather most of them live in Israel. You could the same way prove that Trump was a president of the 1st Nations Federation if 3 Cherokees voted in the US elections.

The PA ambassador was talking about Jews, whom he demanded to be removed from any area under jurisdiction of the Palestinian state, and that usually means Judea itself.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, this question is interesting from a number of aspect angles.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The dynamic range of this question moves from the actual relationship of today _(Muslim Palestinian 'v' Jewish Palestinian)_ under the current political climate, → the relationship in some future post-Conflict atmosphere under a transitional period _(where both sided actually communicate on in a permanent status of negotiations)_ → and towards a more lasting peace arrangement where each side accomplishes some level of necessary objectives → with the view towards an even more distant future where the vision is regional peace and stability on a more permanent basis.
> 
> Now, this sounds like it is totally unrelated to the question _(membership in HAMAS or PA)_; but, it is actually a  necessary precursor to the issue.  As long as the political umbrella described by PLO Ambassador Maen Rashid Areikat exists, there will be no real movement towards any meaningful objective.  What the Ambassador believes is not so radically different than the relocation taken in 1947 - 1948 of Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> For the parliamentary election law there are "set asides." There are set asides for women. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Christians. (usually exceeded) There are set asides for Jews. (so far nobody has run)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Article 3 sets aside 6 seats for Christians.  I don't see anything in there about Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who were the Jews who were allowed to vote in any of the PA or Hamas elections?
> We both know You try to play the_ "I don't see the Swastika in my yard" _game here...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh, there were no Hamas elections.
> 
> I believe the Samaritans in Nablus were allowed to vote. I haven't heard otherwise.
Click to expand...



Although they are an offshoot of Judaism, Samaritans are not really considered to be Jews.  The New Testament is very anti-Semitic, and Jesus used the parable of the Good Samaritan to show that Samaritans can be more charitable to someone in distress than "real Jews" would be.


----------



## Billo_Really

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Billo_Really, et al,
> 
> OFF TOPIC:  I'm not sure that I have ever heard of a public execution in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...  I'm just saying Israel conducts far more public executions than Hamas ever will.  And that is pretty easy to prove as well.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Executions in the Middle East and Persian Gulf States  are not unusual.
> 
> v/r R
Click to expand...

How many innocent Palestinians have died due to Israeli sniper fire?

  Those are public executions.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Let me see You prove Israel executes people without proving that Your country, does that even more.


I'm not going to do that, because I know my country does it to.  Why can't you admit Israel does and voice your outrage about it?



rylah said:


> I just wonder, by Your standards Hamas hanging people for mere suspicion of homosexuality is not public execution, shooting them in the public then dragging their bodies on the streets of Gaza neither does the job.But let the same Jihadis go to war against Israel, and all of a sudden every dead Gazan is "executed".
> 
> Anyway does that magically turn Arabs into the indigenous people of the land?


If you want to know what my standards are, just ask.  You don't have to make them up.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Nah...
> Hamas has contradicted every one of these claims.
> Repeating it a hundred times more won't make it less bs.


It doesn't matter what Hamas says, that doesn't make shooting a medic legal.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.


Because your post is off topic.  We're not discussing other countries.


----------



## Billo_Really

yiostheoy said:


> The last Israeli execution was of Adolf Eichmann in 1954.
> 
> Capital punishment in Israel - Wikipedia


Tell that to  Razan Najjar.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Yes it was right before he said that as Faisal died,_ "basically no Palestinian leader has publicly supported the notion that they (Jews) can stay".
> _
> He then went further explaining that all Jews indeed will have to be removed from the future Palestinian state.
> Jews have been ethnically cleansed virtually from all of middle east, Arabs now demand another* Jew-free state in the middle of Judea...*If that's not Arab apartheid then what is?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tiny Jewish reservation stays, Arabs can explode with rage.


Until you allow their right to return, you don't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> How about Jews pray on the Temple mount?
> 
> ...Maybe Hebrew as a national language?


My names Pall and that's between y'all.


----------



## Billo_Really

ForeverYoung436 said:


> I bet none of these Israel-haters even know that Israel has TWO national languages--Hebrew and Arabic.


Lekh tezdayen


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.



Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes? 

(Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes?
> 
> (Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)
Click to expand...

Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices. They can be found here:

UN ESCWA report on Israeli apartheid | Palestine Liberation Organization | West Bank

And here:
Citizen Strangers Minority Rights in the State of Israel


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes?
> 
> (Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices. They can be found here:
> 
> UN ESCWA report on Israeli apartheid | Palestine Liberation Organization | West Bank
> 
> And here:
> Citizen Strangers Minority Rights in the State of Israel
Click to expand...


That's a lot of story telling, but no actual law to show that.
All while it's the Hamas and PA who hold their people inside camps for decades, and keep demanding a Jew free state. If that's not apartheid nothing in Israel is.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes?
> 
> (Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices. They can be found here:
> 
> UN ESCWA report on Israeli apartheid | Palestine Liberation Organization | West Bank
> 
> And here:
> Citizen Strangers Minority Rights in the State of Israel
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's a lot of story telling, but no actual law to show that.
> All while it's the Hamas and PA who hold their people inside camps for decades, and keep demanding a Jew free state. If that's not apartheid nothing in Israel is.
Click to expand...

Not really. Palestinian refugees do not have travel documents. They can't go anywhere.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let me see You prove Israel executes people without proving that Your country, does that even more.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not going to do that, because I know my country does it to.  Why can't you admit Israel does and voice your outrage about it?
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just wonder, by Your standards Hamas hanging people for mere suspicion of homosexuality is not public execution, shooting them in the public then dragging their bodies on the streets of Gaza neither does the job.But let the same Jihadis go to war against Israel, and all of a sudden every dead Gazan is "executed".
> 
> Anyway does that magically turn Arabs into the indigenous people of the land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you want to know what my standards are, just ask.  You don't have to make them up.
Click to expand...


The only outrage there can be is at Your dishonesty, double standards and compulsive picking at Israel.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes?
> 
> (Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices. They can be found here:
> 
> UN ESCWA report on Israeli apartheid | Palestine Liberation Organization | West Bank
> 
> And here:
> Citizen Strangers Minority Rights in the State of Israel
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> That's a lot of story telling, but no actual law to show that.
> All while it's the Hamas and PA who hold their people inside camps for decades, and keep demanding a Jew free state. If that's not apartheid nothing in Israel is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. Palestinian refugees do not have travel documents. They can't go anywhere.
Click to expand...


Well no Israeli is kept in camps by their state, most of Israelis are refugees as well.
Can travel anywhere, and don't get executed for mere suspicion of homosexuality.

Team P goal is to keep their people in camps of worst conditions for decades to make money of it and keep blaming Israel for the problems Arabs and the UN created themselves.

You don't get to demand a Jew-free state and blame anyone for discrimination pretending as if a swastika isn't sticking out of Your bottom for all to see.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices.



No, they do not.  No law in Israel is structured specifically to identity Jews or non-Jews.  Just like there is no law in Palestine which forbids Jews from government.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nah...
> Hamas has contradicted every one of these claims.
> Repeating it a hundred times more won't make it less bs.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't matter what Hamas says, that doesn't make shooting a medic legal.
Click to expand...


I'm so interested in Your legal opinions...
Hamas says :_ "We'll rip out the hearts of every Jew on our way"._ And the rioters shout_ "Let's go kill Jews and die together!" 
_
Q.Would that medic treat Jews after her people rip out their hearts?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't address my post.
> 
> 
> What rights do Israeli Arabs lack that Jews are granted either under PA or Hamas?
> Show me an example of an Arab country where Jews and Arabs have anywhere the same equality as in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Because your post is off topic.  We're not discussing other countries.
Click to expand...


Every one of Your posts in the last pages is off topic.
None of that deals with discussing indigenous people and culture.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> The only outrage there can be is at Your dishonesty, double standards and compulsive picking at Israel.


I can be critical of my government, you can't do the same.  The biggest problem with Israeli society, is you remain silent while atrocities are constantly committed in your name.  Americans, on the other hand, speak out when we see injustice.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> I'm so interested in Your legal opinions...
> Hamas says :_ "We'll rip out the hearts of every Jew on our way"._ And the rioters shout_ "Let's go kill Jews and die together!"
> _
> Q.Would that medic treat Jews after her people rip out their hearts?


What is worse?

someone who says they're going to kill you?
someone who kills you?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the article I read was incorrect.  However, I don't recall seeing any restrictions on Jewish citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither do I.  There doesn't seem to be any.  Your point would be that since there are no legal restrictions on Jews in Palestine, there is no apartheid in Palestine, yes?  We would agree, in principle, that a government which does not legally restrict the rights of citizens by ethnicity (race) can not be considered apartheid, yes?
> 
> (Btw, it seems to be quite unusual, recently, for law to be written in such a way as to identify a specific ethnic group.  Law-writers appear to want to avoid that little trap.  I've found a couple.  (Jordan. Iran.)  But Israel, Palestine and even Hamas have largely attempted to purge that from their language.  Instead they refer to the "enemy" and to citizens or residents of various States.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Israel has a structure of discrimination in its laws, customs, and practices. They can be found here:
> 
> UN ESCWA report on Israeli apartheid | Palestine Liberation Organization | West Bank
> 
> And here:
> Citizen Strangers Minority Rights in the State of Israel
Click to expand...


Indeed, it is funny when you folks arrempt to use ESCWA, an affiliation of fascist Islamist backwaters, to whine about minority rights. 

ESCWA comprises 18 Arab countries:Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the State of Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

Indeed, please cut and paste more YouTube videos to tell us about human rights in your Islamist paradises of the Sudan and Yemen. 

Indeed, you can trot out Richard Falk who might want to lecture on human rights in some invented place called the “State of Pal’istan”.


----------



## Hollie

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so interested in Your legal opinions...
> Hamas says :_ "We'll rip out the hearts of every Jew on our way"._ And the rioters shout_ "Let's go kill Jews and die together!"
> _
> Q.Would that medic treat Jews after her people rip out their hearts?
> 
> 
> 
> What is worse?
> 
> someone who says they're going to kill you?
> someone who kills you?
Click to expand...


What’s worse is you folks who find justification for killing in your Korans and worship of a 7th century Arab warlord as a model for all of humanity.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm so interested in Your legal opinions...
> Hamas says :_ "We'll rip out the hearts of every Jew on our way"._ And the rioters shout_ "Let's go kill Jews and die together!"
> _
> Q.Would that medic treat Jews after her people rip out their hearts?
> 
> 
> 
> What is worse?
> 
> someone who says they're going to kill you?
> someone who kills you?
Click to expand...


Worse is to stick Your head in the sand when Jihadi maniacs are coming for Your family.
Worse is a mother who straps explosives on her son belly and teaches that "honor" is when You die attempting to murder Jews.

Are You ever planning to discuss the topic at hand?


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only outrage there can be is at Your dishonesty, double standards and compulsive picking at Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> I can be critical of my government, you can't do the same.  The biggest problem with Israeli society, is you remain silent while atrocities are constantly committed in your name.  Americans, on the other hand, speak out when we see injustice.
Click to expand...


You guys dismiss teachers for atrocities such as calling boys" boys" and girls "girls".
Toilet paper has more validity than Your moral judgment.

And btw, if You have no idea about the topic, You should give some respect to those who do want to discuss the subject, and stop derailing every thread to the same pretentious bs.


----------



## rylah

_*The oldest family in the world*

"The Guinness Book of Records has also accepted the Luries as the oldest-known living family in the world today, citing them in the “longest lineage” category in its 1999 edition. "_


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Worse is to stick Your head in the sand when Jihadi maniacs are coming for Your family.
> Worse is a mother who straps explosives on her son belly and teaches that "honor" is when You die attempting to murder Jews.
> 
> Are You ever planning to discuss the topic at hand?


Just answer the fucking question, asshole!


----------



## rylah

Peki'in - the village where Jewish families from the Second Temple period have survived to this day 

The site of Peki'in is ancient: a stalactite cave that was used for burial in the Chalcolithic period (end of the 4th millennium BCE) was discovered in the site of Peki'in in 1995. Pottery ossuaries, jars and remains of bones were found in the cave.

In Peki'in, the continuity of Jewish life from the time of the Second Temple to the present day was preserved.

Peki'in is located in the central Upper Galilee, not far from Ma'alot. In the Talmud the place was called Tekoa, Pekka, Haka. In the Zohar it is called Peki'in, and it seems that the Arabic version of the name of the place, al-bakiya, is an Arabic translation of the Hebrew name Peki'in. It is assumed that the name Peqi'in was interpreted as "valley between mountains".

Today, Peqi'in has about 5,000 residents, 70% of them Druze, 28% Christians, 2% Muslims and one Jewish woman, Margalit Zinati. The village has a Khulwa (a Druze religious place), a Greek Catholic church, an Orthodox Greek church and an ancient synagogue. Near the village there are ancient tombs that according to tradition are buried by Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah and Rabbi Yosi Dapkein.

*The Second Temple period (538 BCE - 70 S.) and the Roman and Christian-Byzantine periods (70 - 640) *

The beginning of the Jewish settlement of Peqi'in was during the Second Temple period. Throughout the period there was an important settlement in the Galilee. Josephus Flavius mentioned the village of Beka in his book "The Wars of the Jews." After the destruction of the Second Temple, the priestly families of Jerusalem came to the Galilee and Rabbi Yosef and a number of families from Jerusalem settled in Peki'in. During the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132-135 CE) they hid, according to Jewish sources (the Tannaitic literature, midrash Rabba), in the cave of Peqi'in Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai and his son Rabbi Elazar. The ancient synagogue in Peki'in was built after the destruction of the Temple.

Archeological remains were discovered in the vicinity of the village confirming the existence of a Jewish settlement in the Roman and Christian-Byzantine periods.

*From the Arab-Muslim period to the Ottoman period (640-1516) *

During this period the name of the village was changed to Arabic and called al-Buqai'a. From this period there is almost no information about Peki'in. Peki'in was a village whose residents were all Jews, apparently until the 14th century. According to the site of the Peki'in village council, the Christians came to the village following the Crusades in the 14th century. The village is mentioned in a Crusader document from 1220, Bokehel, indicating that it belongs to the king fortress.

According to one version, the Muslims reached Peki'in at the end of the 11th century, but according to another version they began to settle in the village only in the 18th century. Since the end of the 11th century the land was conquered by the Crusaders and the Muslims were the victims of massacres It is more likely to assume that the Muslims settled in the village in the 18th century, in light of the fact that the Ottomans invited Muslims to settle in a country that was sparsely populated.

The Druze also have two versions. According to the site of the Peki'in Council, the Druze community began in the 14th century. According to Ilan Toma, of the veteran Jewish families and the Yigal Allon Museum, the Druze settled in Peki'in for the first time in the late 18th century.

*The Ottoman Period (1516 - 1918) *

In 1522 the Jewish tourist Moshe Basula arrived in Israel and visited Peki'in, which was then called "Bukay". Basula mentioned in his book Jewish workers in Peki'in.

According to lists of taxpayers from the 16th century, between 33 and 45 Jewish families lived during the period of Ottoman rule in Peqi'in.

The situation of the Jews under Ottoman rule was difficult. The Ottomans imposed heavy taxes on the Jews and those who could not pay were thrown into prison, from which they had little chance of survival or were taken from their lands. For fear of the Ottoman rule, many of the Jewish landowners in Peqi'in preferred to relinquish their ownership. Some of the Jews registered their lands in the name of Druze neighbors and some sold some of their land.

In the 17 th and 18 th centuries Peki'in was not the only Jewish settlement. A number of other Jewish villages remained in the area, but the heavy taxes imposed by the Ottomans and raids by the Bedouins for robbery, looting and murder gradually led to the abandonment of some of the villages.

In addition to their involvement in agriculture, the Jews of Peqi'in engaged in the silk industry. A confirmation of this information is found in the tax lists of the Ottoman authorities and in the book "Questions and Answers" by the head of the Safed community, Rabbi Moshe ben Yosef Terni of 1602. Rabbi Chaim Ben Attar, a resident of Acre, moved to Peqi'in in 1742 and wrote about it. In 1759, an earthquake struck Safed and part of the Jewish community of Safed moved temporarily to Peki'in.

In 1765 Simcha ben Yehoshua visited Peki'in and, in his book, called the village by its Hebrew name, Peqi'in. He told about 50 Jewish families. In 1765, Rabbi Yosef Sofer, author of the book "Shivchei Eretz Yisrael", who lived in the village for several years, died in Peqi'in, and in 1789 they settled in Peqi'in Hasidim who fled from Tiberias and Safed, and in 1789 they sent a letter to their Ashkenazi brothers, In the village there were about 20 families of Peqi'in Jews who were native to the country, and their agricultural occupations were herds of sheep and cattle, and the emissaries praised the fertile land of Peki'in.

In 1824, about 20 families of Jewish descendants of the Second Temple lived in Peqi'in. They engaged in agriculture and supplied dairy products, honey, lemons and apples to markets in Israel. In 1837, Ashkenazi Jews settled in the village, who fled Safed due to an earthquake. However, in the same year an earthquake hit the entire area, and Peki'in was severely damaged, epidemics broke out and the situation was difficult. The Ashkenazim did not meet the difficulties of living there and left. In their place, 70 Spanish Jews settled in the village. At the end of the 19 th century Peki'in had 17 Jewish families (ie, between 85 and 102 people, according to a calculation of a family of 5-6 persons), and in 1883 Peirin visited Sir Laurence Oliphant and wrote a book on the relations between the religious communities in the village. 80 Druze families, 40 Greek Catholic families and 20 Jewish families.
During World War I (1914-1918), the Ottoman government tried to recruit Jewish men for work for the Ottoman army, and most of the men fled to the mountains to avoid it.

*The synagogue and antiquities of Peqi'in *

In 1873 construction of the synagogue was completed. The synagogue is located in the center of the village and was built on the site of the ancient synagogue. The ancient synagogue was of the Galilee synagogues in Baram and Meron. The ancient synagogue was built on the remains of the Beit Midrash of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah.According to local tradition, stones were brought to the synagogue from the Temple, on which were engraved a menorah, etrog, and lulav, as well as one of the gates of the Temple.

The ancient synagogue was built of wood sources, including hamra, and was severely damaged in the earthquake of 1837 and two more earthquakes. Its roof had collapsed completely and the building itself had been badly damaged.The stones were placed inside the new building. Ilan Toma, a descendant of the Toma-Cohen family, one of the families who survived the Second Temple period, relates that the stones were laid on their side in the new building, in memory of the destruction, but covered with plaster so as not to be stolen. The initiative and contribution to the rebuilding of the synagogue came from one of Beirut's wealthiest people, Raphael Halevy, and on the lintel of the synagogue there is an inscription indicating this.

Between 1926 and 1931 archaeologists examined the structure of the synagogue and came to the conclusion that it was not the stones of the Temple but rather two ancient stone tablets that survived the ancient synagogue.Archaeologists determined that on one tablet there is a relief of the Holy Ark and on the other a menorah, a lulav, a shofar and a brazier. Ilan argues that since the ancient synagogue was built of trees, the stones were brought from the ruins of the Temple.

In addition to the synagogue, Peki'in has two Jewish cemeteries at the eastern entrance to the village from the direction of Beit Jann. Below the building of the Jewish school are the remains of the ancient mikvah of the village, whose waters were brought from the spring of the village, where Rabbi Hoshaya, a man of Tirya, and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hanania are buried.

The synagogue was renovated in 1956 by President Yitzhak Ben Zvi and a large menorah was built on it.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> You guys dismiss teachers for atrocities such as calling boys" boys" and girls "girls".
> Toilet paper has more validity than Your moral judgment.
> 
> And btw, if You have no idea about the topic, You should give some respect to those who do want to discuss the subject, and stop derailing every thread to the same pretentious bs.


And your personal attacks on me is not derailing the threads?


----------



## rylah

*Haim Farhi* (Hebrew: חיים פרחי‎, _Khayim Farkhiy_; also known as *Haim "El Mu'allim"* "The Teacher"), (1760 – August 21, 1820) was an adviser to the governors of the Galilee in the days of the Ottoman Empire. Among the Jews he was known as Hakham Haim, because of his Talmudic learning.[1]

Farhi was chief advisor to Ahmad al-Jazzar of Acre, whose whims included blinding Farhi and leaving him physically scarred. Until his assassination in 1820, instigated by Farhi's own protege Abdullah Pasha, Farhi was the financial vizier and de facto ruler of Acre. After the murder, Abdullah Pasha ordered Farhi's body cast into the sea and confiscated all his property.[2] Two of Farhi’s brothers, Soliman and Rafael, living in Damascus, organized a siege against Abdullah Pasha in Acre to exact revenge.[2]

*Historical background[edit]*
After the Ottoman conquest of the Levant from the Mamluks in 1516, Galilee became part of its empire. Vast areas of Turkey, Asia, North Africa and Southeastern Europe were ruled almost autonomously by local governors. The Levant in particular, split into numerous feuding power centers.[3]

Rule over the 'Sanjak of Acre' (roughly present-day northern Israel) was supposed to derive from the authority of the Damascus governorate and its Walis. In the 18th century, a powerful local leader, Zahir al-Umar, effectively severed ties with the empire and initiated widespread reforms, improving road infrastructure and security, and encouraging Christian and Jewish merchants to settle in the area and revive commerce.

After the Treaty of Kuchuk-Kainarji was signed with Russia on July 21, 1774, Sultan Abdul Hamid I sought to reassert Turkish sovereignty by attacking Dhaher and blockading the port of Acre. His troops rose in revolt and murdered their leader. In 1775 a Turkish officer, the Bosnian Mameluk Ahmad al-Jazzar took over, and the Turks regained control over the northern areas of the land.[4]

Zahir al-Umar actively encouraged Jewish resettlement and personally invited Hayyim ben Jacob Abulafia of İzmir to settle in the Galilee. The rabbi, born in Hebron, then part of the Jerusalem _Mutassariflik_ (Governorate/District), returned in 1740 and was received with full honours by Zahir. He settled in Tiberias, which was restored from its ruinous state. An impressive synagogue was built, roads were constructed, and Jewish agricultural settlements were founded at Pekiin, Shefa-'Amr, and Kafr Yasif. These policies continued under Ahmad al-Jazzar.[4]

The existence of a strong local authority enforced the law and prevented Bedouin banditry on the roads. Zahir was one of the most tolerant and efficient local leaders and meted out justice equally to Muslim, Christian and Jew.[4] This was the case in the days of Zahir and al-Jazzar who transformed the Galilee into a region that attracted both Arabsfrom Syria and Lebanon, and Jews from the east and west.

*Adviser to al-Jazzar[edit]*






Haim Farhi was born to a respected and ancient Jewish family in Damascus. His father Saul had established a banking business that flourished to the extent that it expanded to control Syria's finances, banking and foreign trade for nearly a century.[5][6] Together with other family members, Farhi worked as a financial agent in the Damascus district.[7]Contemporary sources often mention the family as being the "real rulers of Syria".[8]
They may also have mediated between the Jewish community and the authorities, trying to alleviate the tax burden placed on the Jews of Safed. Farhi succeeded his father as banker of the ruler of Damascus. He gained extensive influence with the Turkish government and became the adviser to Ahmad al-Jazzar, ruler of Acre. This was probably due to his intrigues that led to the execution of the previous advisor, Mikhail Sakruj, a Christian merchant from Shefa-'Amr.[9]





Al-Jazzar was a violent and cruel ruler, which is evidenced from his title 'al-Jazzar' meaning 'The Butcher'. He would often find pretext to lash out in savage assaults. He had Farhi's eye plucked out, cut off the tip of his nose, and severed his left ear.[10] (A famous illustration from the time shows al-Jazzar sitting in judgment in front of his Jewish adviser, who is wearing an eye patch.)

Haim Farhi - Wikipedia


----------



## Sixties Fan

Who’s indigenous here?


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> Who’s indigenous here?


Not you!


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who’s indigenous here?
> 
> 
> 
> Not you!
Click to expand...


Actually, *exactly* Sixties Fan.
If You only knew what the heck You were talking about.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who’s indigenous here?
> 
> 
> 
> Not you!
Click to expand...


The story of the indigenous people of the land,

in every generation there're 36 righteous people who help turn the world on the hand of right.
These are the indigenous people of the land:


----------



## Shusha

Denying the Jewish people's indigeniety in the lands of Israel, Judea and Samaria is patently, utterly ridiculous.  It defies any reasonable definition of the term and rejects objective facts.  The fact that this is even subject to discussion is blindingly anti-Jewish as it is not applied to any other indigenous culture.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Actually, *exactly* Sixties Fan.
> If You only knew what the heck You were talking about.


Bunch of wanna be Jethro Tull's.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> The story of the indigenous people of the land,
> 
> in every generation there're 36 righteous people who help turn the world on the hand of right.
> These are the indigenous people of the land:


Well, I'm a liberal and I think the world should turn to the left.

People who move to the land from Europe are not indigenous.  Only Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews and Palestinian-Christians are indigenous to that area.  Zionists are not.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The story of the indigenous people of the land,
> 
> in every generation there're 36 righteous people who help turn the world on the hand of right.
> These are the indigenous people of the land:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm a liberal and I think the world should turn to the left.
> 
> People who move to the land from Europe are not indigenous.  Only Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews and Palestinian-Christians are indigenous to that area.  Zionists are not.
Click to expand...

I remember very well you posting that you were not going to post on these threads again.

Am I the only one to remember that?

So, why are any one of us answering.....again.....this person's senseless posts?

Let foolish Billo spit his venom all to himself.  I can hear the Boomerang.


----------



## Sixties Fan

In the last 1400 years, Islamist expansionism has wiped out most of the ancient indigenous civilizations of the East and taken their land. I came to study the soul of the Jewish people, what it is that gave them strength to return and build anew.

(full article online)

Reclaiming ancestral land: Lessons from tiny, strong, beautiful Israel


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, *exactly* Sixties Fan.
> If You only knew what the heck You were talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bunch of wanna be Jethro Tull's.
Click to expand...


That's nice, I love prog and virtuoso performance,
yet some 12 notes are still missing to compare it to middle eastern tonality.


However didn't You notice that usually authentic middle easter music requires this sort of virtuosity as the most basic fascility to perform? The rhythm patterns are much more asymmetric and syncopated, basically all improvised like session musicians do. They basically start where western prog reaches for.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The story of the indigenous people of the land,
> 
> in every generation there're 36 righteous people who help turn the world on the hand of right.
> These are the indigenous people of the land:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm a liberal and I think the world should turn to the left.
> 
> People who move to the land from Europe are not indigenous.  Only Palestinian-Arabs and Palestinian-Jews and Palestinian-Christians are indigenous to that area.  Zionists are not.
Click to expand...


I'm a descendant of a Palestinian Jew, I say all Jews who according to Jewish law belong to my tribe are part of my society and self determination. I'll give them my home, my fridge and bed if needed.


----------



## member

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who’s indigenous here?
> 
> 
> 
> Not you!
Click to expand...


*"The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?"*



 *"Not you!"*




 ....and certainly Not terrorists !


----------



## P F Tinmore

member said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who’s indigenous here?
> 
> 
> 
> Not you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *"The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?"*
> 
> 
> 
> *"Not you!"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....and certainly Not terrorists !
Click to expand...

Ooooo, that old terrorist canard again.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> member said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who’s indigenous here?
> 
> 
> 
> Not you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *"The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?"*
> 
> 
> 
> *"Not you!"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....and certainly Not terrorists !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ooooo, that old terrorist canard again.
Click to expand...

Oooooo, that old worthless sentence you insist in using when some Muslims are called for what they really are recognized for in the sane world.

Back to the discussion


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> Oooooo, that old worthless sentence you insist in using when some Muslims are called for what they really are recognized for in the sane world.
> 
> Back to the discussion


Well I'm calling you what you are, a selfish, piece of shit, narcissist, who spreads Zionist lies then acts like you just said something of substance.

Palestinians were the ones living here when you fuckers moved in from Europe.  Now go fuck yourself, you little dishrag whore.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oooooo, that old worthless sentence you insist in using when some Muslims are called for what they really are recognized for in the sane world.
> 
> Back to the discussion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I'm calling you what you are, a selfish, piece of shit, narcissist, who spreads Zionist lies then acts like you just said something of substance.
> 
> Palestinians were the ones living here when you fuckers moved in from Europe.  Now go fuck yourself, you little dishrag whore.
Click to expand...


Palestinian Jews were the group that spoke the least amount of foreign languages.
Muslims and Christians in Palestine came from a much wider variety of European countries.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> Palestinian Jews were the group that spoke the least amount of foreign languages.
> Muslims and Christians in Palestine came from a much wider variety of European countries.


Me'anyen li et ha zaiyn


----------



## Sixties Fan

*What is Zionism?*

Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination in their homeland of Israel. Basically, Zionism is about the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. It is that simple.

Anti-Zionism is the idea that Israel has no right to exist. That the Jewish people have no right to a land of their own in their acnestral homeland.

Anti-Zionism is not a criticism of Israel, it’s the negation of Israel.

Anti-Zionism is the movement to use political, economic and moral pressure to wipe the one and only Jewish state off the map. Instead, it strives to replace Israel with an Arab majority country called “palestine”.

(vide video online)

Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and you’ll never again question why


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> *What is Zionism?*
> 
> Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination in their homeland of Israel. Basically, Zionism is about the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. It is that simple.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the idea that Israel has no right to exist. That the Jewish people have no right to a land of their own in their acnestral homeland.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is not a criticism of Israel, it’s the negation of Israel.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the movement to use political, economic and moral pressure to wipe the one and only Jewish state off the map. Instead, it strives to replace Israel with an Arab majority country called “palestine”.
> 
> (vide video online)
> 
> Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and you’ll never again question why


Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What is Zionism?*
> 
> Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination in their homeland of Israel. Basically, Zionism is about the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. It is that simple.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the idea that Israel has no right to exist. That the Jewish people have no right to a land of their own in their acnestral homeland.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is not a criticism of Israel, it’s the negation of Israel.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the movement to use political, economic and moral pressure to wipe the one and only Jewish state off the map. Instead, it strives to replace Israel with an Arab majority country called “palestine”.
> 
> (vide video online)
> 
> Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and you’ll never again question why
> 
> 
> 
> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.
Click to expand...

It is all in your head, and all other Jew haters like yourself.
Take care of your brain....it is a very important part of your body.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What is Zionism?*
> 
> Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have the right to self-determination in their homeland of Israel. Basically, Zionism is about the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. It is that simple.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the idea that Israel has no right to exist. That the Jewish people have no right to a land of their own in their acnestral homeland.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is not a criticism of Israel, it’s the negation of Israel.
> 
> Anti-Zionism is the movement to use political, economic and moral pressure to wipe the one and only Jewish state off the map. Instead, it strives to replace Israel with an Arab majority country called “palestine”.
> 
> (vide video online)
> 
> Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and you’ll never again question why
> 
> 
> 
> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.
Click to expand...


You guys keep saying that, while demanding another Jew-free state.
It's a massive violation of human rights and to act as if no one sees that, is a violation of human intelligence.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.



The idea that a State for the Jewish people in their homeland is a "massive violation of human rights and international law" is ridiculous.  In fact, the norm in international law is for States to form around identifiable ethnic and cultural groups seeking self-determination.  There are dozens of examples:  India, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Korea, Sudan, Cyprus.  Palestine itself has already been partitioned once.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
 ※→  Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,

Our friend "Shusha" is correct... 



Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that a State for the Jewish people in their homeland is a "massive violation of human rights and international law" is ridiculous.  In fact, the norm in international law is for States to form around identifiable ethnic and cultural groups seeking self-determination.  There are dozens of examples:  India, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Korea, Sudan, Cyprus.  Palestine itself has already been partitioned once.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Allied Powers authored the "Rule of Law" for that era → and were directly responsible for the legal mandate in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people.

You cannot twist, stretch and reinterpret the Customary and International Humanitarian Law of the early 20th Century to make a case for the early 21st Century. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Our friend "Shusha" is correct...
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that a State for the Jewish people in their homeland is a "massive violation of human rights and international law" is ridiculous.  In fact, the norm in international law is for States to form around identifiable ethnic and cultural groups seeking self-determination.  There are dozens of examples:  India, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Korea, Sudan, Cyprus.  Palestine itself has already been partitioned once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Allied Powers authored the "Rule of Law" for that era → and were directly responsible for the legal mandate in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people.
> 
> You cannot twist, stretch and reinterpret the Customary and International Humanitarian Law of the early 20th Century to make a case for the early 21st Century.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The Jewish National Home as envisioned by the Mandate and the state of Israel are two separate and unrelated things.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Our friend "Shusha" is correct...
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Load of hooey. Israel was created and is maintained by massive violations of human rights and international law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that a State for the Jewish people in their homeland is a "massive violation of human rights and international law" is ridiculous.  In fact, the norm in international law is for States to form around identifiable ethnic and cultural groups seeking self-determination.  There are dozens of examples:  India, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Korea, Sudan, Cyprus.  Palestine itself has already been partitioned once.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Allied Powers authored the "Rule of Law" for that era → and were directly responsible for the legal mandate in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people.
> 
> You cannot twist, stretch and reinterpret the Customary and International Humanitarian Law of the early 20th Century to make a case for the early 21st Century.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish National Home as envisioned by the Mandate and the state of Israel are two separate and unrelated things.
Click to expand...

You are an endless joke.
You could not prove that if you stood on your head for a whole week.
But it will be fun to see you try


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
 ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Here you are, trying to reinterpret and spread disinformation.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Jewish National Home as envisioned by the Mandate and the state of Israel are two separate and unrelated things.


*(COMMENT)*

The phrase "Jewish National Home" (JNH) _(which today is Israel)_ and the phrase "National Home for the Jewish people," _(as articulated by the Allied Powers)_ have a slightly different meaning.  But it is totally misleading to say or imply that they are "two separate and unrelated things."  

This is an example of a deparate grasping at straws; by raising an objections about a trivial matter.   You'll have to explain to me what adjective is modifying what noun that results in what difference. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Here you are, trying to reinterpret and spread disinformation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish National Home as envisioned by the Mandate and the state of Israel are two separate and unrelated things.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The phrase "Jewish National Home" (JNH) _(which today is Israel)_ and the phrase "National Home for the Jewish people," _(as articulated by the Allied Powers)_ have a slightly different meaning.  But it is totally misleading to say or imply that they are "two separate and unrelated things."
> 
> This is an example of a deparate grasping at straws; by raising an objections about a trivial matter.   You'll have to explain to me what adjective is modifying what noun that results in what difference.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship. Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.

The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Here you are, trying to reinterpret and spread disinformation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish National Home as envisioned by the Mandate and the state of Israel are two separate and unrelated things.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The phrase "Jewish National Home" (JNH) _(which today is Israel)_ and the phrase "National Home for the Jewish people," _(as articulated by the Allied Powers)_ have a slightly different meaning.  But it is totally misleading to say or imply that they are "two separate and unrelated things."
> 
> This is an example of a deparate grasping at straws; by raising an objections about a trivial matter.   You'll have to explain to me what adjective is modifying what noun that results in what difference.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship. Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.
> 
> The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.
Click to expand...

The Mandate for Palestine was for a future country called Israel. Except that the British hated the Jews and chose to humiliate them as the Romans had done.  So, like the Romans, they called the region  "Palestine".

The Muslims became violent.  The British caved in.
Caved not only 78% of the Mandate to the Arab Muslim Hashemites, but caved in about unlimited immigration for the indigenous Jewish people.

Jews were to become a majority on their own ancient homeland, what was left of it.  The Muslims would not have it.

Muslims did not call themselves Palestinians, nor did they actively go for the Palestinian passports offered by the British during their Mandate.  The Muslims wanted to be part of Greater Syria.

In your world, immigrant Arab/Muslims were called Palestinians and the indigenous immigrant Jews were called "foreigners".

We know all about your alternate reality.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship. Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.
> 
> The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.



The Mandate version of a Jewish National Home was for Jewish Palestinians, Jewish immigrants and Arab Palestinians to have citizenship in a single shared state under Jewish self-government.  What "fucked that up" was (and is) Arab hostility to the very idea.

None of this, of course, actually prohibits the Jewish people (just like every other people) from building and holding a State in their historical homeland based on their ethnic and cultural self-determination.  None of this, of course, prohibits the territory of Palestine from being partitioned (again) into a two state solution.  Oh wait, except for that Arab hostility.


----------



## rylah

*The land knows who are her true children:*

*Judean Date Palm* – links the past to the present through agriculture and archeology. One of the world's most ancient species, it is being revived after 2,000 years at the Center for Sustainable Agriculture in Israel.


----------



## rylah




----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
 ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

You are starting with the wrong idea.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship.


*(COMMENT)*

The Mandate version was for the people in the territory to which the Mandate applied, to be brought under the same political umbrella through a common citizenship for administrative purposes.

The principle objective _(made public) _of the Mandate for Palestine was the establishment of an independent and autonomous territory capable of handling an influx of Jews _(from around the world),_ escaping persecution,  and accept them; protecting them from further persecution under the color of law → bringing them closer to the center of their most cherished religious venue national point of origin _(first Jewish Nation)_.



P F Tinmore said:


> Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.


*(COMMENT)*

From the very beginning of the Mandate _(1920 San Remo Conference)_, the "single shared state" concept was not considered.  The Allied Powers knew that the territory to which the Mandate applied was going to be partitioned at least once with the creation of an autonomous Transjordan.  The "single state idea" was never a political requirement or even a desire.

The concept was to create an environment that would allow for the sovereign protection of the Jewish People from the abuses of the non-Jewish people; a place that would protect them from political institutions that would target them non-Jewish zealots and religious fanatics → and protect the Jews from those that would seek to strip the Jews of their accumulated wealth and accomplishments.




P F Tinmore said:


> The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.


*(COMMENT)*

All (ever single one) of the established self-governing institution established through self-determination is by definition → a unilateral move.  If it was a move instigated and established by an external political force, then it would not be → "by "*self*"-determination.  The "Mandate" was a vehicle under which many outcomes were possible.

The creation of a sovereignty called "Israel" was an action by the "National Council for the Jewish State."   And again you use the very wrong wording again _(a slight propaganda twist)_.  The action was NOT a "creation of Israel" → but rather → a "*reconstituting* their national home" as seen by the Allied Powers _(in whatever final form that may take)_.  Sometimes I think the Arab Palestinian gets that wrong on purpose.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You are starting with the wrong idea.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Mandate version was for the people in the territory to which the Mandate applied, to be brought under the same political umbrella through a common citizenship for administrative purposes.
> 
> The principle objective _(made public) _of the Mandate for Palestine was the establishment of an independent and autonomous territory capable of handling an influx of Jews _(from around the world),_ escaping persecution,  and accept them; protecting them from further persecution under the color of law → bringing them closer to the center of their most cherished religious venue national point of origin _(first Jewish Nation)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> From the very beginning of the Mandate _(1920 San Remo Conference)_, the "single shared state" concept was not considered.  The Allied Powers knew that the territory to which the Mandate applied was going to be partitioned at least once with the creation of an autonomous Transjordan.  The "single state idea" was never a political requirement or even a desire.
> 
> The concept was to create an environment that would allow for the sovereign protection of the Jewish People from the abuses of the non-Jewish people; a place that would protect them from political institutions that would target them non-Jewish zealots and religious fanatics → and protect the Jews from those that would seek to strip the Jews of their accumulated wealth and accomplishments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All (ever single one) of the established self-governing institution established through self-determination is by definition → a unilateral move.  If it was a move instigated and established by an external political force, then it would not be → "by "*self*"-determination.  The "Mandate" was a vehicle under which many outcomes were possible.
> 
> The creation of a sovereignty called "Israel" was an action by the "National Council for the Jewish State."   And again you use the very wrong wording again _(a slight propaganda twist)_.  The action was NOT a "creation of Israel" → but rather → a "*reconstituting* their national home" as seen by the Allied Powers _(in whatever final form that may take)_.  Sometimes I think the Arab Palestinian gets that wrong on purpose.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.

The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You are starting with the wrong idea.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandate version of a Jewish national home was for Palestinians to have Palestinian citizenship and for immigrant Jews to obtain Palestinian citizenship.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Mandate version was for the people in the territory to which the Mandate applied, to be brought under the same political umbrella through a common citizenship for administrative purposes.
> 
> The principle objective _(made public) _of the Mandate for Palestine was the establishment of an independent and autonomous territory capable of handling an influx of Jews _(from around the world),_ escaping persecution,  and accept them; protecting them from further persecution under the color of law → bringing them closer to the center of their most cherished religious venue national point of origin _(first Jewish Nation)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then there wound be a single shared state. Britain fucked that up big time and left their mess for others to clean up. Of course that never happened.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> From the very beginning of the Mandate _(1920 San Remo Conference)_, the "single shared state" concept was not considered.  The Allied Powers knew that the territory to which the Mandate applied was going to be partitioned at least once with the creation of an autonomous Transjordan.  The "single state idea" was never a political requirement or even a desire.
> 
> The concept was to create an environment that would allow for the sovereign protection of the Jewish People from the abuses of the non-Jewish people; a place that would protect them from political institutions that would target them non-Jewish zealots and religious fanatics → and protect the Jews from those that would seek to strip the Jews of their accumulated wealth and accomplishments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The creation of Israel was a unilateral move that had nothing to do with the Mandate that had already left. The Mandate created nothing. It was unconnected from the creation of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All (ever single one) of the established self-governing institution established through self-determination is by definition → a unilateral move.  If it was a move instigated and established by an external political force, then it would not be → "by "*self*"-determination.  The "Mandate" was a vehicle under which many outcomes were possible.
> 
> The creation of a sovereignty called "Israel" was an action by the "National Council for the Jewish State."   And again you use the very wrong wording again _(a slight propaganda twist)_.  The action was NOT a "creation of Israel" → but rather → a "*reconstituting* their national home" as seen by the Allied Powers _(in whatever final form that may take)_.  Sometimes I think the Arab Palestinian gets that wrong on purpose.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
Click to expand...


So, it seems we’re back to you attempting to make the absurd claim, just in a more subtle way, that the Treaty of Lausanne created your imagined “country of Pally’land”.. 

Such is the alternate reality defined by the Islamist mindset.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.

THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results. 



P F Tinmore said:


> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.


*(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*

✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.

✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties. 

✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._

✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.  

*(COMMENT)*

It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.

For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy


What did I say that was incorrect?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did I say that was incorrect?
Click to expand...


In the part where You say that Palestinian Jews opposed the reconstitution of Israel, where in fact they were those who called for their liberation in the first place. The plight of Jews in Syria-Palestine was the cause that created the first Zionist  political organized tools.

Palestinian Jews were giving whole plots of land to the Zionist organization for free, just at the sound of Israel revival, and wrote songs of redemption when they saw the  2000 years old promise of Israel in-gathering in front of their eyes.

This is Your weak spot - because without this apparent bold lie, Your racist argument holds no water.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did I say that was incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the part where You say that Palestinian Jews opposed the reconstitution of Israel, where in fact they were those who called for their liberation in the first place. The plight of Jews in Syria-Palestine was the cause that created the first Zionist  political organized tools.
> 
> Palestinian Jews were giving whole plots of land to the Zionist organization for free, just at the sound of Israel revival, and wrote songs of redemption when they saw the  2000 years old promise of Israel in-gathering in front of their eyes.
> 
> This is Your weak spot - because without this apparent bold lie, Your racist argument holds no water.
Click to expand...

Link to the local Jews supporting a Jewish state?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did I say that was incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the part where You say that Palestinian Jews opposed the reconstitution of Israel, where in fact they were those who called for their liberation in the first place. The plight of Jews in Syria-Palestine was the cause that created the first Zionist  political organized tools.
> 
> Palestinian Jews were giving whole plots of land to the Zionist organization for free, just at the sound of Israel revival, and wrote songs of redemption when they saw the  2000 years old promise of Israel in-gathering in front of their eyes.
> 
> This is Your weak spot - because without this apparent bold lie, Your racist argument holds no water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link to the local Jews supporting a Jewish state?
Click to expand...

I've already presented this when You claimed that the declaration of independence was signed by immigrants.

*In the 70 years of modern Israel, there were more Palestinian Jews in the Israeli govt, than Indians in the US govt for all of its' 500 years of history.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Take Rabbi Uziel for example, he was the 1st Rishon LeZion of Israel, a native Jerusalemite Jew who was more Zionist than Ben Gurion himself.







During the War of Independence in 1948, a number of yeshiva
students came to Rabbi Uziel to obtain exemptions from military service.
He rejected their requests and *said that if he were not already an
old man himself, he would be holding a gun and hand grenade, fighting
to defend the Old City of Jerusalem where he was born and raised.
This was a battle of life and death for the people of Israel. How could
anyone want to be exempted from fighting this great battle?* On the
contrary, each person should rise to the occasion and give strength to
his fellow soldiers. He told the yeshiva students that it was a mitsvah for
them to join in the defense of their people, to risk their lives alongside
their brothers, to defend the Jewish people and the Jewish land. [11]

The Grand Religious Worldview of Rabbi Benzion Uziel | jewishideas.org


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.



Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history.  You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.

Let's go over your post in detail to illuminate:

First, be clear who "they" are.  The rights of a people encompass the collective whole of the people.  It does not apply only to some of them but to every single individual who self-identifies as being part of the collective and who is accepted by the group as being part of the collective.  I KNOW you agree with this because you consistently argue that when considering the Palestinians we must include all of them -- those living in Israel, those living in non-Israel Palestine, and those living in foreign countries.  You expressly reject the idea of fragmenting the people.  You can't have it both ways.  

Second, the reconstitution of a national home - including sovereignty over territory - for an existing peoples may be a practical problem but it is NEVER a problem in principle.  Peoples have inherent, inviolable rights that are not dependent on meeting certain conditions.  Again, I KNOW you agree with this because you consistently argue this when discussing the Arab Palestinian people.  

Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest.  As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.  Leaving aside the fact that "Palestinian" as a peoples had not yet distinguished itself from "Syrian", "Jordanian" or even "Arab",  that peoples consisted of two distinct groups  -- the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians.  Therefore, using your example of naming and defining the territory for the existing peoples, the territory should have been called Israel and Palestine in order to represent both groups.  

Next, you forget that immigrating Jews ALSO became citizens of "Israel and Palestine".

Finally, you claim that some Jews were opposed to self-determination, and wished to live under the sovereignty of another peoples.  This point, while repeated often, has never been substantiated.in a meaningful way.  The existence of a small sect of non-normative religious beliefs is not substantiation for your point.  But, even so, opposition to self-determination by SOME does not negate the rights to self-determination for the group as a collective.  That is, the fact that a number of Arab Palestinians, numbering now at over a million, accepted Israeli citizenship does NOT negate the rights of the remaining Arab Palestinians to self-determination.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a problem with the "*reconstituting* their national home." When Palestine (Naming and defining the territory for the existing people.) was created by post war treaties, there were native Jews living in that territory. These Jews, along with the other inhabitants of the land, automatically became citizens of Palestine. These Jews, and the other citizens of Palestine, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
> 
> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it. All of the people who signed Israel's declaration of independence were foreign colonial settlers. There was not a native among them.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did I say that was incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the part where You say that Palestinian Jews opposed the reconstitution of Israel, where in fact they were those who called for their liberation in the first place. The plight of Jews in Syria-Palestine was the cause that created the first Zionist  political organized tools.
> 
> Palestinian Jews were giving whole plots of land to the Zionist organization for free, just at the sound of Israel revival, and wrote songs of redemption when they saw the  2000 years old promise of Israel in-gathering in front of their eyes.
> 
> This is Your weak spot - because without this apparent bold lie, Your racist argument holds no water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link to the local Jews supporting a Jewish state?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've already presented this when You claimed that the declaration of independence was signed by immigrants.
> 
> *In the 70 years of modern Israel, there were more Palestinian Jews in the Israeli govt, than Indians in the US govt for all of its' 500 years of history.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
> Take Rabbi Uziel for example, he was the 1st Rishon LeZion of Israel, a native Jerusalemite Jew who was more Zionist than Ben Gurion himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During the War of Independence in 1948, a number of yeshiva
> students came to Rabbi Uziel to obtain exemptions from military service.
> He rejected their requests and *said that if he were not already an
> old man himself, he would be holding a gun and hand grenade, fighting
> to defend the Old City of Jerusalem where he was born and raised.
> This was a battle of life and death for the people of Israel. How could
> anyone want to be exempted from fighting this great battle?* On the
> contrary, each person should rise to the occasion and give strength to
> his fellow soldiers. He told the yeshiva students that it was a mitsvah for
> them to join in the defense of their people, to risk their lives alongside
> their brothers, to defend the Jewish people and the Jewish land. [11]
> 
> The Grand Religious Worldview of Rabbi Benzion Uziel | jewishideas.org
Click to expand...

OK, that's one.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.


I did not.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
Click to expand...

Wow, how expressive !!!!
We got all the explanation of what you meant by what you wrote in those three words.

How do you do it?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.


The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, how expressive !!!!
> We got all the explanation of what you meant by what you wrote in those three words.
> 
> How do you do it?
Click to expand...

You people make shit up then blame me for it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
Click to expand...

Same wrong conclusion as always.
Why?
Because you forget that the indigenous Jewish people also became known as Palestinians, MAINLY because the British called that Mandate.......The Mandate for Palestine.

In other words, you have still not proven that there was a people known as "Palestinians" before the Ottomans lost all of that land around 1917.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, how expressive !!!!
> We got all the explanation of what you meant by what you wrote in those three words.
> 
> How do you do it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You people make shit up then blame me for it.
Click to expand...

You never prove anything.

Your shit falls only on you.

Deal with it.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, how expressive !!!!
> We got all the explanation of what you meant by what you wrote in those three words.
> 
> How do you do it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You people make shit up then blame me for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You never prove anything.
> 
> Your shit falls only on you.
> 
> Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Don't blame me for your reading comprehension problem.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
Click to expand...


You mean after the Treaty of Lausanne created the “country of Pal’istan”, right?

Same fraud, different thread.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean after the Treaty of Lausanne created the “country of Pal’istan”, right?
> 
> Same fraud, different thread.
Click to expand...


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean after the Treaty of Lausanne created the “country of Pal’istan”, right?
> 
> Same fraud, different thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Good, repeat that icon in front of the mirror a thousand times and see if your brain wakes up


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
Click to expand...


Of course you did.  You are fragmenting them by making a distinction between the "natives" and the "foreigners".


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
Click to expand...


But you are erasing the fact that there are TWO distinct peoples and trying to make them into one common entity.  That is the fallacy.  There was not one cohesive group of people "Palestinians" with common goals for self-determination.  There was no "Palestinian" in the sense that there was a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural collective which saw themselves as the same under the umbrella of "Palestinian".  There were TWO distinct groups of "Palestinian" competing for self-determination from limited resources.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy with the distinctive features whereby the Arab Palestinian whining is a tool on the manipulation in the projection of cries that invoke emotions in order to win an argument.  The purpose of action _(used for the last half-century)_ is the application of "pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_.   In fact, one can hardly draw a name to any "successful" action by the Arab Palestinians that did not use this strategy.  This application ["pity" used to used by the weak _(Arab Palestinian Community)_ to blackmail the strong _(Israel and their Allies)_] is so successful that it has been effective in legitimizing the hijacking of aircraft, the Olympic Massacre, the suicide bombing, the machinegunning of innocent, unarmed men, women and children, the use of indiscriminate fire of rocket and mortars on to civilian targets, the intentional Location of launch sites from Densely Populated Areas, the intentional failure from removing civilians the Vicinity of legitimate military targets, and utilizing the presence of a civilian to provoke confrontation render certain points, areas or military forces immune from Israeli counter-fire.
> 
> THIS territorial argument uses this very same strategy, augmented by misinformation, to achieve similar results.
> 
> *(CORRECTING THE ALLEGATION)*
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was NOT defined or named for the  "existing people" (the indigenous people); but rather to identify the Civil Administration under which the Mandate would be executed.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" was not created by post-war treaties.
> 
> ✪  "Palestine" _(The Administration of Palestine)_ enacted a nationality law; wherein the "habitual residence" and the Jews _(residents and immigrants)_ acquired citizenship.  Everyone on an equal footing.  Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples;  the "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" would not be spelled-out until 2007 _(nearly a century later)._
> 
> ✪  On the argument that "that creation of a Jewish state was a foreign concept. None of the natives wanted it."  This is what is called the frozen "Snapshot in Time."  Common Sense tells us that attitudes change over time.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It goes without saying that the Jewish did not have a hive mentality at the turn of the Twentieth Century, at the time of the Mandate termination, at the turn of the 21st Century and even today.  Whether or not Jewish Statehood was a foreign concept or not, it happened.
> 
> For the development of civilization, all progressive and successful cultures look forward in time; and not to the past.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument you put forth here is a variation on a theme, the strategy being → to employ a logical fallacy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did I say that was incorrect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the part where You say that Palestinian Jews opposed the reconstitution of Israel, where in fact they were those who called for their liberation in the first place. The plight of Jews in Syria-Palestine was the cause that created the first Zionist  political organized tools.
> 
> Palestinian Jews were giving whole plots of land to the Zionist organization for free, just at the sound of Israel revival, and wrote songs of redemption when they saw the  2000 years old promise of Israel in-gathering in front of their eyes.
> 
> This is Your weak spot - because without this apparent bold lie, Your racist argument holds no water.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link to the local Jews supporting a Jewish state?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've already presented this when You claimed that the declaration of independence was signed by immigrants.
> 
> *In the 70 years of modern Israel, there were more Palestinian Jews in the Israeli govt, than Indians in the US govt for all of its' 500 years of history.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
> Take Rabbi Uziel for example, he was the 1st Rishon LeZion of Israel, a native Jerusalemite Jew who was more Zionist than Ben Gurion himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During the War of Independence in 1948, a number of yeshiva
> students came to Rabbi Uziel to obtain exemptions from military service.
> He rejected their requests and *said that if he were not already an
> old man himself, he would be holding a gun and hand grenade, fighting
> to defend the Old City of Jerusalem where he was born and raised.
> This was a battle of life and death for the people of Israel. How could
> anyone want to be exempted from fighting this great battle?* On the
> contrary, each person should rise to the occasion and give strength to
> his fellow soldiers. He told the yeshiva students that it was a mitsvah for
> them to join in the defense of their people, to risk their lives alongside
> their brothers, to defend the Jewish people and the Jewish land. [11]
> 
> The Grand Religious Worldview of Rabbi Benzion Uziel | jewishideas.org
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, that's one.
Click to expand...


The only ones who opposed the creation of Israel were a small sect who immigrated from Europe, but even this small sect later divided, with the majority taking a role in the new forming govt.

Your argument holds no water, because it was the plight of the native Jews that  initiated the creation of first international Zionist organizations. It were specifically the native Jews who coordinated the efforts on the ground.

Rabbi Uziel was the leader of the native Jewish community.
This elderly man, a sage of his generation, who was chosen unanimously to lead the Jewish community, picked up a shovel and dug barricades on Shabat to help defend Israel.

How much more proof does one need?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you are fragmenting the Jewish people so you can erase them and deny them rights and even their own history. You do this with a deeply embedded sense that the Real (TM) Jewish people (the fragment that you call native) would prefer to live under the dhimmitude of another peoples rather than have self-determination in a reconstituted nation.
> 
> 
> 
> I did not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course you did.  You are fragmenting them by making a distinction between the "natives" and the "foreigners".
Click to expand...

OK, but I didn't say all that other stuff.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But you are erasing the fact that there are TWO distinct peoples and trying to make them into one common entity.  That is the fallacy.  There was not one cohesive group of people "Palestinians" with common goals for self-determination.  There was no "Palestinian" in the sense that there was a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural collective which saw themselves as the same under the umbrella of "Palestinian".  There were TWO distinct groups of "Palestinian" competing for self-determination from limited resources.
Click to expand...

You keep saying that foreign colonial settlers are natives even though there is no evidence that any of them have ancestors from there.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But you are erasing the fact that there are TWO distinct peoples and trying to make them into one common entity.  That is the fallacy.  There was not one cohesive group of people "Palestinians" with common goals for self-determination.  There was no "Palestinian" in the sense that there was a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural collective which saw themselves as the same under the umbrella of "Palestinian".  There were TWO distinct groups of "Palestinian" competing for self-determination from limited resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep saying that foreign colonial settlers are natives even though there is no evidence that any of them have ancestors from there.
Click to expand...


They weren't viewed so by the indigenous people of the land, they were viewed as blood brothers and liberators from the Arab yoke. That's all the proof one needs.

There's a difference between ancestry and nativity, of which You understand neither.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, it is a fallacy to consider "Palestinian" as an "existing people" during the time frame you suggest. As Rocco correctly points out, you have a tendency to take modern concepts and work them backwards as though they have always existed.
> 
> 
> 
> The people already existed. It is just that they changed from Ottoman subjects to Palestinian citizens after the Treaty of Lausanne. Same people, different status.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But you are erasing the fact that there are TWO distinct peoples and trying to make them into one common entity.  That is the fallacy.  There was not one cohesive group of people "Palestinians" with common goals for self-determination.  There was no "Palestinian" in the sense that there was a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural collective which saw themselves as the same under the umbrella of "Palestinian".  There were TWO distinct groups of "Palestinian" competing for self-determination from limited resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep saying that foreign colonial settlers are natives even though there is no evidence that any of them have ancestors from there.
Click to expand...


Here's another thing: if people who've moved in just yesterday know more about the  land, it's names, its' nature and seasons, its'  language and indigenous culture...while You don't even know what's the meaning of the name You call the country -* then You're the poster boy of a foreign invader with no much claims beyond simply occupying the place by force.*

Just ask an average US citizen what does 'Milwaukee' mean, then ask an Arab what does 'Palestine' mean, You'll get the same results - neither have a clue, neither are indigenous.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You keep saying that foreign colonial settlers are natives even though there is no evidence that any of them have ancestors from there.



You keep missing the point that peoples are a collective and membership in that collective is measured by self-identification and group acceptance and not subject to individual, externally adjudicated ancestry tests.  The connection is one of being culturally part of the collective.  All Jewish people who are part of that collective, due to the evidence of their belonging to the cultural collective, are "natives".  

Seriously, how ELSE are you going to measure it?  If someone says they are "Palestinian", for example and therefore part of the collective of "Palestine" -- how are you going to measure that?  Go ahead.  Give it your best shot.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying that foreign colonial settlers are natives even though there is no evidence that any of them have ancestors from there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep missing the point that peoples are a collective and membership in that collective is measured by self-identification and group acceptance and not subject to individual, externally adjudicated ancestry tests.  The connection is one of being culturally part of the collective.  All Jewish people who are part of that collective, due to the evidence of their belonging to the cultural collective, are "natives".
> 
> Seriously, how ELSE are you going to measure it?  If someone says they are "Palestinian", for example and therefore part of the collective of "Palestine" -- how are you going to measure that?  Go ahead.  Give it your best shot.
Click to expand...

That is an easy one. All of the people who were Turkish citizens who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine became Palestinian citizens. They were the people of the place not the people from someplace else.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> That is an easy one. All of the people who were Turkish citizens who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine became Palestinian citizens. They were the people of the place not the people from someplace else.



Sure.  So you base rights to self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity on residency within a territory at a specific point in time when a legal document is created.  Not the first time you have said this.  

But there are a number of problems with this.

1.  Residency can be changed (both forcibly and voluntarily).  
2.  People can possess or grow a desire for self-determination WITHIN a place of residency.
3.  Other legal documents can come into force.
4.  Migration, into and out of a territory happens.
5.  Political boundaries and sovereigns can change.

I don't so much have a problem with your premise that all formerly Ottoman citizens became citizens of "Palestine".  What I dispute is your assumption that this is a fixed and immutable reality which can not be abrogated or changed through mutual agreement. And that it is the only fixed and immutable reality and that all others, either before or after, have no weight and must not be considered.  Its a serious flaw in your game.  

And it puts a serious dent in your desire to see Palestinians as a collective.  See, there are Palestinians who are no longer Palestinians, because they are Israeli.  And there are Palestinians who are no longer Palestinians because they are foreigners (no longer residents).  And there are Palestinians who are no longer part of Palestine.

And, you are going to want to argue that Palestinians and ALL their descendants will always and forever be immutably Palestinian and their rights can never be removed from them.  And THAT is where you ultimately lose the game -- because IF THAT IS TRUE then the same applies to the Jewish people.  It doesn't matter where they are resident -- if they are descendants of those people then they are of those people.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

*Q:*  In the opening decades of the 20th Century, did your distinction make a real difference? 

... [T]he following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens: →





(a)Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order.





(b)All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.​
*A:*  No, →  not at all.  The citizenship laws and procedures in 1922 were not substantially changed by any subsequent law until 1948.  During the effective period of the Mandate, the law facilitated the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who toke up their permanent residence in Palestine.

_*Remembering*_ that:  "PALESTINE" was to be defined as the territory to which the Order in Council applied; subject to the British Civil Administration.  It was an "entity" and not a self-governing institution.​


P F Tinmore said:


> That is an easy one. All of the people who were Turkish citizens who normally lived in the territory that became Palestine became Palestinian citizens. They were the people of the place not the people from someplace else.


*(COMMENT)*

The "b" type citizens included "the people from someplace else;" and granted the same rights and benefits as  the "a" type citizens.

Even when it came to the 21st Century A/RES/61/295 (2007) United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples _(nearly a century later)_, it was made clear that the indigenous population and the non-indigenous population are treated the same. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## watchingfromafar

RoccoR said:


> it was made clear that the indigenous population and the non-indigenous population are treated the same.



Thank you "R" for posting this


----------



## rylah

*During the liberation of Jerusalem, Rabbi Goren ran unarmed with a Torah scroll in front of the soldiers...*





(Western Wall, Jerusalem)





(Naamush, Syrian heights)





(Rabbi Goren waving the flag of Israel at the Cave of Patriarchs, Hebron)


----------



## Sixties Fan

Sheikh gets schooled by a Jew on Arabic TV in ARABIC!


----------



## Sixties Fan

*The Peel Commission Report*

He uses the quite lengthy Peel Commission report of 1937 to support some of his ideas.This gave me the impetus I had not yet had to actually examine the document. It is a fascinating read. It begins with giving a brief but comprehensive history of Jews and Arabs then residing in the area entrusted to Britain in the form of the British Mandate of Palestine.

Let us look at what Hammond pulls out of this report. Here is one example from page 16 of Exposing A Zionist Hoax:

The truth is that, naturally, during the Mandate period, when the British controlled the formerly Ottoman territory of Palestine, both Arab and Jewish inhabitants were called “Palestinians”.

His footnote shows this is supported by the Peel Commission Report. The real truth is that, in the entire document neither Arabs nor Jews are called “Palestinians”. There is not even one instance in which the term “Palestinian” appears in the text. Jews and Arabs are simply referred to as Jews or Arabs living in Palestine. What do you conclude when someone prefaces a statement with ”the truth is” and then writes something that anyone who wants to make the effort to check up on it can see it is not true at all?

Interestingly, on page 7 of the same Peel Commission report, while describing the history of the Arabs in the region, they refer to “Arab Spain” when talking about, of all things, the flourishing of Jewish culture under the Muslim occupation of Spain.

When Arab Spain led the world, they [the Jews] were leaders in Arab Spain — secretaries or viziers of the Caliph, diplomatists, financiers, scientists, physicians, scholars.

Funny . . .  nobody refers to this to suggest that Spain is actually an Arab country that the indigenous Spaniards stole from the invading Muslims. (And to which the invading Muslims are now requesting the right to return just as invading Arabs now calling themselves Palestinians are requesting the right to return to the land they colonized.)

(full article online)

Exposing A Zionist Hoax: Exposing an Anti-Zionist Hoax | Israel Diaries


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.



And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.


----------



## Sixties Fan

AzogtheDefiler said:


> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.


Thank you for your participation in the thread, but you are off topic and I am asking you to not simply attack Islam on every thread.
There are set up threads for exactly that, possibly under another community.

Thank you.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
Click to expand...


Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.


----------



## Hossfly

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
Click to expand...


From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.


----------



## Kondor3

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
Click to expand...

My nomination for the _Worst Piece of Bull$hit Faux Equivalency of the Week_...


----------



## theliq

Hossfly said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
Click to expand...

So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
Click to expand...


More false equivalence.


----------



## Hossfly

theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
Click to expand...

Wasn't talkin' 'bout no blanket ass Injuns, Steve. I was talkin' 'bout prophecy. 
Injuns ain't gettin' nothin' but a piece of bubble gum.


----------



## Uncensored2008

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
Click to expand...



Only through genocide did they get it.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
Click to expand...


Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.

I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
Click to expand...


Made up? There is nothing made up about it.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
Click to expand...


About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
Click to expand...


Not modern history. No.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not modern history. No.
Click to expand...


Modern History being what?

Wikipedia suggests 16th Century onwards.

Take the Iraq War. How many people died in the Iraq War and post war period? 300,000 or 1 million? Or something in between? 

Perhaps people will just pick and choose and make up a figure that's convenient for their argument. 

Why did the US go to war? Do we know enough to be able to say why the US went to war? Or do some people make stuff up?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not modern history. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Modern History being what?
> 
> Wikipedia suggests 16th Century onwards.
> 
> Take the Iraq War. How many people died in the Iraq War and post war period? 300,000 or 1 million? Or something in between?
> 
> Perhaps people will just pick and choose and make up a figure that's convenient for their argument.
> 
> Why did the US go to war? Do we know enough to be able to say why the US went to war? Or do some people make stuff up?
Click to expand...


US went to war to get rid of Sadam. Stupid idea.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's all dependent on how you view what a "warlord" is. Doesn't matter, different names same shit.
> 
> I think we should be beyond the point where we believe made up history, don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not modern history. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Modern History being what?
> 
> Wikipedia suggests 16th Century onwards.
> 
> Take the Iraq War. How many people died in the Iraq War and post war period? 300,000 or 1 million? Or something in between?
> 
> Perhaps people will just pick and choose and make up a figure that's convenient for their argument.
> 
> Why did the US go to war? Do we know enough to be able to say why the US went to war? Or do some people make stuff up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> US went to war to get rid of Sadam. Stupid idea.
Click to expand...


And that's it? Nothing else? Simple, very simple.

I think you just proved my point.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

frigidweirdo said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Made up? There is nothing made up about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not modern history. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Modern History being what?
> 
> Wikipedia suggests 16th Century onwards.
> 
> Take the Iraq War. How many people died in the Iraq War and post war period? 300,000 or 1 million? Or something in between?
> 
> Perhaps people will just pick and choose and make up a figure that's convenient for their argument.
> 
> Why did the US go to war? Do we know enough to be able to say why the US went to war? Or do some people make stuff up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> US went to war to get rid of Sadam. Stupid idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that's it? Nothing else? Simple, very simple.
> 
> I think you just proved my point.
Click to expand...


It was that simple.


----------



## frigidweirdo

AzogtheDefiler said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> About "it"? What is "it"? History? You're saying nothing in History has ever been made up? Right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not modern history. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Modern History being what?
> 
> Wikipedia suggests 16th Century onwards.
> 
> Take the Iraq War. How many people died in the Iraq War and post war period? 300,000 or 1 million? Or something in between?
> 
> Perhaps people will just pick and choose and make up a figure that's convenient for their argument.
> 
> Why did the US go to war? Do we know enough to be able to say why the US went to war? Or do some people make stuff up?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> US went to war to get rid of Sadam. Stupid idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that's it? Nothing else? Simple, very simple.
> 
> I think you just proved my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was that simple.
Click to expand...


As I said, thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Could we please discuss the topic of the thread.
Who is indigenous to the Land of Israel?

The Jews

The Arabs

The Turks 

None of the above?


----------



## Slyhunter

God gave the land to the Jews.
/thread.


----------



## frigidweirdo

Slyhunter said:


> God gave the land to the Jews.
> /thread.



Just need to prove God exists first. And that God is pro-Jewish too.


----------



## Slyhunter

frigidweirdo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> God gave the land to the Jews.
> /thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just need to prove God exists first. And that God is pro-Jewish too.
Click to expand...

Got a book that says it's true.


----------



## Sixties Fan

You guys are so OFF topic.
It is not about any god giving any land, it is about who are the indigenous people of the land.

Discuss.


----------



## Slyhunter

Sixties Fan said:


> You guys are so OFF topic.
> It is not about any god giving any land, it is about who are the indigenous people of the land.
> 
> Discuss.


ok, then Cave men owns the land.
Someone took the land from someone sometime. The original inhabitants lost it because they couldn't defend it. That is the way it works in a Darwinistic universe.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Slyhunter said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You guys are so OFF topic.
> It is not about any god giving any land, it is about who are the indigenous people of the land.
> 
> Discuss.
> 
> 
> 
> ok, then Cave men owns the land.
> Someone took the land from someone sometime. The original inhabitants lost it because they couldn't defend it. That is the way it works in a Darwinistic universe.
Click to expand...

Too generalized.

Let us all go back to Africa where we all came from, shall we?


That is not what this thread is about, thank you.


----------



## frigidweirdo

Slyhunter said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> God gave the land to the Jews.
> /thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just need to prove God exists first. And that God is pro-Jewish too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Got a book that says it's true.
Click to expand...


I got a book that says English kids can fly around on broomsticks. Must be true, it's in a book.


----------



## theliq

Hossfly said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wasn't talkin' 'bout no blanket ass Injuns, Steve. I was talkin' 'bout prophecy.
> Injuns ain't gettin' nothin' but a piece of bubble gum.
Click to expand...

Considering most Jews today are not REAL JEWS,JUST CENTRAL ASIAN AND EUROPEAN  CONVERTS...SYNTHETIC JEWS...WHO UNDER THE ANTI-SEMITIC ZIONIST TERRORISTS CREED have almost wiped out Semitic Jews

Zionists and Converts which is basically one and the same,began as a political Organization...they are not a Semetic Peoples,Shepardic Jews and Palestinians are the only Semitic Peoples.

Methinks you post through Ignorance Or you are shining a SPOTLIGHT on HYPOCRICY AND DOUBLE-STANDARDS,that continue to Plague Public Debate...I trust you are well Hoss...steve


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
Click to expand...

I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindful you and your Cronies are so wrong and Mindless...Keep Well Mindful...steve


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
Click to expand...


The usual blah.


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
Click to expand...

I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
Click to expand...


Nothing you say makes any sense.


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing you say makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Well to you and your Zionist Cult it wouldn't...because your whole existence started on a LIE and has continued ever since...your banal one-liner makes your whole existence regressive,once you understand and practice the truth,then and only then can you move forward...steveand Yes,I am a Gentile


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> 
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing you say makes any sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well to you and your Zionist Cult it wouldn't...because your whole existence started on a LIE and has continued ever since...your banal one-liner makes your whole existence regressive,once you understand and practice the truth,then and only then can you move forward...steveand Yes,I am a Gentile
Click to expand...


Go and stroke a koala.


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing you say makes any sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well to you and your Zionist Cult it wouldn't...because your whole existence started on a LIE and has continued ever since...your banal one-liner makes your whole existence regressive,once you understand and practice the truth,then and only then can you move forward...steveand Yes,I am a Gentile
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Go and stroke a koala.
Click to expand...

I only spoke the truth in my posts,in the last one...I was saying despite what Zionists believe,with Love and Affection they could change...just as well you didn't ask me to stroke my koala


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

theliq said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
Click to expand...


That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.


----------



## theliq

AzogtheDefiler said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
Click to expand...

Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people

The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> 
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
Click to expand...


What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think not,far from it,Jews have NO more claim to this Land more than anyone else...THEY ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE OF THIS LAND AT ALL,that is why Mindless you and your Cronies are so wrong...steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
Click to expand...

Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews

Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians

YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven

As for that compulsive Liar Rocco (with respect,as he erroneously calls himself,the idiot) No doubt I shall receive reams of Gobbledegook Bullshit...he tries but God Almighty he is Bloody Trying indeed


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> The usual blah.
> 
> 
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
Click to expand...

 

It was a simple question,
try again.


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do realize that you Zionists have big Problems with the Truth and Facts...Your Cults whole Mantra is a LIE...steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was a simple question,
> try again.
Click to expand...

Really Ry  more sillyness


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is a dumb statement. Your anti semitism is delicious.
> 
> 
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was a simple question,
> try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Ry  more sillyness
Click to expand...




You use that word in every post but can't figure out what it means.
Still no answer?


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well I clearly explained that Zionist Terrorists are NOT Semitic,but they are ANTI-SEMITIC.....they have a cute saying for Assasination  it is "NEGATIVE TREATMENT" just merely shows the DECEPTION of these people
> 
> The only thing DUMB on here is You U,DUMB ASS,how is downtown Tel Aive these days
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was a simple question,
> try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Ry  more sillyness
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You use that word in every post but can't figure out what it means.
> Still no answer?
Click to expand...

You know why because it's Pointless,I have explained enough anyway


----------



## Mindful

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the meaning of "SEMITIC"?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was a simple question,
> try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Ry  more sillyness
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You use that word in every post but can't figure out what it means.
> Still no answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You know why because it's Pointless,I have explained enough anyway
Click to expand...


Do you ever talk about anything else?  Like jam making for instance?


----------



## theliq

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Rylah,well mine is the original and true one,Yours no doubt is the Zionist Bullshit Version that incorrectly says that all Zionists are Semitic too,Zionism is a Political Movement NOT a Religious one,although the Zionists have tried to entwine themselves as being Semitic,but you don't have to ask me,or suck my breast on this matter,talk to the Ultras,they say you are NOT Semitic or Real Jews for that matter...The only peoples in the world are the Largest population of Semitic People The Palestinians followed by the Shepardic Jews
> 
> Despite what your Cult claim,we all know you Converts to Judaism are not real Jews and Certainly NOT a SEMITIC PEOPLE...infact you Zionist Converts are the WORST ANTI-SEMITES,who have tried to Wipe Out Semitic Jews and Semitic Palestinians
> 
> YOU ARE NOT SEMITIC...but keep BELLOWING THE ZIONIST CULT LINE...ZIONISM=LIARS=DEATH for the Real Semitic Peoples of the World..H.I.M.King Steven
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a simple question,
> try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really Ry  more sillyness
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You use that word in every post but can't figure out what it means.
> Still no answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You know why because it's Pointless,I have explained enough anyway
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you ever talk about anything else?  Like jam making for instance?
Click to expand...

I am knowlegable about most things,jam being one of them,i would watch my Mom make Blackberry Jam,from Blackberrys,i and my siblings would collect from the wild...beautiful colour and taste...as i have said before,MOM WAS WIDOWED at 28 with six children so things were tight indeed,she would bake and cook beautifully...and used many wild herbs and plants plus with our expert scrumping much came into the larder...she has 6 very beautiful children and through her she made very strong children...I am indebted         to her..I really miss her...moreover because of her we hold women in very high esteem indeed,unlike a lot of men,just sayin...steven


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

Mindful said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> When is Turkey returning Constantinople to the Christians? Islam is a religion started by a warlord.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
Click to expand...



Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.


----------



## Mindful

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
Click to expand...


Me? 

I am a Jew.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

Mindful said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me?
> 
> I am a Jew.
Click to expand...


My dad was right. He told me when I was a little boy that the biggest and dumbest anti semites you will run into in your life will be other Jews. I thought he was kidding but he was right. The native american comparison is not a false equivalency. Not remotely.


----------



## Mindful

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me?
> 
> I am a Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My dad was right. He told me when I was a little boy that the biggest and dumbest anti semites you will run into in your life will be other Jews. I thought he was kidding but he was right. The native american comparison is not a false equivalency. Not remotely.
Click to expand...


I don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## rylah

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Christianity is a religion that turned people into warlords. Different methods, same outcome. Only Islam got the sand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
Click to expand...

You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
Mindful is one of the most respectful posters in this wild corner of the forum.
 Please check again.


----------



## Mindful

rylah said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Expansionists for sure, not necessarily warlords. My point is in war the victors write history. I believe because Israel won the wars of 1948 and 1967 they get to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
Click to expand...



And I had  had high hopes of him.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

Mindful said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
Click to expand...


My bad


----------



## rylah

Mindful said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
Click to expand...


Mistakes happen, when I was new I've made lots of mess.
Forget about it, let's all eat Matza and wish each other a happy Begnning of Elul.


----------



## Mindful

rylah said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mistakes happen, when I was new I've made lots of mess.
> Forget about it, let's all eat Matza and wish each other a happy Begnning of Elul.
Click to expand...


I'm not that new.


----------



## rylah

Mindful said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mistakes happen, when I was new I've made lots of mess.
> Forget about it, let's all eat Matza and wish each other a happy Begnning of Elul.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not that new.
Click to expand...


You're not new, Azog is new to this site.

Let me follow my intuition, and ask You 2 a question - AzogtheDefiler, Mindful is Jerusalem Your eternal ancestral capital?


----------



## Mindful

rylah said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> 
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mistakes happen, when I was new I've made lots of mess.
> Forget about it, let's all eat Matza and wish each other a happy Begnning of Elul.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not that new.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're not new, Azog is new to this site.
> 
> Let me follow my intuition, and ask You 2 a question - AzogtheDefiler, Mindful is Jerusalem Your eternal ancestral capital?
Click to expand...


Yes.


----------



## rylah

Mindful said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have probably quoted the wrong poster by mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I had  had high hopes of him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mistakes happen, when I was new I've made lots of mess.
> Forget about it, let's all eat Matza and wish each other a happy Begnning of Elul.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not that new.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're not new, Azog is new to this site.
> 
> Let me follow my intuition, and ask You 2 a question - AzogtheDefiler, Mindful is Jerusalem Your eternal ancestral capital?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.
Click to expand...


Ok so if can't get two similar answers for a simple conclusion,
we'll have to dig the issue to come to an understanding regarding the Indigenous people of the Americas.

'Cause I have compared Israel more than once, figuratively to a *reservation* inside a conglomerate of Arab Muslim states. And I've expressed my expectation that willing indigenous nations, like Kurds or some Native American tribes follow Israel's example and get independent - if *they* want to.

I would support that argument for any people, as I do for my nation - Israel.
Are we on the same page?


----------



## theliq

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've read and from what's taking place currently, Israel is due to get all their land back in the near future. Them bleeping Magogs better be steppin' lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me?
> 
> I am a Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My dad was right. He told me when I was a little boy that the biggest and dumbest anti semites you will run into in your life will be other Jews. I thought he was kidding but he was right. The native american comparison is not a false equivalency. Not remotely.[/QUOTE/]
> 
> You are barking up the wrong tree here,Mindful and Ry are Good Jews,(but if Zionist could be Anti-Semitic) but on balance they are Proud of their history albeit they are probably decendents of Converts to Judaism and have no lineage to Abraham,thus not Semitic at all,ask the Ultras.
> 
> Although Brain Washed by their Zionist Political Cult to believe they are...….I find them nice people and at least they never waiver,which is admirable(even though an untruth) but what you see is what you get and I would have their backs with comment like yours above.
> 
> You can say what you like to me,despite all I am not Anti-Semitic in any way I support a free and Peaceful Palestine and Free and Peaceful Israel,I think the only person that thinks this way on here,mind you Israel has become too Zionist for my taste,and my condemnation of this Political Cult knows no bounds for obvious reasons.
> 
> No one has to Hate,it is totally negative and always a waste of time in the end.
> 
> To dissect you name for a second which is a reflection of your thought pattens….AZOG...is some Masculine Cartoon Character who Wars against others but Dies in the end for his troubles...…….the Defiler...self explanetary sic.....Trouble is you Defile yourself in the above post
> 
> If truth be known,you prossibly have small man,small dick SYNDROME...be nice to Jews the most persecuted peoples,it is a shame they have treated Palestinians in the same way,of all peoples,you would have thought they could have learnt  some lessons from their own history,instead of perpetuating them...steven
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  theliq,

Is this really an accurate representation of your personality???



theliq said:


> If truth be known,you prossibly have small man,small dick SYNDROME... →


*(COMMENT)*

Why direct insults towards people → rather than concentrate on the position they hold?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the NATIVE AMERICANS should now be GIVEN ALL THEIR LAND BACK is what you are saying then Hossie....................................steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More false equivalence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Your Jew hate is funny. When do the Christians get Constantinople back? You need to learn history before opining about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Me?
> 
> I am a Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My dad was right. He told me when I was a little boy that the biggest and dumbest anti semites you will run into in your life will be other Jews. I thought he was kidding but he was right. The native american comparison is not a false equivalency. Not remotely.[/QUOTE/]
> 
> You are barking up the wrong tree here,Mindful and Ry are Good Jews,(but if Zionist could be Anti-Semitic) but on balance they are Proud of their history albeit they are probably decendents of Converts to Judaism and have no lineage to Abraham,thus not Semitic at all,ask the Ultras.
> 
> Although Brain Washed by their Zionist Political Cult to believe they are...….I find them nice people and at least they never waiver,which is admirable(even though an untruth) but what you see is what you get and I would have their backs with comment like yours above.
> 
> You can say what you like to me,despite all I am not Anti-Semitic in any way I support a free and Peaceful Palestine and Free and Peaceful Israel,I think the only person that thinks this way on here,mind you Israel has become too Zionist for my taste,and my condemnation of this Political Cult knows no bounds for obvious reasons.
> 
> No one has to Hate,it is totally negative and always a waste of time in the end.
> 
> To dissect you name for a second which is a reflection of your thought pattens….AZOG...is some Masculine Cartoon Character who Wars against others but Dies in the end for his troubles...…….the Defiler...self explanetary sic.....Trouble is you Defile yourself in the above post
> 
> If truth be known,you prossibly have small man,small dick SYNDROME...be nice to Jews the most persecuted peoples,it is a shame they have treated Palestinians in the same way,of all peoples,you would have thought they could have learnt  some lessons from their own history,instead of perpetuating them...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Actually the Orthodox have always kept family trees through the generations.


----------



## flacaltenn

*I'm gonna ask ONE TIME nicely without warnings and thread bans. This forum has to refrain from getting 100% personal content in posts. Most all of you have been told that before. So there's not gonna be a lot of leniency if things get this personal again. 

10 posts marked for deletion. 
*


----------



## rylah

*Who's indigenous?*

Those who look outside and turn their asses towards Jerusalem





Or those who face her from every direction?


----------



## rylah

*Shema'a Yisrael - a call that has sounded continuously for 3,000 years by the indigenous people in their ancestral land:*


----------



## Sixties Fan

Israel's Jewish Indigenous Land Rights: A Conversation with Nan Greer, Part 1 (Judean Rose) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## watchingfromafar

Jews are not “indigenous” to the land now called “Israel”. The Jews were nomadic sheep herders who had no original “home”.

(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [*ISRAEL*] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.

(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation?* And they said unto Pharaoh, _Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers._

The above states what the Jews did for a living and the following tells us where the chose to burry their great leaders----------------------------------
Most of the great Jewish leaders were buried on the east side of the Jordan River, not in “Israel”.

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [* Israel* ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [* Israel* ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me *[ Israel* ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ *Israel* ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._

You bury your great leaders in your own homeland

Which Is Not the land falsely called


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Jews are not “indigenous” to the land now called “Israel”. The Jews were nomadic sheep herders who had no original “home”.



The Jewish people had no original "home".

Sure.  Jews just cropped up like daisies all over the world.  Miraculous.


----------



## montelatici

Well, they did not originate in what is called Israel today.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> Well, they did not originate in what is called Israel today.



You have GOT to be kidding me.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, they did not originate in what is called Israel today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have GOT to be kidding me.
Click to expand...

Of course they did not originate in this part of the world,they originated in what was Assyria they were part Arab part Jew


----------



## theliq

Sixties Fan said:


> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS

Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ theliq, et al,

I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.



theliq said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.

BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.


  ​
Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

Pamela Geller: Brown University Celebrates 'Palestinians' on 'Indigenous Peoples’ Day' | Breitbart


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ theliq, et al,
> 
> I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.
> 
> BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.
> 
> View attachment 221618 View attachment 221620​
> Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Hi Rocco,You are right on sentence one,right too on sentence two,with qualification,Soloman and his Tribe was not the original peoples of the area

Three,debatable,who knows what the future brings.

Trust you and yours are well Rocc...steve


----------



## Sixties Fan

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ theliq, et al,
> 
> I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.
> 
> BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.
> 
> View attachment 221618 View attachment 221620​
> Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ theliq, et al,
> 
> I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.
> 
> BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.
> 
> View attachment 221618 View attachment 221620​
> Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Here is a history of Hebron

The Ancient City of Hebron - TheTorah.com

This thread is about who is indigenous to the area.
Anti-Israel/Jewish groups, incited by the Arabs,  want others to believe that there never was an Israel or a Jewish people living on the land so that they claim all of it as theirs and put an end to Israel.

THAT is why this is important in the today's history.

The rights of the Jewish Nation/People on their ancient homeland must be respected, like any other indigenous people on their homelands.

No other indigenous people is having their indigenous identity and rights questioned, anywhere in the world.


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, they did not originate in what is called Israel today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have GOT to be kidding me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they did not originate in this part of the world,they originated in what was Assyria they were part Arab part Jew
Click to expand...

Of course they did.
Jews originate from Yehuda bar Yaakov and Bat Shua the Canaanite,
while Arabs originate from a North - African maidservant.


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
Click to expand...


When a righteous convert marries a Jew and lives in the community, after 3-5 generations their descendants certainly become an indistinguishable part of the family.
No descendants of a convert can remain a part of the tribe but through intermarriage within the tribe and separation from the nations.
They become indistinguishable from the core of the family, and if the indigenous tribe accepts them there's no distinction.

Simple math and common sense.
And frankly You have no say in this whatsoever, our tribe - our rules.


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When a righteous convert marries a Jew and lives in the community, after 3-5 generations their descendants certainly become an indistinguishable part of the family.
> No descendants of a convert can remain a part of the tribe but through intermarriage within the tribe and separation from the nations.
> They become indistinguishable from the core of the family, and if the indigenous tribe accepts them there's no distinction.
> 
> Simple math and common sense.
> And frankly You have no say in this whatsoever, our tribe - our rules.
Click to expand...

Shame you never explained this to me years ago Rylah but what I cannot understand is why European decended Jews, despise those from say Morrocco and other places,I have been to Israel-Palestine several times and have noted often, that the attitude and friendship between some Jews is much healthier with Palestinians and the respect for them...than with other Jews not from the European background...steve


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When a righteous convert marries a Jew and lives in the community, after 3-5 generations their descendants certainly become an indistinguishable part of the family.
> No descendants of a convert can remain a part of the tribe but through intermarriage within the tribe and separation from the nations.
> They become indistinguishable from the core of the family, and if the indigenous tribe accepts them there's no distinction.
> 
> Simple math and common sense.
> And frankly You have no say in this whatsoever, our tribe - our rules.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shame you never explained this to me years ago Rylah but what I cannot understand is why European decended Jews, despise those from say Morrocco and other places,I have been to Israel-Palestine several times and have noted often, that the attitude and friendship between some Jews is much healthier with Palestinians and the respect for them...than with other Jews not from the European background...steve
Click to expand...


You've chosen the wrong person to answer this question.
In my family we have relatives who's parents immigrated from virtually every corner of the globe.
But in short every immigrant society has its socio-economic hardships, that cannot be summed up by merely such broad brushing statements.
If anything I think Israel has been one of the most inclusive societies in the history of the world, all in spite of the unique situation of a young state who's society was severely traumatized in the countries of the diaspora.

In fact it were the Jews who came from Europe who raised the issue of social-economic gap and attempted to solve it. And it were primarily Jews from the European diaspora who promoted all of the peace initiatives with Arabs, while Jews who immigrated from Muslim countries most openly and unapologetically express their distrust in such notions, for natural reasons. As well as it was a Jew from the European diaspora, Menachem Begin, who was the symbol of unity between the different diaspora communities who gathered in Israel:


I suggest You visit again, listen to the radio and check who're our most successful singers, look at the covers of the prayer books in several synagogues, visit some weddings and report back.
Opposite to common misconception - Israel is predominantly a middle eastern society with its own unique identity, neither European nor Arab, rather simply Israeli.


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When a righteous convert marries a Jew and lives in the community, after 3-5 generations their descendants certainly become an indistinguishable part of the family.
> No descendants of a convert can remain a part of the tribe but through intermarriage within the tribe and separation from the nations.
> They become indistinguishable from the core of the family, and if the indigenous tribe accepts them there's no distinction.
> 
> Simple math and common sense.
> And frankly You have no say in this whatsoever, our tribe - our rules.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shame you never explained this to me years ago Rylah but what I cannot understand is why European decended Jews, despise those from say Morrocco and other places,I have been to Israel-Palestine several times and have noted often, that the attitude and friendship between some Jews is much healthier with Palestinians and the respect for them...than with other Jews not from the European background...steve
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've chosen the wrong person to answer this question.
> In my family we have relatives who's parents immigrated from virtually every corner of the globe.
> But in short every immigrant society has its socio-economic hardships, that cannot be summed up by merely such broad brushing statements.
> If anything I think Israel has been one of the most inclusive societies in the history of the world, all in spite of the unique situation of a young state who's society was severely traumatized in the countries of the diaspora.
> 
> In fact it were the Jews who came from Europe who raised the issue of social-economic gap and attempted to solve it. And it were primarily Jews from the European diaspora who promoted all of the peace initiatives with Arabs, while Jews who immigrated from Muslim countries most openly and unapologetically express their distrust in such notions, for natural reasons. As well as it was a Jew from the European diaspora, Menachem Begin, who was the symbol of unity between the different diaspora communities who gathered in Israel:
> 
> 
> I suggest You visit again, listen to the radio and check who're our most successful singers, look at the covers of the prayer books in several synagogues, visit some weddings and report back.
> Opposite to common misconception - Israel is predominantly a middle eastern society with its own unique identity, neither European nor Arab, rather simply Israeli.
Click to expand...

You know what I mean though Rylah,as for Begin I have NO time for that Zionist Criminal...steve


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> The rights of the Jewish Nation/People on their ancient homeland must be respected, like any other indigenous people on their homelands.



You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The truth will get out even if you lock it in a steel safe and drop to to the bottom of the sea; it will float to the top for all to see-----
_
*Promised Land*_

_“Moses went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the *promised land of Israel* spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty, according to Talmudic legend on 7 Adar, his 120th birthday exactly. _

_Moab is the historical name for a mountainous strip of land in modern-day _*Jordan *_running along the eastern shore of the _*Dead Sea. *_In ancient times, it was home to the kingdom of the Moabites, a people often in conflict with their Israelite neighbors to the west._

_The Moabites were a historical people, whose existence is attested to by numerous archeological findings, most notably the Mesha Stele, which describes the Moabite victory over an unnamed son of King_ _Omri of Israel. Their capital was _*Dibon, *_located next to the modern Jordanian town of _*Dhiban.*_”_

_Moab - New World Encyclopedia_

From there they moved to Egypt

(Gen 42:25 KJV)  _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

(Gen 45:20 KJV)  _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._

(Gen 45:21 KJV)  _*And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.*_

(Gen 47:1 KJV)  _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and *all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_

(Gen 47:3 KJV) _ And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_

Based on the above the “Promised Land” is not the land the Jews are occupying today. In biblical verse terms the Jews were nomads who were wanderers living off of the land grazing their sheep on the open plains.

The Truth Will Set you Free ~~~~~~~~~~~


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The rights of the Jewish Nation/People on their ancient homeland must be respected, like any other indigenous people on their homelands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The truth will get out even if you lock it in a steel safe and drop to to the bottom of the sea; it will float to the top for all to see-----
> _
> *Promised Land*_
> 
> _“Moses went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the *promised land of Israel* spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty, according to Talmudic legend on 7 Adar, his 120th birthday exactly. _
> 
> _Moab is the historical name for a mountainous strip of land in modern-day _*Jordan *_running along the eastern shore of the _*Dead Sea. *_In ancient times, it was home to the kingdom of the Moabites, a people often in conflict with their Israelite neighbors to the west._
> 
> _The Moabites were a historical people, whose existence is attested to by numerous archeological findings, most notably the Mesha Stele, which describes the Moabite victory over an unnamed son of King_ _Omri of Israel. Their capital was _*Dibon, *_located next to the modern Jordanian town of _*Dhiban.*_”_
> 
> _Moab - New World Encyclopedia_
> 
> From there they moved to Egypt
> 
> (Gen 42:25 KJV)  _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_
> 
> (Gen 45:20 KJV)  _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._
> 
> (Gen 45:21 KJV)  _*And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:1 KJV)  _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and *all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) _ And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
> 
> Based on the above the “Promised Land” is not the land the Jews are occupying today. In biblical verse terms the Jews were nomads who were wanderers living off of the land grazing their sheep on the open plains.
> 
> The Truth Will Set you Free ~~~~~~~~~~~
Click to expand...

Your hatred for Jews makes you see whatever you wish to see, interpret things whichever way you wish to interpret them.

This hatred tells you that Jews do not have any rights, much less any rights to their ancestral homeland, which is the Land of Israel.

Continue to follow your poison.  The only one being poisoned is yourself.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> Continue to follow your poison. The only one being poisoned is yourself.



So said the spider to the fly-----


----------



## Sixties Fan

An obvious, yet rarely considered example of indigenous people by any definition, is the Jewish People, whose history, traditions, and religious and national character have been and continue to be acknowledged by all, whether through the study of the Bible or of the history of civilization.

Like the North American “First Nations,” the early Chinese Han people, and other Asian tribes and peoples, the Jewish People for more than two millennia has consistently maintained the strongest claim to be the aboriginal people in its ancestral homeland despite the fact that as a result of exiles, repression, forced diasporas, Inquisition, and the Holocaust, Jews were but a small percentage of the inhabitants there.

The existence and roots of the Jewish People are widely documented, acknowledged, and recognized. This is evident both in the context of their historic location and settlement in their original tribal areas in the “Holy Land,” including the areas of Judea (origin of the term Jew) and Samaria, and also in the context of their presence in various Jewish dispersions and diasporas caused by periods of exile, persecution, and attempts to obliterate their character as a people (even up to present day).

Jewish peoplehood and its evident linkage to its ancestral homeland predates other religions and reaches back to antiquity.

(full article online)

Jews – The Indigenous People of Jerusalem and The Land of Israel | One Jerusalem


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> An obvious, yet rarely considered example of indigenous people by any definition, is the Jewish People, whose history, traditions, and religious and national character have been and continue to be acknowledged



Biblical-ly  speaking, the "Bible" clearly states that the Jews were shepherds who did not have a "homeland" of their own.
Having said that I checked your own web link and this is what it said~~~~~~~~

– _Arab and Palestinian leaders are attempting to establish a mythical, new narrative according to which the “*Palestinian People*” have existed as a distinct people indigenous to the area for thousands of years, *predating the Jewish People*._

The article acknowledges the existence of the Palestinian people and even states that the Palestinians predates the Jewish people.

The Truth Will Set You Free -


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> An obvious, yet rarely considered example of indigenous people by any definition, is the Jewish People, whose history, traditions, and religious and national character have been and continue to be acknowledged
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biblical-ly  speaking, the "Bible" clearly states that the Jews were shepherds who did not have a "homeland" of their own.
> Having said that I checked your own web link and this is what it said~~~~~~~~
> 
> – _Arab and Palestinian leaders are attempting to establish a mythical, new narrative according to which the “*Palestinian People*” have existed as a distinct people indigenous to the area for thousands of years, *predating the Jewish People*._
> 
> The article acknowledges the existence of the Palestinian people and even states that the Palestinians predates the Jewish people.
> 
> The Truth Will Set You Free -
Click to expand...

Pay attention:

"ARE  ATTEMPTING to establish a mythical NEW narrative....."

Read well, and understand well what you read.

The truth, as the article put it, is that the Jews are the Indigenous people of the Land, and the Arab Palestinians are invaders from the 7th century trying to wipe out any and ALL history of the Jews on their own ancient homeland and pass their "Palestinian" narrative as a very ancient one, instead of one invented in the year 1964 CE.

You like to understand ONLY what you like to understand, and nothing more.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> Jewish peoplehood and its evident linkage to its ancestral homeland predates other religions and reaches back to antiquity.



The Jews had "no" homeland and yes, there was a land called "Palestina~~

_*Judea or Judæa*
Judea - Wikipedia_

*Palestine* is a geographic region in Western Asia usually considered to include Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and in some definitions, some parts of western Jordan.
Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

The Jews of old were shepherds who were not leaders of a nation or a country, they were wanderers of the open lands

(Gen 42:25 KJV) _ Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

(Gen 45:20 KJV) _ Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._

(Gen 45:21 KJV)  _*And the children of Israel did so*: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._

(Gen 47:1 KJV) _ Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._


(Gen 47:3 KJV)  _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers._

*Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*​
End of the myth; let the truth be told -


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> You like to understand ONLY what you like to understand, and nothing more.



I was going to say that every same thing to you but you beat me to it so I will just flip the coin and head it your way instead.

Having said that Oh Wise One, You like to understand ONLY what you like to understand, and nothing more.
-


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You like to understand ONLY what you like to understand, and nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going to say that every same thing to you but you beat me to it so I will just flip the coin and head it your way instead.
> 
> Having said that Oh Wise One, You like to understand ONLY what you like to understand, and nothing more.
> -
Click to expand...

And still.....my indigenous people of the land will continue to hang on to the 20% of our original Homeland regardless of what Jew haters like you like to spread.

We do understand that Jew haters like you like to keep Jews as dhimmis in order to do with them what you like.  No more.

Flip the coin all you like, you are a nobody attempting to help steal our land and our freedom.  

To you and others, the only good Jews are the ones who say "Yes, Sir, No, Sir"  "Whatever you say, Sir" , keep us as second hand citizens and do with us whatever you think you should do.

Sorry, Jew hater.....NO MORE.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> Sorry, Jew hater.....NO MORE.



I am Jewish myself and you my friend is not invited into my house.

Sorry, such is life -


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, Jew hater.....NO MORE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am Jewish myself and you my friend is not invited into my house.
> 
> Sorry, such is life -
Click to expand...

You were not born Jewish.  Even a converted one.

You are a thief of land and of identity.

I do not care to know what else you go around stealing.


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> The Jews had "no" homeland and yes, there was a land called "Palestina~~



You make no actual sense.  You claim the Jews had no homeland and then post a wiki about Judea.  Which was (and IS) the homeland for the Jewish people.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> Which was (and IS) the homeland for the Jewish people.



Spin is which every way you want. The Jews abandoned wherever they came from and moved to Egypt and there they stayed until the day of Exodus.
_Promised Land_

_“Moses went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the *promised land of Israel* spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty, according to Talmudic legend on 7 Adar, his 120th birthday exactly. _

* Moab is the historical name for a mountainous strip of land in modern-day Jordan running along the eastern shore of the Dead Sea. *_In ancient times, it was home to the kingdom of the Moabites, a people often in conflict with their Israelite neighbors to the west._

_The Moabites were a historical people, whose existence is attested to by numerous archeological findings, most notably the Mesha Stele, which describes the Moabite victory over an unnamed son of King_ _Omri of Israel. Their capital was _*Dibon, *_located next to the modern Jordanian town of _*Dhiban.*_”_

_Moab - New World Encyclopedia_

You must first remember that it was a "promise", a promise that would be fulfilled "IF" they follow his commandments and not one day before.

*Shusha*, prove to me that they are now obeying the Lord's instructions and once done I will change my tune and embrace them.

But not until then -


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> *Shusha*, prove to me that they are now obeying the Lord's instructions and once done I will change my tune and embrace them.



So your point is indigeniety is determined by who is following G-d's instructions, and only those following G-d's instructions are indigenous peoples?  That's kinda wacky.


----------



## Shusha

Wait.  Does that mean First Nations peoples of the Americas are not indigenous because they were/are pagan?

And wait, are the Japanese not indigenous to Japan because they don't follow the "right" G-d?


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ theliq, et al,
> 
> I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.
> 
> BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.
> 
> View attachment 221618 View attachment 221620​
> Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Israel Is Our Shield, and It's Made Out of the Strongest Metal on Earth*

The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was motivated by the need to have a decoy and blocking force against the inevitable 20th Century jihad.  Whatever you are told by superficial pundits, the civilized world's real interest in Israel has everything to do with the perpetually recurring war between advanced civilization and Islamic savages.  The enemies of the evolved races jealously want to destroy us and bring the world back to the Stone Age those creatures from No Man's Lands belong in.


----------



## theliq

Sixties Fan said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The rights of the Jewish Nation/People on their ancient homeland must be respected, like any other indigenous people on their homelands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The truth will get out even if you lock it in a steel safe and drop to to the bottom of the sea; it will float to the top for all to see-----
> _
> *Promised Land*_
> 
> _“Moses went up Mount Nebo to the top of Pisgah, looked over the *promised land of Israel* spread out before him, and died, at the age of one hundred and twenty, according to Talmudic legend on 7 Adar, his 120th birthday exactly. _
> 
> _Moab is the historical name for a mountainous strip of land in modern-day _*Jordan *_running along the eastern shore of the _*Dead Sea. *_In ancient times, it was home to the kingdom of the Moabites, a people often in conflict with their Israelite neighbors to the west._
> 
> _The Moabites were a historical people, whose existence is attested to by numerous archeological findings, most notably the Mesha Stele, which describes the Moabite victory over an unnamed son of King_ _Omri of Israel. Their capital was _*Dibon, *_located next to the modern Jordanian town of _*Dhiban.*_”_
> 
> _Moab - New World Encyclopedia_
> 
> From there they moved to Egypt
> 
> (Gen 42:25 KJV)  _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_
> 
> (Gen 45:20 KJV)  _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._
> 
> (Gen 45:21 KJV)  _*And the children of Israel did so: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:1 KJV)  _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and *all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) _ And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
> 
> Based on the above the “Promised Land” is not the land the Jews are occupying today. In biblical verse terms the Jews were nomads who were wanderers living off of the land grazing their sheep on the open plains.
> 
> The Truth Will Set you Free ~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your hatred for Jews makes you see whatever you wish to see, interpret things whichever way you wish to interpret them.
> 
> This hatred tells you that Jews do not have any rights, much less any rights to their ancestral homeland, which is the Land of Israel.
> 
> Continue to follow your poison.  The only one being poisoned is yourself.
Click to expand...

NO,HE SPEAKS THE COMPLETE TRUTH...THERE IS NO POISON IN HIS RESPONSE...JUST ACTUAL FACT...

YOUR SUMMATION IS BASED ON THE USUAL DEFENSE STRATEGY OF THE FILTH OF ZIONIST TERRORISM,THE IDF ARE COWARDS AND MOST ARE MISFITS...THE REAL TERM FOR THESE CHILD DEATHS....                                  IS MURDER...                  

 STOP CALLING OUT PEOPLE AS JEW HATERS,WHEN CLEARLY THE WRITER WAS NOT BEING HATEFUL AT ALL,JUST FACTUAL.

 NOTE.HE MERELY STATED THE DISGUSTING APPAULLING TRUTH OF THE IDF/ZIONIST INSPIRED MURDERS and the Tribalism and Nomadism of the Israelites,who were interlopers and banal where ever they wandered.steve   As "Watching" stated...The Truth WILL set you Free


----------



## theliq

The Sage of Main Street said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ theliq, et al,
> 
> I must be misunderstanding the conversation here.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hebron - The Land of the Hebrews (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
> 
> 
> 
> Still being Silly Sixties...Your notourious Lies,Hebron was never the land of the Jews or todays CONVERTS TO JUDIASM...AKA the mongrel race AKA  ZIONISTS
> 
> Lovely though Sixties to see you around...I trust you and yours are well...steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That entire landscape changed hands many, many times.
> 
> BUT! I believe that Solomon's Kindom (≈ 3000 years ago) Hebron was under his domain.
> 
> View attachment 221618 View attachment 221620​
> Of course, it is possible I could be wrong.  But I don't believe anything prior to 1948 makes any difference in how we deal with the contemporary Middle East.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Israel Is Our Shield, and It's Made Out of the Strongest Metal on Earth*
> 
> The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was motivated by the need to have a decoy and blocking force against the inevitable 20th Century jihad.  Whatever you are told by superficial pundits, the civilized world's real interest in Israel has everything to do with the perpetually recurring war between advanced civilization and Islamic savages.  The enemies of the evolved races jealously want to destroy us and bring the world back to the Stone Age those creatures from No Man's Lands belong in.
Click to expand...

I thought I couldn't see such a depraved or ridiculous statement than this...There is something completely abnormal about the writer and his RAVINGS of total lies and stupidity..better suited to the aslylam than on this site of possible normality.

I will stop here because I will be banned for life,suffice to say the Mods(all very nice people) have me Under Very Heavy Manners(to try to control my natural residivism of breaches of the rules??cricky I have only chalked up 70 odd infractions!!!!!!!!!(shocking really) but that is why I must moderate my normal or abnormal zealousness... Great being Australian,folk like the nice mods make allowances for us well me actually,poor theliq he's aussie...such under estimation because we are quite a smart group of folk...steve  just sayin


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> So your point is indigeniety is determined by who is following G-d's instructions, and only those following G-d's instructions are indigenous peoples? That's kinda wacky.



No, you missed the point but it doesn't matter. Arabs and the Israelite's are "both" indigenous to the region.


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So your point is indigeniety is determined by who is following G-d's instructions, and only those following G-d's instructions are indigenous peoples? That's kinda wacky.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, you missed the point but it doesn't matter. Arabs and the Israelite's are "both" indigenous to the region.
Click to expand...


Not if you use a proper definition of "indigenous".


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> Not if you use a proper definition of "indigenous".



Oh Wise One, post the "proper" definition of "indigenous".
Thanks in advance -


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not if you use a proper definition of "indigenous".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Wise One, post the "proper" definition of "indigenous".
> Thanks in advance -
Click to expand...


“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.

            “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:

a)      Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;

b)      Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;

c)      Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);

d)      Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);

e)      Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;

f)      Other relevant factors.

            “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).

            “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference"


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> “Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them.



As I said, the Israelite's and the Arabs fit that definition.


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Definition of indigenous *

*1: *produced, growing, living, or occurring naturally in a particular region or environment _indigenous_ plantsthe _indigenous_ culture
Definition of INDIGENOUS

As I said, the Israelite's and the Arabs fit that definition.


----------



## watchingfromafar

According to the above poll-
*Who are the indiginous people(s) of the Palestine region?*

*The majority vote*: People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> “Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said, the Israelite's and the Arabs fit that definition.
Click to expand...


No, the Arabs do not.  They are NOT pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on the territory.  They ARE the invading and colonizing societies.  Their culture did not develop there -- but was brought from elsewhere by invading and colonizing societies.  Modern Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the invading and colonizing cultures who adopted the invading, colonizing culture.  That makes them not indigenous.

And again, I re-iterate my point that it does not matter with respect to ending the conflict and self-determination for both peoples.


----------



## Shusha

The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.



Find me an "ancient" map showing the Israelite kingdom and I will shine your shoes for a month.



 



No wait, my bad, I can see "Israel", the man; paddling across the Red Sea and soon thereafter he will be da indigenous one,.,.,.,, NO WAIT, he's paddling in the wrong way, hes headed for Ethiopia!!!!!!


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Find me an "ancient" map showing the Israelite kingdom and I will shine your shoes for a month.
> 
> View attachment 222613
> 
> No wait, my bad, I can see "Israel", the man; paddling across the Red Sea and soon thereafter he will be da indigenous one,.,.,.,, NO WAIT, he's paddling in the wrong way, hes headed for Ethiopia!!!!!!
Click to expand...



Blah, blah, blah.  You can't address my actual points so you retreat to your bizarre argument that "maps" are the determining factor with respect to defining indigenous peoples.  Weak.  Also boring.


----------



## Shusha

Going back to the definition of "indigenous", let's look at what the Arabs would have to demonstrate in order to be shown to be indigenous to the particular territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture (language, religion, legal system, traditions, style of dress, rituals, celebrations, holidays, etc) ORIGINATED in that territory PRIOR to the invasion or colonization of other cultures.  

They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture did NOT pre-exist elsewhere, but developed on that specific territory.

They would have to demonstrate that they are DISTINCT from other cultures in the region.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> You can't address my actual points so you retreat to your bizarre argument that "maps" are the determining factor with respect to defining indigenous peoples. Weak. Also boring.



Oh poor baby mama can't find da map for you--?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture (language, religion, legal system, traditions, style of dress, rituals, celebrations, holidays, etc) ORIGINATED in that territory PRIOR to the invasion or colonization of other cultures.



Oh wise one, how many people (%%)  prior to your fake invasion spoke Hebrew and Arabic-?

I await your answer.


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Geography of Ancient Egypt*
Someone needs to write a letter complaining that they left out Judia!!!!!!
(note: they must be anti-semites!!!)


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can't address my actual points so you retreat to your bizarre argument that "maps" are the determining factor with respect to defining indigenous peoples. Weak. Also boring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh poor baby mama can't find da map for you--?
Click to expand...


Oh wow.  So you are doubling down on the idea that no map = no people?  Sad.


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture (language, religion, legal system, traditions, style of dress, rituals, celebrations, holidays, etc) ORIGINATED in that territory PRIOR to the invasion or colonization of other cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wise one, how many people (%%)  prior to your fake invasion spoke Hebrew and Arabic-?
> 
> I await your answer.
Click to expand...



100% of people whose culture originated in that place spoke the language of that place and practiced the culture of that place. 100%.  Any losses because of the invading and colonizing cultures are losses BECAUSE of invasion and colonization.  Consuming, eliminating, destroying and replacing a local, indigenous culture does not make the invading culture indigenous.


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Shusha*, please forgive me for my rude and crude posts.

I’m gone to other places

Wish you and yours a great day and beyond


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not if you use a proper definition of "indigenous".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Wise One, post the "proper" definition of "indigenous".
> Thanks in advance -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)      Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)      Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)      Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)      Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)      Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)      Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference"
Click to expand...

Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land,which disqualifies your claim,moreover you fled this land(hence the term :Wandering Jew") You may have resided here but you will find your cousins the Semitic Palestinians have more right to this Land...Because most Jews today are converts to Judaism and can never be Semitic because unlike the Palestinians you have no direct lineage to Abraham and I'm sorry Schusa they are the truth and rights of the matter...I'm theliq,Ever Living,Ever Truthful,Ever Fair...steve   S., you can wrap it any way you want,but you can never be Semitic...You can be a Zionists,but as much as this Terrorist Cult try to say they are Semitic,this is but another lie...ask the Ultra's they will tell you what you are


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture (language, religion, legal system, traditions, style of dress, rituals, celebrations, holidays, etc) ORIGINATED in that territory PRIOR to the invasion or colonization of other cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wise one, how many people (%%)  prior to your fake invasion spoke Hebrew and Arabic-?
> 
> I await your answer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 100% of people whose culture originated in that place spoke the language of that place and practiced the culture of that place. 100%.  Any losses because of the invading and colonizing cultures are losses BECAUSE of invasion and colonization.  Consuming, eliminating, destroying and replacing a local, indigenous culture does not make the invading culture indigenous.
Click to expand...

You have agreed with me and totally contradicted your original prose st


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  Shusha, et al,

The term "indigenous," (as in the"indigenous" population) does not have a true and universally accepted recognized definition.  Nearly all regions of the world are in constant "transformation."  And that is the term most people are actually suppose to use.



Shusha said:


> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.


*(COMMENT)*

For instance:  Here in the United States we think of the American Indian as the indigenous population.  But is that really true?  Or were the Anasazi, the more ancient Native Americans, the real indigenous population?

The White Explores thought the American Indians were the original Native Americans; and the Indigenous population.

The term indigenous population is a niece generalized term, but it is a rather foolish term to use when trying to make a claim.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Shusha, et al,
> 
> The term "indigenous," (as in the"indigenous" population) does not have a true and universally accepted recognized definition.  Nearly all regions of the world are in constant "transformation."  And that is the term most people are actually suppose to use.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For instance:  Here in the United States we think of the American Indian as the indigenous population.  But is that really true?  Or were the Anasazi, the more ancient Native Americans, the real indigenous population?
> 
> The White Explores thought the American Indians were the original Native Americans; and the Indigenous population.
> 
> The term indigenous population is a niece generalized term, but it is a rather foolish term to use when trying to make a claim.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

When the Arabs make claim that they have been on the Land of Israel, Ancient Canaan, for at least 10,000 years, in order to make claim to the land over the Jewish people, the world Indigenous does have a meaning.

It does not mean that , because the Arabs created a religion where they are to despise the Jews as inferior to them, that they can make claim to the whole land as being indigenous to the land over the Jewish people who do have a history on it well documented even in Islam.

It has been very clear that the Arab's use of the word indigenous for themselves has been with the intention of taking away from the Jews any sovereignty they have legally earned in the past century .

The Arabs have been going as far as spreading the idea that there is no Jewish History on the land, only a Muslim one.

As long as the Muslims continue to deny any Jewish history or connection to their ancient homeland, the word indigenous must continue to define those who were there long before the Arab/Muslim invasion occurred.

They are doing this to the Jews, now,  they could be doing it to another people, next.


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land



Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> The term indigenous population is a niece generalized term, but it is a rather foolish term to use when trying to make a claim.



Not so.  The term is easily understood and readily definable.  It is easily applied all over the world to various groups and peoples and cultures.  Only when it comes to Jews does it suddenly have no meaning or mean something else entirely.


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
Click to expand...

Read your history and you will elevate your understanding  SIAM


----------



## theliq

Sixties Fan said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  Shusha, et al,
> 
> The term "indigenous," (as in the"indigenous" population) does not have a true and universally accepted recognized definition.  Nearly all regions of the world are in constant "transformation."  And that is the term most people are actually suppose to use.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For instance:  Here in the United States we think of the American Indian as the indigenous population.  But is that really true?  Or were the Anasazi, the more ancient Native Americans, the real indigenous population?
> 
> The White Explores thought the American Indians were the original Native Americans; and the Indigenous population.
> 
> The term indigenous population is a niece generalized term, but it is a rather foolish term to use when trying to make a claim.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When the Arabs make claim that they have been on the Land of Israel, Ancient Canaan, for at least 10,000 years, in order to make claim to the land over the Jewish people, the world Indigenous does have a meaning.
> 
> It does not mean that , because the Arabs created a religion where they are to despise the Jews as inferior to them, that they can make claim to the whole land as being indigenous to the land over the Jewish people who do have a history on it well documented even in Islam.
> 
> It has been very clear that the Arab's use of the word indigenous for themselves has been with the intention of taking away from the Jews any sovereignty they have legally earned in the past century .
> 
> The Arabs have been going as far as spreading the idea that there is no Jewish History on the land, only a Muslim one.
> 
> As long as the Muslims continue to deny any Jewish history or connection to their ancient homeland, the word indigenous must continue to define those who were there long before the Arab/Muslim invasion occurred.
> 
> They are doing this to the Jews, now,  they could be doing it to another people, next.
Click to expand...

Sorry to correct you 60's but the Palestinians never despised the Jews at all,they lived in harmony on the whole...Up until the shambles of 1948 and it is the Zionists who did the Despising then & since,you people must not muddy the waters and speak the truth if that is possible,which would be desirable to move forward...SIAM


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read you history and you will elevate your understanding  SIAM
Click to expand...


Pretty sure I can run circles around you with respect to actual history.


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read you history and you will elevate your understanding  SIAM
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pretty sure I can run circles around you with respect to actual history.
Click to expand...

Don't think so,as I ran the 440 yards in 48.3 when the world record at the time was 46.9 but keep trying...steve


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read you history and you will elevate your understanding  SIAM
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pretty sure I can run circles around you with respect to actual history.
Click to expand...

Anti Zionism by the way is not as you proclaim at the bottom of each of your posts


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea that an invading, colonizing culture BECOMES indigenous by consuming, eliminating and replacing the local culture with their own culture is vile and opposes the very concept of indigeneity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Find me an "ancient" map showing the Israelite kingdom and I will shine your shoes for a month.
> View attachment 222624
> 
> 
> 
> No wait, my bad, I can see "Israel", the man; paddling across the Red Sea and soon thereafter he will be da indigenous one,.,.,.,, NO WAIT, he's paddling in the wrong way, hes headed for Ethiopia!!!!!!
Click to expand...








My shoes are fine thank You, don't need to bother.


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They would have to demonstrate that their specific culture (language, religion, legal system, traditions, style of dress, rituals, celebrations, holidays, etc) ORIGINATED in that territory PRIOR to the invasion or colonization of other cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh wise one, how many people (%%)  prior to your fake invasion spoke Hebrew and Arabic-?
> 
> I await your answer.
Click to expand...


Hebraic dialects were spoken by a majority of Canaanite people.
Hebrew is the last remaining Canaanite language in common use.


----------



## rylah

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not if you use a proper definition of "indigenous".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Wise One, post the "proper" definition of "indigenous".
> Thanks in advance -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)      Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)      Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)      Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)      Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)      Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)      Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land,which disqualifies your claim,moreover you fled this land(hence the term :Wandering Jew") You may have resided here but you will find your cousins the Semitic Palestinians have more right to this Land...Because most Jews today are converts to Judaism and can never be Semitic because unlike the Palestinians you have no direct lineage to Abraham and I'm sorry Schusa they are the truth and rights of the matter...I'm theliq,Ever Living,Ever Truthful,Ever Fair...steve   S., you can wrap it any way you want,but you can never be Semitic...You can be a Zionists,but as much as this Terrorist Cult try to say they are Semitic,this is but another lie...ask the Ultra's they will tell you what you are
Click to expand...


Most of today's Jews are direct descendants of Levantine people.
Especially the Israelites of today, no other nation has produced anything as closely outstanding as the Jews - the land has kept all the best gifts for her true children.


----------



## montelatici

You sound like Hitler and his aryans.


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> You sound like Hitler and his aryans.



Hitler was a suicidal psychopath like the Jihadi ilk, both lost major wars trying to subjugate other nations, both set to dominate the world and eradicate the Jews.

Both ended up humiliated.


----------



## rylah

*Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  rylah, et al,

*BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?

_
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*​_
I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.

Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.






 Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.


rylah said:


> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*



*(REFERENCE)*_

In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_

_(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
_(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
_(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
_
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*​
_*(COMMENT)*[/I]

The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.  

In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...



The Arab Palestinians, as is typical for them, use parts of the resolutions, documents or "the law" to support their incorrect positions while conveniently ignoring other parts of the same resolutions, documents or "law".  

Case in point:  

In 1986 it was further added that any individual who identified himself or herself as indigenous and was accepted by the group or the community as one of its members was to be regarded as an indigenous person (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7/Add.4. para.381).

What does that mean, in terms of this question:  If the indigeous people are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?

It means that uprooting a community and forcing that community to live elsewhere is not relevant to inclusion or exclusion from indigenous status.  (Which seems to me to uphold the notion that displacing people is morally incorrect).

And the Arab Palestinians WANT to adopt this idea.  Otherwise the "right to return" does not exist.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

There is no question that Dr Said has a strong position and argument on this point.  But this position, much like the presentations by Dr Noam Chomsky, is very critics of the Peace process and the Palestinian leadership of Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization.  And similarly, both Said and Chomsky have their advanced education and experience in a soft science other than political science or government _(one in literature and the other in linguistics)_.



P F Tinmore said:


> • Professor Edward Said (1935 - 2003) • Proponent of the political rights of the Arab Palestinian People (See: • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) • Columbia University


*(COMMENT)*

Neither is sympathetic to the cause of a Jewish National Home, and neither really addresses the impact on the objective goal of establishing a Jewish National Home in a political environment charged by the majority anti-Semitic displeasure of the Arab Palestinian.  Neither is representative of a stakeholder, and neither has extended their position into the dilemma of facing into the lamp of the 21st Century political arclight. 

While Dr Said's presentation was very professional, it really did not answer any of the questions that wrangle the new era politics.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> There is no question that Dr Said has a strong position and argument on this point.  But this position, much like the presentations by Dr Noam Chomsky, is very critics of the Peace process and the Palestinian leadership of Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization.  And similarly, both Said and Chomsky have their advanced education and experience in a soft science other than political science or government _(one in literature and the other in linguistics)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> • Professor Edward Said (1935 - 2003) • Proponent of the political rights of the Arab Palestinian People (See: • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) • Columbia University
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Neither is sympathetic to the cause of a Jewish National Home, and neither really addresses the impact on the objective goal of establishing a Jewish National Home in a political environment charged by the majority anti-Semitic displeasure of the Arab Palestinian.  Neither is representative of a stakeholder, and neither has extended their position into the dilemma of facing into the lamp of the 21st Century political arclight.
> 
> While Dr Said's presentation was very professional, it really did not answer any of the questions that wrangle the new era politics.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Nice deflection.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> There is no question that Dr Said has a strong position and argument on this point.  But this position, much like the presentations by Dr Noam Chomsky, is very critics of the Peace process and the Palestinian leadership of Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization.  And similarly, both Said and Chomsky have their advanced education and experience in a soft science other than political science or government _(one in literature and the other in linguistics)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> • Professor Edward Said (1935 - 2003) • Proponent of the political rights of the Arab Palestinian People (See: • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) • Columbia University
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Neither is sympathetic to the cause of a Jewish National Home, and neither really addresses the impact on the objective goal of establishing a Jewish National Home in a political environment charged by the majority anti-Semitic displeasure of the Arab Palestinian.  Neither is representative of a stakeholder, and neither has extended their position into the dilemma of facing into the lamp of the 21st Century political arclight.
> 
> While Dr Said's presentation was very professional, it really did not answer any of the questions that wrangle the new era politics.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nice deflection.
Click to expand...

The deflection robot is at it again.     Too programmed to spill the same thing, over and over and over again.

Speak to your master, oh robot, and see if they can add an ability to discuss issues, not just run from them.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Edward Said's argument is false and self-contradicting.

His argument is not for indigenous rights, but for rights on the basis of longstanding presence, which by itself doesn't give an indigenous status according to the definition of the UN.

Furthermore he attempts to equate* "domination"* to *"inhabitance"*, which is in effect a total denial of indigenous rights, and their purpose.

Using his argument Spaniards could claim that they're indigenous Moroccans because they have longer domination over Melila and Ceuta in North Africa, or the USA could claim that they were the indigenous nation of America because they had longer domination of the territory than the Iroquois Confederacy.

Again- longstanding inhabitance or "domination", as he puts it, alone doesn't make a group indigenous, but rather defines it as an invading civilization.


----------



## rylah

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> There is no question that Dr Said has a strong position and argument on this point.  But this position, much like the presentations by Dr Noam Chomsky, is very critics of the Peace process and the Palestinian leadership of Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization.  And similarly, both Said and Chomsky have their advanced education and experience in a soft science other than political science or government _(one in literature and the other in linguistics)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> • Professor Edward Said (1935 - 2003) • Proponent of the political rights of the Arab Palestinian People (See: • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) • Columbia University
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Neither is sympathetic to the cause of a Jewish National Home, and neither really addresses the impact on the objective goal of establishing a Jewish National Home in a political environment charged by the majority anti-Semitic displeasure of the Arab Palestinian.  Neither is representative of a stakeholder, and neither has extended their position into the dilemma of facing into the lamp of the 21st Century political arclight.
> 
> While Dr Said's presentation was very professional, it really did not answer any of the questions that wrangle the new era politics.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I have to disagree, he's merely dancing around the fact, that Jews have the main claim based on longstanding presence as well, he merely switches the definitions to go around 3500 years of Jewish history in that territory.

This is not a scientific approach.


----------



## rylah

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The bluff is easy to tell when looking at the culture of the group, indigenous people have all of their core cycles and communication systems based on one specific land and its' seasons.

Arabs live by the natural cycle of of Mecca, Jews live by the natural cycles of Canaan.

RoccoR
Edit:
I agree with the part regarding:


"..the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law."
I would add a long list of all who cooperate under the slogan of "Jews are foreigners in Judea", but that would be pretty much the majority of the UN blocks.
Meanwhile what is important is there's a healthy discussion regarding  an official legal claim of the Jewish nation for full sovereignty over Jerusalem.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Edward Said's argument is false and self-contradicting.
> 
> His argument is not for indigenous rights, but for rights on the basis of longstanding presence, which by itself doesn't give an indigenous status according to the definition of the UN.
> 
> Furthermore he attempts to equate* "domination"* to *"inhabitance"*, which is in effect a total denial of indigenous rights, and their purpose.
> 
> Using his argument Spaniards could claim that they're indigenous Moroccans because they have longer domination over Melila and Ceuta in North Africa, or the USA could claim that they were the indigenous nation of America because they had longer domination of the territory than the Iroquois Confederacy.
> 
> Again- longstanding inhabitance or "domination", as he puts it, alone doesn't make a group indigenous, but rather defines it as an invading civilization.
Click to expand...

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.

Edward Said gave a list of some of the people who have invaded/conquered/occupied that land. I don't believe that every time a territory falls under new rule everybody moves out and a whole new population moves in. Usually the upper crust is removed and everybody else stays to be exploited. Many people have come and gone but there is a core group of people who have stayed and put down roots. These are the people of the place. Call them the indigenous, the natives, whatever they are the people who belong to that land.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Edward Said's argument is false and self-contradicting.
> 
> His argument is not for indigenous rights, but for rights on the basis of longstanding presence, which by itself doesn't give an indigenous status according to the definition of the UN.
> 
> Furthermore he attempts to equate* "domination"* to *"inhabitance"*, which is in effect a total denial of indigenous rights, and their purpose.
> 
> Using his argument Spaniards could claim that they're indigenous Moroccans because they have longer domination over Melila and Ceuta in North Africa, or the USA could claim that they were the indigenous nation of America because they had longer domination of the territory than the Iroquois Confederacy.
> 
> Again- longstanding inhabitance or "domination", as he puts it, alone doesn't make a group indigenous, but rather defines it as an invading civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> Edward Said gave a list of some of the people who have invaded/conquered/occupied that land. I don't believe that every time a territory falls under new rule everybody moves out and a whole new population moves in. Usually the upper crust is removed and everybody else stays to be exploited. Many people have come and gone but there is a core group of people who have stayed and put down roots. These are the people of the place. Call them the indigenous, the natives, whatever they are the people who belong to that land.
Click to expand...


Yes we call them Jews, have a documented history of inhabitance for 3500 continuous years, who established a distinct civilization centered around that specific land, as Edward Said claimed THERE IS a certainly a stronger claim.

Arabs are simply not indigenous to Palestine, by definition.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Zionism: Taking A Stand for the Indigenous Rights of Middle Eastern Jews*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Edward Said's argument is false and self-contradicting.
> 
> His argument is not for indigenous rights, but for rights on the basis of longstanding presence, which by itself doesn't give an indigenous status according to the definition of the UN.
> 
> Furthermore he attempts to equate* "domination"* to *"inhabitance"*, which is in effect a total denial of indigenous rights, and their purpose.
> 
> Using his argument Spaniards could claim that they're indigenous Moroccans because they have longer domination over Melila and Ceuta in North Africa, or the USA could claim that they were the indigenous nation of America because they had longer domination of the territory than the Iroquois Confederacy.
> 
> Again- longstanding inhabitance or "domination", as he puts it, alone doesn't make a group indigenous, but rather defines it as an invading civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> Edward Said gave a list of some of the people who have invaded/conquered/occupied that land. I don't believe that every time a territory falls under new rule everybody moves out and a whole new population moves in. Usually the upper crust is removed and everybody else stays to be exploited. Many people have come and gone but there is a core group of people who have stayed and put down roots. These are the people of the place. Call them the indigenous, the natives, whatever they are the people who belong to that land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we call them Jews, have a documented history of inhabitance for 3500 continuous years, who established a distinct civilization centered around that specific land, as Edward Said claimed THERE IS a certainly a stronger claim.
> 
> Arabs are simply not indigenous to Palestine, by definition.
Click to expand...

OK, but they were never exclusively there so they have no exclusive claim to the land.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF:*  We don't truly understand what is meant by "Indigenous Poeple?"  What makes one group an Indigenous People and another Group not?  If the indigeouspeople are forced to leave on the needs of survival, and then return some number of generations later, are they indigenous or foreign?
> 
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​I think that most of these "indigenous to Palestine" arguments are seriously flawed; for both the Arab Palestinian and the Jewish People of Israel.
> 
> Even in this presentation, the discussion starts with the remembrance of the 20th Century direct support by European collaborator for totalitarianism and the extreme persecution by the Germanic ethnic group themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Download A/RES/61/295 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.pdf (165.85 KB)​It is important to remember that the Arab Palestinian believes that they now have a legal position based on the UN Declaration.  They have this mistaken idea that the UN Declaration supports what they think is justice for them.
> ​
> *(REFERENCE)*
> _
> In 1983 the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) enlarged this definition of "indigenous people" (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:_
> 
> _(a) they are the descendants of groups, which were in the territory at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origin arrived there;_
> _(b) precisely because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have almost preserved intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous;_
> _(c) they are, even if only formally, placed under a state structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to their own._[/I]
> _*----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *_​*(COMMENT)*[/I]
> 
> The global doctrine advocates the moral condemnable of the social injustice of NOT recognizing the right of all peoples to be different → to consider themselves different.
> 
> In this case, the Indigenous Peoples (Jews) have suffered from historic injustices by an unfair majority (Arab Palestinians) acting under the cover and color of law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Edward Said's argument is false and self-contradicting.
> 
> His argument is not for indigenous rights, but for rights on the basis of longstanding presence, which by itself doesn't give an indigenous status according to the definition of the UN.
> 
> Furthermore he attempts to equate* "domination"* to *"inhabitance"*, which is in effect a total denial of indigenous rights, and their purpose.
> 
> Using his argument Spaniards could claim that they're indigenous Moroccans because they have longer domination over Melila and Ceuta in North Africa, or the USA could claim that they were the indigenous nation of America because they had longer domination of the territory than the Iroquois Confederacy.
> 
> Again- longstanding inhabitance or "domination", as he puts it, alone doesn't make a group indigenous, but rather defines it as an invading civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> Edward Said gave a list of some of the people who have invaded/conquered/occupied that land. I don't believe that every time a territory falls under new rule everybody moves out and a whole new population moves in. Usually the upper crust is removed and everybody else stays to be exploited. Many people have come and gone but there is a core group of people who have stayed and put down roots. These are the people of the place. Call them the indigenous, the natives, whatever they are the people who belong to that land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we call them Jews, have a documented history of inhabitance for 3500 continuous years, who established a distinct civilization centered around that specific land, as Edward Said claimed THERE IS a certainly a stronger claim.
> 
> Arabs are simply not indigenous to Palestine, by definition.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but they were never exclusively there so they have no exclusive claim to the land.
Click to expand...


What do You mean by exclusively?
One is either indigenous or not, Greece is either a Greek land or it's not.
I'm not arguing that groups don't have rights based on longstanding presence, my argument is for sovereignty rights of any *indigenous *nation that thrives to* re-establish* their *historic *homeland.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al,

This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."



P F Tinmore said:


> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.


*(COMMENT)*

It is not a matter of a claim...

It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.

Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.

There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.

The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is not a matter of a claim...
> 
> It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.
> 
> Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.
> 
> There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.
> 
> The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I think it's important to understand the lexicon, because the international law regarding those times was actually framed on a similar basis as the definition of an indigenous nation. It was specifically stated that a specific nation was to re-establish their homeland based on (claims of) historic ties and preservation.

Therefore Israel is an exemplary case in international law of an ancient indigenous nation that was successful in gaining effective sovereignty.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is not a matter of a claim...
> 
> It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.
> 
> Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.
> 
> There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.
> 
> The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

How does all this refute my post?


----------



## rylah

*International Definition of Indigenous Rights*


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is not a matter of a claim...
> 
> It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.
> 
> Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.
> 
> There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.
> 
> The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does all this refute my post?
Click to expand...


Completely.


----------



## RoccoR

ereRE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, the question was never about who is "indigenous" and who is 'not indigenous."  In fact, I do not know that the term "indigenous people" is even defined; let alone a brief on whether or not the Arab Palestinians are the indigenous inhabitance of the territory.  They appear to be nothing more than the remnant population of former inhabitants.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is not a matter of a claim...
> 
> It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.
> 
> Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.
> 
> There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.
> 
> The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does all this refute my post?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

My commentary was not intended to "refute" your flawed observation.  It was intended to drag you back to what really has meaning:  the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."

The territory was not sovereign unto the Arab Palestinian _(not yours to fight over).  _ It was territory (from the Mediterranean to the frontier of Persia) laid down by the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic into the hands of the Allied Powers.   The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, having renounced all rights and title and the future of the territory, occupied by the Allied Powers concerned on the conclusion of the Great War.

Throughout history, there are examples after examples of instances where conflict was ended with the redistribution of territory as a compulsory outcome of the war.   It was 100 years ago this week that in the
Mudros Agreement: Armistice with Turkey (October 30, 1918), that the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic
surrendered of all garrisons in Hedjaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied Commander _(except those necessary to maintain order)_. 

If there is a legal claim ever to be made, it is not the Arab Palestinians that have any legal footing.  The Arab Palestinians were not operating in favor during the Allied Powers in either the First World War, or the Second World War.

REFUTE*!*  There is nothing to refute.  The Arab Palestinians have demanded territorial sovereignty for more than a century; a sovereignty which they never had in the first place, which they did not fight for, nor were a party to its liberation from the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.

What claim you believe that radiates from millennium past is completely irrelevant.  The intent by the Allied Powers, was then, perfectly clear.  Within such boundaries, as may be fixed and adopted by the said Powers, the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.  It was their decision.  And it is not the case where the United Nations of today, or any other subdivision thereof, especially the G-77, can refute.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> ereRE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OK, the question was never about who is "indigenous" and who is 'not indigenous."  In fact, I do not know that the term "indigenous people" is even defined; let alone a brief on whether or not the Arab Palestinians are the indigenous inhabitance of the territory.  They appear to be nothing more than the remnant population of former inhabitants.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has nothing to do with the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is not a matter of a claim...
> 
> It is a decision made to cure a specific problem that nearly extinguished the culture and people known as the Jews.  It was a conscious decision to maintain _(as close as possible)_ in its original _(or what remains)_ state the Jewish Culture.
> 
> Who was there first, and who has the claim, is not relevant.  The preservation of the Jewish People as part of humanity is the key.
> 
> There will always be those that are subpar cultures in the world that will not understand the need to protect and preserve the Jews from further decimation as that which has been inflicted upon then throughout history; and especially that which has ravaged them over the last century.
> 
> The intent, 100 years ago, when the rumble started, was to establish a Jewish National Home.  Today, the intent is to protect the Jewish National Home from being ravaged by yet another set of developmentally disadvantaged set of nations (the Arab League States) and turning Israel from being the most advanced nation in the Middle East on the Human Development Index, into another failed example of adjacent failing Arab States.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does all this refute my post?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> My commentary was not intended to "refute" your flawed observation.  It was intended to drag you back to what really has meaning:  the joint Allied Powers decision to establish a "Jewish National Home."
> 
> The territory was not sovereign unto the Arab Palestinian _(not yours to fight over).  _ It was territory (from the Mediterranean to the frontier of Persia) laid down by the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic into the hands of the Allied Powers.   The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, having renounced all rights and title and the future of the territory, occupied by the Allied Powers concerned on the conclusion of the Great War.
> 
> Throughout history, there are examples after examples of instances where conflict was ended with the redistribution of territory as a compulsory outcome of the war.   It was 100 years ago this week that in the
> Mudros Agreement: Armistice with Turkey (October 30, 1918), that the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic
> surrendered of all garrisons in Hedjaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied Commander _(except those necessary to maintain order)_.
> 
> If there is a legal claim ever to be made, it is not the Arab Palestinians that have any legal footing.  The Arab Palestinians were not operating in favor during the Allied Powers in either the First World War, or the Second World War.
> 
> REFUTE*!*  There is nothing to refute.  The Arab Palestinians have demanded territorial sovereignty for more than a century; a sovereignty which they never had in the first place, which they did not fight for, nor were a party to its liberation from the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.
> 
> What claim you believe that radiates from millennium past is completely irrelevant.  The intent by the Allied Powers, was then, perfectly clear.  Within such boundaries, as may be fixed and adopted by the said Powers, the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.  It was their decision.  And it is not the case where the United Nations of today, or any other subdivision thereof, especially the G-77, can refute.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> If there is a legal claim ever to be made, it is not the Arab Palestinians that have any legal footing.


You keep glossing over the fact that the Palestinians, as the citizens of a defined territory, have the inalienable right to sovereignty. Nobody has the authority to violate their inalienable right to sovereignty.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You keep glossing over the fact that the Palestinians, as the citizens of a defined territory, have the inalienable right to sovereignty. Nobody has the authority to violate their inalienable right to sovereignty.



Exactly.  That means the Jewish people have an inalienable right to sovereignty in all of Palestine.  When is Jordan giving that over then?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

You don't know what form an "inalienable right" takes*!*  If you did, you would not say this.



P F Tinmore said:


> You keep glossing over the fact that the Palestinians, as the citizens of a defined territory, have the inalienable right to sovereignty. Nobody has the authority to violate their inalienable right to sovereignty.


*(COMMENT)*

In a practical sense, no political constituency _(in this example → Israel)_ has to forfeit any aspect, apportionment or sovereign control to any other political constituency just BECAUSE they raise the issue of an "inalienable right."

• *POSITIVE RIGHTS* •

Since the concept of rights limits the actions of the government, the only way to circumvent them is by adding new rights that are allegedly superior to the others. The concept of Positive Rights was developed. These new rights differ from the old rights. Instead of involving freedom from interference from others, these new rights demand goods and services.

The "positive" in positive rights refers to the fact that to satisfy these rights, other people must provide them. They require action from others, instead of inaction. A "right" to health care is such a right. In order to fulfill it, a doctor must be enslaved. The doctor may be paid of course, but then others are required to pay the bill.

*Positive rights are not compatible with real rights, or "negative rights".* The positive rights require actions on the part of others. Negative rights require that no man can be forced to do anything he doesn't want. The two are incompatible. Positive rights are accepted at the expense of negative rights. They cannot coexists, since they are polar opposites.​
*(CRITICAL POINTS)*

•  Both the Arab Palestinians and the Israelis must understand that each has an obligation to respect the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.  The Arab Paestinianmust observe the rights of the Israeli every bit as much as the inverse.
•  Both the Arab Palestinians and the Israelis are obligated to NOT use the threat of force → or → actually use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the other.
•  The Israelis have derived thierterritorial claims prior to the 1988 Declaration of Indenpendence of the Palestinian State.
•  In August 1988, the Israelis had territorial control of the West Bank and Jerusalem after the Hashemite Kingdom abandon their soveriegntyor claims ("cut all ties"); whereas the Independence and government of the Arab Palestinian was NOT yet declared.​
There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.

Human Rights are in the form of laws _[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)]_ that apply by convention to the entirety of the international community.

The people of Israel have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right, they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development; in the Middle East.

✪  By virtue of this right, under what authority do the Arab Palestinians attempt to claim, by force, that which Israel already established territorial integrity_*?*_

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.


Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

OH, for crying out loud_*!*_

You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.

The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.

More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.

If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.

But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Straw man argument.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
Click to expand...

Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS


----------



## Sixties Fan

Do you know how to defend Israel from the lies? (Daled Amos) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## rylah

*From Time Immemorial – The Everlasting Jewish Tie to the Land of Israel*


----------



## Mindful

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
Click to expand...


I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Mindful said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.
Click to expand...

His reason is the same as all others who were taught that Israel is evil, and the Jews in it just as much.

Christian or Muslim devotion to what their ideologies are all about.
Keeping the Jews in their places, even if it is 6 feet under.


----------



## Mindful

Sixties Fan said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His reason is the same as all others who were taught that Israel is evil, and the Jews in it just as much.
> 
> Christian or Muslim devotion to what their ideologies are all about.
> Keeping the Jews in their places, even if it is 6 feet under.
Click to expand...




Sixties Fan said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His reason is the same as all others who were taught that Israel is evil, and the Jews in it just as much.
> 
> Christian or Muslim devotion to what their ideologies are all about.
> Keeping the Jews in their places, even if it is 6 feet under.
Click to expand...


He doesn't even know any facts.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The armistice line was between Israeli and Jordanian forces. It had nothing to do with Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Mindful said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His reason is the same as all others who were taught that Israel is evil, and the Jews in it just as much.
> 
> Christian or Muslim devotion to what their ideologies are all about.
> Keeping the Jews in their places, even if it is 6 feet under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Straw man argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinmore endlessly empty responses =  PRICELESS
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what his motive is. Because he's not convincing any of us with his bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> His reason is the same as all others who were taught that Israel is evil, and the Jews in it just as much.
> 
> Christian or Muslim devotion to what their ideologies are all about.
> Keeping the Jews in their places, even if it is 6 feet under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He doesn't even know any facts.
Click to expand...

They do not care about facts.  It is called delegitimization  of the other.
And it has been done to the Jewish people and Judaism since an idiot created Christianity.   
Which is why we read so many posts where Jews aren't Jews, and they all left the Land, and so on and so forth, since 1948.
Another form of destroying Judaism and Jews.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, for crying out loud_*!*_
> 
> You are correct in that Israel should not be made to forfeit any territory that was not under Arab Palestinian control.  It is under the Permanent Stats of Negotiation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no law that obligated the Israelis to forfeit any territorial holdings, especially since the President of Palestine openly declared the Oslo Accords dissolved.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel isn't required to forfeit anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Despite the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) \ Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) has "never" established sovereign control of the territory which they demand, the PA \ PLO demand the 1967 border.  The PA\PLO defines this border as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th, 1967.  They claim the Armistice Line is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine.
> 
> The Armistice Line of 1949 with Jordan is exactly that - with Jordan.  It disolved in 1994 with the execution of the Peace Treaty between the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Government of the State of Israel.  The armistice agreement between the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and Israel has been signed this evening, 3 April 1949, only remained in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties (Jordan/Israel) was achieved through a treaty [*See Article XII(2*)].  The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to either agreement.
> 
> More importantly, should be noted that Article VI(9) stipulates that:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in Articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties *without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party* relating thereto.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are going to use the Armistice Demarcation Lines, then they should recognize the flexability.  If we look at Article VI(11) we see:  The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in this article and in article V *shall be subject to such rectification as may be agreed upon by the Parties to this Agreement*, _(NOT the Arab Palestinians)_ and all such rectifications shall have the same force and effect as if they had been incorporated in full in this General Armistice Agreement.
> 
> But I think that everyone understands that the Armistice Agreement dissolved in1995 when the Peace Treaty took effect.  The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The armistice line was between Israeli and Jordanian forces. It had nothing to do with Palestine.
Click to expand...


Because there's no such place.


----------



## Mindful

Kudos, Tinmore.

Give a funny when you have no argument.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, so that is true.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> The Arab Palestinians should not be held to those conditions.
> 
> 
> 
> The armistice line was between Israeli and Jordanian forces. It had nothing to do with Palestine.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

So why is it that the Arab Palestinians want to use the Armistice Lines as a border?

When did the Arab Palestinians assume control over any part of the territory?

It is often the position f the Arab Palestinians that they return to the 4 June 1967 Armistice Lines.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> So why is it that the Arab Palestinians want to use the Armistice Lines as a border?


You are confusing the illegitimate leadership with the Palestinians.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler

Still waiting...name one mostly Muslim country that does not have significant issues either politicaly, economicaly, and or socialy? Why on EARTH would we want another one. Especially one where groups like Hamas and Fatah have been running them for years with massive corruption.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why is it that the Arab Palestinians want to use the Armistice Lines as a border?
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing the illegitimate leadership with the Palestinians.
Click to expand...



No govt, no responsibility, reliance on vague identities.
You see how easy it is to get confused with "Palestinian" nonsense?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why is it that the Arab Palestinians want to use the Armistice Lines as a border?
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing the illegitimate leadership with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No govt, no responsibility, reliance on vague identities.
> You see how easy it is to get confused with "Palestinian" nonsense?
Click to expand...

Indeed, and you are.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why is it that the Arab Palestinians want to use the Armistice Lines as a border?
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing the illegitimate leadership with the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No govt, no responsibility, reliance on vague identities.
> You see how easy it is to get confused with "Palestinian" nonsense?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, and you are.
Click to expand...


Did these Arabs ever have an independent state or leadership in historic Palestine before the Jews, maybe a king we all know of?

Everyone know Arabs came from Arabia.
Help me clear the confusion buddy 

.....


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> Did these Arabs ever have an independent state or leadership in historic Palestine before the Jews, maybe a king we all know of?



The Jews buried all their great leaders beyond the river in a land not called Israel" but Cannon. Your true roots are where they bury their great leaders & that place was NOT Palestine.


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did these Arabs ever have an independent state or leadership in historic Palestine before the Jews, maybe a king we all know of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews buried all their great leaders beyond the river in a land not called Israel" but Cannon. Your true roots are where they bury their great leaders & that place was NOT Palestine.
Click to expand...


Said who?


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
Click to expand...

Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.

I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
Click to expand...



Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
Click to expand...

Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,let us be totally honest by the end of the 1800.s it was the Christians who persecuted the Jews most of all...but these Noble sentiments were taken over by a Hard Right Wing Elements of the of the Zionist Organization(let us remember when the first delegation of Zionists went to Palestine they clearly stated "The Bride (Palestine) is Beautiful BUT Married to another(The Palestinians)

Shusha I have a meeting,I will respond to you asap..remind me if you have to...Best Regards steven


----------



## Shusha

theliq said:


> Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,



So far so good.  Having a homeland for a people is good.  We agree so far.  Have a good meeting, catch up later.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→  theliq, Shusha, et al,

You have to be very careful when you talk about "Zionism."  That is especially true if you are not Jewish.  There are many a widely held → but false beliefs about Zionism, just as there is a misrepresentation of the truth.  These are not false beliefs and misrepresented many facts passed-on without a malicious intent.  They are what some believe to be true. 



theliq said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a people and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,let us be totally honest by the end of the 1800.s it was the Christians who persecuted the Jews most of all...but these Noble sentiments were taken over by a Hard Right Wing Elements of the of the Zionist Organization(let us remember when the first delegation of Zionists went to Palestine they clearly stated "The Bride (Palestine) is Beautiful BUT Married to another(The Palestinians)
> 
> Shusha I have a meeting,I will respond to you asap..remind me if you have to...Best Regards steven
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Not all Jews are Zionist.  But all Zionist are Jews.  There is a distinction here that is important.

Zionism is the national political movement of and for the Jewish people.  Some of the embedded ideas that drive Zionism are:

· The right to self-determination.
· The legitimate home of the Jewish people.
· The Jewish people have the right to realize their territorial integrity without having to constantly defend against those that have the opposite belief.
· The Jewish people, have a right to determine their own destiny; - as a free people.​
To be a believer in the religion - Judaism - is a faith-based concept concerning the relationship between a people and the Supreme Being (a deity).  They have their own religious customs.  But basically, Jewdaism in Religous. 

What is the connection between Jews and Zionist?  Having said the Judaism is a religion, for nearly 2000 years, the people who believe in the religion are preyed upon by unscrupulous persons of power.  Thus the tie-in to Zionism.   Zionism offers the Jewish people  a safe haven, a place that they will not be the subject of persecution → generally for wealth and power.   Zionism offers the Jew the possibility of a place that they can preserve their culture and practice their religion while not being discriminated against because of their faith.

I should stop here before I draw too much fire.  I probably said too much already.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  theliq, Shusha, et al,
> 
> You have to be very careful when you talk about "Zionism."  That is especially true if you are not Jewish.  There are many a widely held → but false beliefs about Zionism, just as there is a misrepresentation of the truth.  These are not false beliefs and misrepresented many facts passed-on without a malicious intent.  They are what some believe to be true.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a people and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,let us be totally honest by the end of the 1800.s it was the Christians who persecuted the Jews most of all...but these Noble sentiments were taken over by a Hard Right Wing Elements of the of the Zionist Organization(let us remember when the first delegation of Zionists went to Palestine they clearly stated "The Bride (Palestine) is Beautiful BUT Married to another(The Palestinians)
> 
> Shusha I have a meeting,I will respond to you asap..remind me if you have to...Best Regards steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Not all Jews are Zionist.  But all Zionist are Jews.  There is a distinction here that is important.
> 
> Zionism is the national political movement of and for the Jewish people.  Some of the embedded ideas that drive Zionism are:
> 
> · The right to self-determination.
> · The legitimate home of the Jewish people.
> · The Jewish people have the right to realize their territorial integrity without having to constantly defend against those that have the opposite belief.
> · The Jewish people, have a right to determine their own destiny; - as a free people.​
> To be a believer in the religion - Judaism - is a faith-based concept concerning the relationship between a people and the Supreme Being (a deity).  They have their own religious customs.  But basically, Jewdaism in Religous.
> 
> What is the connection between Jews and Zionist?  Having said the Judaism is a religion, for nearly 2000 years, the people who believe in the religion are preyed upon by unscrupulous persons of power.  Thus the tie-in to Zionism.   Zionism offers the Jewish people  a safe haven, a place that they will not be the subject of persecution → generally for wealth and power.   Zionism offers the Jew the possibility of a place that they can preserve their culture and practice their religion while not being discriminated against because of their faith.
> 
> I should stop here before I draw too much fire.  I probably said too much already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

There are non Jews who are Zionists.
Meaning that they are for a sovereign state for the Jewish people.
Just as there are Jews who do not want a sovereign state for their people, for whichever religious or personal reasons they may have.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
Click to expand...

Zionism, (The version referenced on these boards.) is not a religion but a political philosophy.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Zionism, (The version referenced on these boards.) is not a religion but a political philosophy.
Click to expand...

Who in the world ever said that Zionism was a religion?

Why do you continue to choose to show how ignorant or deceitful you are by coming up with nonsense like this?

_*Zionism : a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.*_
_*
BY THE INDIGENOUS people of the land, by the way.

The Jewish Nation/ People
*
You will never be able to change that._


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  theliq, Shusha, et al,
> 
> You have to be very careful when you talk about "Zionism."  That is especially true if you are not Jewish.  There are many a widely held → but false beliefs about Zionism, just as there is a misrepresentation of the truth.  These are not false beliefs and misrepresented many facts passed-on without a malicious intent.  They are what some believe to be true.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a people and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,let us be totally honest by the end of the 1800.s it was the Christians who persecuted the Jews most of all...but these Noble sentiments were taken over by a Hard Right Wing Elements of the of the Zionist Organization(let us remember when the first delegation of Zionists went to Palestine they clearly stated "The Bride (Palestine) is Beautiful BUT Married to another(The Palestinians)
> 
> Shusha I have a meeting,I will respond to you asap..remind me if you have to...Best Regards steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Not all Jews are Zionist.  But all Zionist are Jews.  There is a distinction here that is important.
> 
> Zionism is the national political movement of and for the Jewish people.  Some of the embedded ideas that drive Zionism are:
> 
> · The right to self-determination.
> · The legitimate home of the Jewish people.
> · The Jewish people have the right to realize their territorial integrity without having to constantly defend against those that have the opposite belief.
> · The Jewish people, have a right to determine their own destiny; - as a free people.​
> To be a believer in the religion - Judaism - is a faith-based concept concerning the relationship between a people and the Supreme Being (a deity).  They have their own religious customs.  But basically, Jewdaism in Religous.
> 
> What is the connection between Jews and Zionist?  Having said the Judaism is a religion, for nearly 2000 years, the people who believe in the religion are preyed upon by unscrupulous persons of power.  Thus the tie-in to Zionism.   Zionism offers the Jewish people  a safe haven, a place that they will not be the subject of persecution → generally for wealth and power.   Zionism offers the Jew the possibility of a place that they can preserve their culture and practice their religion while not being discriminated against because of their faith.
> 
> I should stop here before I draw too much fire.  I probably said too much already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> Zionism offers the Jewish people a safe haven,


By kicking out the natives and pigging the place for themselves.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble with your summation is that the Israelites were not the original indigenous people at all but invaders to this land
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews started their quest as a peoples and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Zionism, (The version referenced on these boards.) is not a religion but a political philosophy.
Click to expand...



Zionism is the liberation movement of the people indigenous to the homeland in question.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→  theliq, Shusha, et al,
> 
> You have to be very careful when you talk about "Zionism."  That is especially true if you are not Jewish.  There are many a widely held → but false beliefs about Zionism, just as there is a misrepresentation of the truth.  These are not false beliefs and misrepresented many facts passed-on without a malicious intent.  They are what some believe to be true.
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  They invaded from where?  In what place did the unique and clearly definable Jewish culture arise?
> 
> 
> 
> Jews started their quest as a people and eventually a nation in Iraq,they were decimated by the rise of the Assyians and fled south...Shusha,I think you misunderstand me completely,I have Great admiration for Jews,their fight for existence,against all odds...and what they have done for the world...My Beef is the Zionists as you well know by now...they are different Jews in mentality,that so many have converted to this cult in my opinion has arrested the development of Judiasm.
> 
> I only hope that the IS/Pal schism resolves in the future
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay.  So, legit, genuine question here:  What is the difference between a "Jew" and a "Zionist", in your mind?  What is the difference in mentality?  I would honestly like to hear your explanation for this.  Preferably in clear, objective terms without emotional language, insults or broad, negative brushstrokes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Firstly,Zionism was created basically to find a permenent home for Jews worldwide and a very noble sentiment in my opinion,let us be totally honest by the end of the 1800.s it was the Christians who persecuted the Jews most of all...but these Noble sentiments were taken over by a Hard Right Wing Elements of the of the Zionist Organization(let us remember when the first delegation of Zionists went to Palestine they clearly stated "The Bride (Palestine) is Beautiful BUT Married to another(The Palestinians)
> 
> Shusha I have a meeting,I will respond to you asap..remind me if you have to...Best Regards steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Not all Jews are Zionist.  But all Zionist are Jews.  There is a distinction here that is important.
> 
> Zionism is the national political movement of and for the Jewish people.  Some of the embedded ideas that drive Zionism are:
> 
> · The right to self-determination.
> · The legitimate home of the Jewish people.
> · The Jewish people have the right to realize their territorial integrity without having to constantly defend against those that have the opposite belief.
> · The Jewish people, have a right to determine their own destiny; - as a free people.​
> To be a believer in the religion - Judaism - is a faith-based concept concerning the relationship between a people and the Supreme Being (a deity).  They have their own religious customs.  But basically, Jewdaism in Religous.
> 
> What is the connection between Jews and Zionist?  Having said the Judaism is a religion, for nearly 2000 years, the people who believe in the religion are preyed upon by unscrupulous persons of power.  Thus the tie-in to Zionism.   Zionism offers the Jewish people  a safe haven, a place that they will not be the subject of persecution → generally for wealth and power.   Zionism offers the Jew the possibility of a place that they can preserve their culture and practice their religion while not being discriminated against because of their faith.
> 
> I should stop here before I draw too much fire.  I probably said too much already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zionism offers the Jewish people a safe haven,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> By kicking out the natives and pigging the place for themselves.
Click to expand...

When Arabs become natives of Israel by simply being there for a few centuries, following their indigenous Arab culture and language all the way from Arabia.......


We shall let you know



(And how perfect of you to call Jews pigs when they do not even eat pork  )


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*


If speaking ancient history its the Canaanites and Cushites.


----------



## rylah

*The initial roots of modern Zionism are in Morocco and Syria-Palestine.*

Rabbi Haim ben-Attar urged Jews about upcoming persecutions, and obliged every Jewish community to move to Israel immediately with the first signs of unrest. Which he later did himself, taking a long journey to Israel through N.Africa and Europe in order to alarm people and invite them to join.

Later his descendant Rabbi Bivas, whose family was forced to flee the persecutions in Morocco met Rabbi Elkalai , which influenced the later of the urge and possibility to become an independent nation and defend against the waves of Arab and Europe pogroms. This inspired him to write a set and detailed platform for Jewish return and independence long before the 1st Zionist congress as described in Rabbi Elkalai's works.

Simon Loeb Herzl who used to be an administrator in Rabbi Elkalai's synagogue, had a grandson by the name Theodor.


----------



## Sixties Fan

But all this cannot be done without screaming in the ears of the world -- especially during Hanukkah -- a single basic truth, as Simon the Hasmonean put it some 2,200 years ago: "We have not taken foreign territory or any alien property, but have occupied our ancestral heritage, for some time unjustly wrested from us by our enemies; now that we have a favorable opportunity, we are merely recovering our ancestral heritage" (Maccabees 1, 15:33-34).

---
What Simon the Hasmonean understood more than 2,000 years ago, and what our sage Rashi understood in his interpretation of the first verse in Genesis some 1,000 years ago, followed by Israel's first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and later Prime Minister Menachem Begin, and certainly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is that we exist here by way of force and of diplomacy, but, above all, we exist here by right.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/we-are-not-occupiers-in-our-own-land/


----------



## watchingfromafar

The facts are the facts that cannot be denied---

God talked directly to the Jews. God chose them to be His example on earth. God then gave then instructions on how they should behave in His name.

*STRANGER—The term “stranger” is mentioned 123 times in the Holy Bible*

(Mal 3:5 KJV)  And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the *stranger* from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.

(Jer 14:8 KJV) *O the hope of Israel,* the saviour thereof in time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a *stranger* in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night?

(Ezek 14:7 KJV) For every one of the house of Israel, or of the *stranger* that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to inquire of him concerning me; I the LORD will answer him by myself:

(Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.

(Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

(Deu 24:19 KJV) When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.

(Deu 24:20 KJV) When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the *strange*r, for the fatherless, and for the widow.

(Deu 24:21 KJV) When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow.

(Jer 7:6 KJV) If ye oppress not the *stranger*, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:

(Jer 22:3 KJV) Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the* stranger*, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.

(Ezek 22:7 KJV) In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst of thee have they dealt by oppression with the *stranger*: in thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow.

(Zec 7:10 KJV)  And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the *stranger*, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.

(Exo 22:21 KJV)  Thou shalt neither vex a *stranger*, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

(Exo 23:9 KJV) Also thou shalt not oppress a *stranger*: for ye know the heart of a stranger, *seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.*

(Lev 19:34 KJV) But the* stranger* that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

(Lev 25:35 KJV) And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a* stranger*, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.

(Num 35:15 KJV) These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the *stranger*, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.

(Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.

(Deu 10:18 KJV) He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the* stranger*, in giving him food and raiment.

(Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

But what God asked them to do they did not and instead we find this -----

(Mat 25:38 KJV) When saw we thee a *stranger*, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

(Mat 25:43 KJV) I was a *stranger*, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

(Ezek 22:29 KJV)  The people of the land have used oppression, and exercised robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy: yea, they have oppressed the *stranger* wrongfully.

The sad truth is they felt that they were above God and did not have to obey His instructions and so the Israeli's were the “first” to throw bombs into buses, assassinate political leaders and IDF snipers shooting school children.

They have failed to follow His teaching and instead have embraced the Devil himself instead.

Sad, Oh so sad, but true,.,.,.,. as history has proven over and over

Still, they could repent
ask the Lord for forgiveness
& 
if they do 
He will forgive them
-​


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> The facts are the facts that cannot be denied---
> 
> God talked directly to the Jews. God chose them to be His example on earth. God then gave then instructions on how they should behave in His name.
> 
> *STRANGER—The term “stranger” is mentioned 123 times in the Holy Bible*
> 
> (Mal 3:5 KJV)  And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the *stranger* from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
> 
> (Jer 14:8 KJV) *O the hope of Israel,* the saviour thereof in time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a *stranger* in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night?
> 
> (Ezek 14:7 KJV) For every one of the house of Israel, or of the *stranger* that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to inquire of him concerning me; I the LORD will answer him by myself:
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Deu 24:19 KJV) When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.
> 
> (Deu 24:20 KJV) When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the *strange*r, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Deu 24:21 KJV) When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Jer 7:6 KJV) If ye oppress not the *stranger*, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:
> 
> (Jer 22:3 KJV) Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the* stranger*, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
> 
> (Ezek 22:7 KJV) In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst of thee have they dealt by oppression with the *stranger*: in thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow.
> 
> (Zec 7:10 KJV)  And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the *stranger*, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.
> 
> (Exo 22:21 KJV)  Thou shalt neither vex a *stranger*, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Exo 23:9 KJV) Also thou shalt not oppress a *stranger*: for ye know the heart of a stranger, *seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.*
> 
> (Lev 19:34 KJV) But the* stranger* that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
> 
> (Lev 25:35 KJV) And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a* stranger*, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.
> 
> (Num 35:15 KJV) These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the *stranger*, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:18 KJV) He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the* stranger*, in giving him food and raiment.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> But what God asked them to do they did not and instead we find this -----
> 
> (Mat 25:38 KJV) When saw we thee a *stranger*, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
> 
> (Mat 25:43 KJV) I was a *stranger*, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
> 
> (Ezek 22:29 KJV)  The people of the land have used oppression, and exercised robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy: yea, they have oppressed the *stranger* wrongfully.
> 
> The sad truth is they felt that they were above God and did not have to obey His instructions and so the Israeli's were the “first” to throw bombs into buses, assassinate political leaders and IDF snipers shooting school children.
> 
> They have failed to follow His teaching and instead have embraced the Devil himself instead.
> 
> Sad, Oh so sad, but true,.,.,.,. as history has proven over and over
> 
> Still, they could repent
> ask the Lord for forgiveness
> &
> if they do
> He will forgive them
> -​





watchingfromafar said:


> The facts are the facts that cannot be denied---
> 
> God talked directly to the Jews. God chose them to be His example on earth. God then gave then instructions on how they should behave in His name.
> 
> *STRANGER—The term “stranger” is mentioned 123 times in the Holy Bible*
> 
> (Mal 3:5 KJV)  And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the *stranger* from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
> 
> (Jer 14:8 KJV) *O the hope of Israel,* the saviour thereof in time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a *stranger* in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night?
> 
> (Ezek 14:7 KJV) For every one of the house of Israel, or of the *stranger* that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to inquire of him concerning me; I the LORD will answer him by myself:
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Deu 24:19 KJV) When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.
> 
> (Deu 24:20 KJV) When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the *strange*r, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Deu 24:21 KJV) When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Jer 7:6 KJV) If ye oppress not the *stranger*, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:
> 
> (Jer 22:3 KJV) Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the* stranger*, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
> 
> (Ezek 22:7 KJV) In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst of thee have they dealt by oppression with the *stranger*: in thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow.
> 
> (Zec 7:10 KJV)  And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the *stranger*, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.
> 
> (Exo 22:21 KJV)  Thou shalt neither vex a *stranger*, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Exo 23:9 KJV) Also thou shalt not oppress a *stranger*: for ye know the heart of a stranger, *seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.*
> 
> (Lev 19:34 KJV) But the* stranger* that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
> 
> (Lev 25:35 KJV) And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a* stranger*, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.
> 
> (Num 35:15 KJV) These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the *stranger*, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:18 KJV) He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the* stranger*, in giving him food and raiment.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> But what God asked them to do they did not and instead we find this -----
> 
> (Mat 25:38 KJV) When saw we thee a *stranger*, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
> 
> (Mat 25:43 KJV) I was a *stranger*, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
> 
> (Ezek 22:29 KJV)  The people of the land have used oppression, and exercised robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy: yea, they have oppressed the *stranger* wrongfully.
> 
> The sad truth is they felt that they were above God and did not have to obey His instructions and so the Israeli's were the “first” to throw bombs into buses, assassinate political leaders and IDF snipers shooting school children.
> 
> They have failed to follow His teaching and instead have embraced the Devil himself instead.
> 
> Sad, Oh so sad, but true,.,.,.,. as history has proven over and over
> 
> Still, they could repent
> ask the Lord for forgiveness
> &
> if they do
> He will forgive them
> -​


All of your "truths" belong in the Religion Community, and other threads in this community but not here.

Enjoy your visits over there.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> All of your "truths" belong in the Religion Community, and other threads in this community but not here.



The thread title is--
_The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?_

It's spelled indigenous, not "_indiginous". _Having said that, the population of Palestine is relevant to your thread and the biblical context as well.



Sixties Fan said:


> Enjoy your visits over there.



Gladly; bye -


----------



## Indeependent

watchingfromafar said:


> The facts are the facts that cannot be denied---
> 
> God talked directly to the Jews. God chose them to be His example on earth. God then gave then instructions on how they should behave in His name.
> 
> *STRANGER—The term “stranger” is mentioned 123 times in the Holy Bible*
> 
> (Mal 3:5 KJV)  And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the *stranger* from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
> 
> (Jer 14:8 KJV) *O the hope of Israel,* the saviour thereof in time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a *stranger* in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night?
> 
> (Ezek 14:7 KJV) For every one of the house of Israel, or of the *stranger* that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to inquire of him concerning me; I the LORD will answer him by myself:
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Deu 24:19 KJV) When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field, and hast forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hands.
> 
> (Deu 24:20 KJV) When thou beatest thine olive tree, thou shalt not go over the boughs again: it shall be for the *strange*r, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Deu 24:21 KJV) When thou gatherest the grapes of thy vineyard, thou shalt not glean it afterward: it shall be for the *stranger*, for the fatherless, and for the widow.
> 
> (Jer 7:6 KJV) If ye oppress not the *stranger*, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt:
> 
> (Jer 22:3 KJV) Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the* stranger*, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.
> 
> (Ezek 22:7 KJV) In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst of thee have they dealt by oppression with the *stranger*: in thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow.
> 
> (Zec 7:10 KJV)  And oppress not the widow, nor the fatherless, the *stranger*, nor the poor; and let none of you imagine evil against his brother in your heart.
> 
> (Exo 22:21 KJV)  Thou shalt neither vex a *stranger*, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> (Exo 23:9 KJV) Also thou shalt not oppress a *stranger*: for ye know the heart of a stranger, *seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.*
> 
> (Lev 19:34 KJV) But the* stranger* that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
> 
> (Lev 25:35 KJV) And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a* stranger*, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.
> 
> (Num 35:15 KJV) These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the *stranger*, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.
> 
> (Deu 1:16 KJV) And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the *stranger* that is with him.
> 
> (Deu 10:18 KJV) He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the* stranger*, in giving him food and raiment.
> 
> (Deu 10:19 KJV) Love ye therefore the* stranger*: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
> 
> But what God asked them to do they did not and instead we find this -----
> 
> (Mat 25:38 KJV) When saw we thee a *stranger*, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
> 
> (Mat 25:43 KJV) I was a *stranger*, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
> 
> (Ezek 22:29 KJV)  The people of the land have used oppression, and exercised robbery, and have vexed the poor and needy: yea, they have oppressed the *stranger* wrongfully.
> 
> The sad truth is they felt that they were above God and did not have to obey His instructions and so the Israeli's were the “first” to throw bombs into buses, assassinate political leaders and IDF snipers shooting school children.
> 
> They have failed to follow His teaching and instead have embraced the Devil himself instead.
> 
> Sad, Oh so sad, but true,.,.,.,. as history has proven over and over
> 
> Still, they could repent
> ask the Lord for forgiveness
> &
> if they do
> He will forgive them
> -​


The word Gar does not mean "stranger", it means sojourner.
The Egyptians allowed the Jacob's family to sojourn in Egypt because Joseph saved Egypt from starvation.
A sojourner is a productive person who does not intend to live somewhere permanently.

You see, the family of Jacob didn't come to Egypt to wash dishes, mow lawns , babysit and suck off of Egypt and send the money back.home.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Indeependent said:


> The Egyptians allowed the Jacob's family to sojourn in Egypt because Joseph saved Egypt from starvation.
> A sojourner is a productive person who does not intend to live somewhere permanently.
> 
> You see, the family of Jacob didn't come to Egypt to wash dishes, mow lawns , babysit and suck off of Egypt and send the money back.home.



You are wrong on so many counts but lets stick with the biblical truth. The Jews were shepherds who were starving in Cannon because of a great drought. 

Let the verses speak the truth----------

(Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph (_a Jew_), Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_

(Gen 41:40 KJV) _Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou._

(Gen 41:42 KJV) _And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;_

(Gen 41:44 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt._

Gen 41:46 KJV) _And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh King of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt._

Joseph who is now the de facto ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelite's who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.

(Gen 42:1 KJV) _Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, why do ye look one upon another?_

(Gen 42:2 KJV) _And he said, Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt: get you down thither, and buy for us from thence;_

(Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan._

(Gen 42:25 KJV) _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

(Gen 45:20 KJV) _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._

See above, they abandon the land of Canaan and move to Egypt

(Gen 45:21 KJV) _*And the children of Israel did so*: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._

(Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._

(Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation*? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_

(Gen 47:4 KJV) _They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the famine is sore *in the land of Canaan*: now therefore, we pray thee, let thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen._

(Gen 47:5 KJV) _And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_

(Gen 47:6 KJV) _*The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell*; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._

(Gen 47:11 KJV) *And Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.*

-


----------



## watchingfromafar

Indeependent said:


> The word Gar does not mean "stranger", it means sojourner.



You should write your own version of Biblical text since you are obviously more knowledgeable on this than us pagans are.

just a suggestion
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

watchingfromafar said:


> (Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph (_a Jew_), Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_



BTW: It is possible that Joseph is buried in one of the pyramids.


----------



## Indeependent

watchingfromafar said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Egyptians allowed the Jacob's family to sojourn in Egypt because Joseph saved Egypt from starvation.
> A sojourner is a productive person who does not intend to live somewhere permanently.
> 
> You see, the family of Jacob didn't come to Egypt to wash dishes, mow lawns , babysit and suck off of Egypt and send the money back.home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are wrong on so many counts but lets stick with the biblical truth. The Jews were shepherds who were starving in Cannon because of a great drought.
> 
> Let the verses speak the truth----------
> 
> (Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph (_a Jew_), Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
> 
> (Gen 41:40 KJV) _Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou._
> 
> (Gen 41:42 KJV) _And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;_
> 
> (Gen 41:44 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt._
> 
> Gen 41:46 KJV) _And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh King of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt._
> 
> Joseph who is now the de facto ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelite's who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.
> 
> (Gen 42:1 KJV) _Now when Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt, Jacob said unto his sons, why do ye look one upon another?_
> 
> (Gen 42:2 KJV) _And he said, Behold, I have heard that there is corn in Egypt: get you down thither, and buy for us from thence;_
> 
> (Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan._
> 
> (Gen 42:25 KJV) _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_
> 
> (Gen 45:20 KJV) _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._
> 
> See above, they abandon the land of Canaan and move to Egypt
> 
> (Gen 45:21 KJV) _*And the children of Israel did so*: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._
> 
> (Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation*? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:4 KJV) _They said moreover unto Pharaoh, For to sojourn in the land are we come; for thy servants have no pasture for their flocks; for the famine is sore *in the land of Canaan*: now therefore, we pray thee, let thy servants dwell in the land of Goshen._
> 
> (Gen 47:5 KJV) _And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
> 
> (Gen 47:6 KJV) _*The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell*; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._
> 
> (Gen 47:11 KJV) *And Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.*
> 
> -
Click to expand...

I don't get your point.
Joseph is made the second in command of Egypt which means he has no personal life until he passes away; and working in the royal court wasn't exactly pleasant.
Pharoah assumes that Joseph's family member are as smart as Joseph.
Jacob's family is accepted simply because Joseph saved Egypt, not because Jacob's family came to pick fruit.
Do you think Joseph would have been taken out of the prison and welcomed as an Egyptian Immigrant to pick fruit if he couldn't interpret the dreams?
What world are you living in?


----------



## Indeependent

watchingfromafar said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> (Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph (_a Jew_), Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW: It is possible that Joseph is buried in one of the pyramids.
Click to expand...

Joseph's body was taken out of Egypt by Moses.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Indeependent said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> (Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph (_a Jew_), Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW: It is possible that Joseph is buried in one of the pyramids.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Joseph's body was taken out of Egypt by Moses.
Click to expand...

Oh, I see  

That is why this place is called  "Joseph's Tomb".....

Shechem (Nablus): Joseph's Tomb


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> You should write your own version of Biblical text since you are obviously more knowledgeable ...



You mean like the original Hebrew version of the text? Here's another idea:  if you can't read it in the original language, you aren't able to actually read it.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ Shusha, et al,

Yeah, You're right.



Shusha said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> You should write your own version of Biblical text since you are obviously more knowledgeable ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean like the original Hebrew version of the text? Here's another idea:  if you can't read it in the original language, you aren't able to actually read it.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I have a copy of "The NotoryArt of Solomon" (Ars Notoria), but it is really a _(First Published)_ 1657 translation by Robert Turner.

The praises and prayers contained within it seem very authentic.  But it is still a translation; the magic is gone...



> _*The Notory Art revealed by the Most High Creator to Solomon.*_
> In the Name of the Holy and undivided Trinity, beginneth this most Holy Art of
> Knowledge, revealed to Solomon, which the Most High Creator by his Holy Angels
> ministered to Solomon upon the Alter of the Temple; that thereby in short time he
> knew all Arts and Sciences, both Liberal and Mechanick, with all the Faculties and
> Properties thereof: He has suddenly infused into him, and also was filled with all
> wisdom, to utter the Sacred Mysteries of most Holy words.​


​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

*Who are the Palestinians? An Arab Invention*


----------



## Sixties Fan

“Before the Balfour Promise, when the Ottoman rule [1517-1917] ended, Palestine’s political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today”, historian Abd Al-Ghani admitted on official PA TV on November 1.

“Since Palestine’s lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region [the Palestinians] were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people’s political identity.”

In 1917, says this Arab historian on official PA TV, there was no such thing as a Palestinian people. This statement amounts to saying that the whole narrative of an ‘indigenous Palestinian people’ was made up at a later point in time.

As Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad speaking on Al-Hekma TV said in March 2012: “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis. Who are the Palestinians? We have many families called Al-Masri, whose roots are Egyptian. Egyptian! They may be from Alexandria, from Cairo, from Dumietta, from the North, from Aswan, from Upper Egypt. We are Egyptians…”

There is a reason, why the “Palestinian National Museum” is empty of historical artifacts.

The Arab historian’s admission corroborates the observations of 19th century travelers to the region, who notably had no specific political agenda when they visited, unlike so many visitors to Israel today:

”Outside the gates of Jerusalem, we saw indeed no living object, heard no living sound”, wrote French poet Alphonse de Lamartine about his visit in 1835.

”The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population.” wrote British Consul James Finn in his 1857 description of the Holy Land.

”Palestine sits in a sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that withered its fields and fettered its energies. …Palestine is desolate and unlovely….It is a hopeless dreary, heartbroken land.” wrote American author Mark Twain in his description of his visit in 1867.

Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.

(full article online)

Arab Historian Admits there is No Palestinian People


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:


 
Is this where the following came from too-?

*FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*

November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*

 July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *

October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.

September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)

December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.

December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.

December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*. 

December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*

June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*

December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.

December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*

January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*

January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.

January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.

January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.

February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*

March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.

March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.

March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.

April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.

April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *

April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *

May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.

May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.

April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.

Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*


The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.

*Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*

*Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits

 BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
Click to expand...



I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:

"Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'

......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.

But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?

Do not forget the 1920s:

Arab Riots of the 1920's


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
Click to expand...

The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.

The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.

The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
> The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.
> 
> The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.
> 
> The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.
Click to expand...

At the time the Mandate was created after WWI there was not ONE SOUL in the region of Palestine who cared themselves Palestinians.

You wish to make all Jews foreign to their own land.  Fine.

You will have to make all Arabs totally foreign to the region of Palestine as well, since not only are they Indigenous of Arabia, but thousands of Arabs came from all over Asia and Europe into that region after 1850 because Jews were creating jobs and hiring those Arabs.  Those Arab foreigners who ended up finding themselves in a war they did not want to be a part of, but were forced into it by those who became the Arab's "Leaders" of a war against the Jewish RIGHT to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.

You use and abuse the word "Palestinian" and think that Jesus or Allah, whichever one you abuse Jews for, is happy smiling at you.

That is all simpletons like you are capable of.

So, where is your "salvation" Tinmoore?  When is that going to happen?
When all Jews are gone?  Or when they all convert to either one of these sick ideologies you are so fond of?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
> The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.
> 
> The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.
> 
> The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the time the Mandate was created after WWI there was not ONE SOUL in the region of Palestine who cared themselves Palestinians.
> 
> You wish to make all Jews foreign to their own land.  Fine.
> 
> You will have to make all Arabs totally foreign to the region of Palestine as well, since not only are they Indigenous of Arabia, but thousands of Arabs came from all over Asia and Europe into that region after 1850 because Jews were creating jobs and hiring those Arabs.  Those Arab foreigners who ended up finding themselves in a war they did not want to be a part of, but were forced into it by those who became the Arab's "Leaders" of a war against the Jewish RIGHT to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> You use and abuse the word "Palestinian" and think that Jesus or Allah, whichever one you abuse Jews for, is happy smiling at you.
> 
> That is all simpletons like you are capable of.
> 
> So, where is your "salvation" Tinmoore?  When is that going to happen?
> When all Jews are gone?  Or when they all convert to either one of these sick ideologies you are so fond of?
Click to expand...

You haven't been reading my posts.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
> The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.
> 
> The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.
> 
> The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the time the Mandate was created after WWI there was not ONE SOUL in the region of Palestine who cared themselves Palestinians.
> 
> You wish to make all Jews foreign to their own land.  Fine.
> 
> You will have to make all Arabs totally foreign to the region of Palestine as well, since not only are they Indigenous of Arabia, but thousands of Arabs came from all over Asia and Europe into that region after 1850 because Jews were creating jobs and hiring those Arabs.  Those Arab foreigners who ended up finding themselves in a war they did not want to be a part of, but were forced into it by those who became the Arab's "Leaders" of a war against the Jewish RIGHT to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> You use and abuse the word "Palestinian" and think that Jesus or Allah, whichever one you abuse Jews for, is happy smiling at you.
> 
> That is all simpletons like you are capable of.
> 
> So, where is your "salvation" Tinmoore?  When is that going to happen?
> When all Jews are gone?  Or when they all convert to either one of these sick ideologies you are so fond of?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You haven't been reading my posts.
Click to expand...

The ones where the Indigenous Jews are actually foreigners and Israel does not exist, or have the right to exist?

Those posts?

You surely like to use the word "foreign" when it comes to Jews, but not to Arabs


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this where the following came from too-?
> 
> *FIRST ACTS OF TERRORISM, COINING THE PHRASE*
> 
> November 6, 1944. *Zionist terrorists* of the Stern Gang *assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.*
> 
> July 22, 1946. *Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem,.,.,killing or injuring more than 200 persons.  *
> 
> October 1, 1946. The *British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions*, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.
> 
> September 3, 1947. *A postal bomb* addressed to the British War Office *exploded in the post office sorting room in London*, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)
> 
> December ll, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa*; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 19, 1947. *Haganah terrorists* attacked an Arab village near Safad, *blowing up two houses* in the ruins of which were *found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children*. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.
> 
> December 13, 1947 -- February 10, 1948. *Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others*, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses.  *Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others*.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> June 1947. *Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.*
> 
> December ll, 1947. *Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded* when *bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa* ; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.
> 
> December 29, 1947. *Two British constables* and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem *when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.*
> 
> January 4, 1948. *Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms* penetrated into the center of Jaffa and *blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House*) *killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.*
> 
> January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis *Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons*.
> 
> January 7, 1948. *Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb* at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the *murder of a British officer* near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.
> 
> January 16, 1948. *Zionists blew up three Arab buildings*. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.
> 
> February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, *killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children.*
> 
> March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa by Zionists who drove an* army lorry* ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the *detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives*; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured.
> 
> March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the *Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles* before the explosion.
> 
> March 31, 1948. The *Cairo-Haifa Express was mined*, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.
> 
> April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and *killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children.* Older men and young women were paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.
> 
> April 16, 1948. *Zionists attacked the former British army camp* at Tel Litvinsky,* killing 90 Arabs there. *
> 
> April 19, 1948. *Fourteen Arabs were killed* in a house in Tiberias, *which was blown up by Zionist terrorists. *
> 
> May 3, 1948. *A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer*, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.
> 
> May11, 1948. *A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker*, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.
> 
> April 25, 1948 -- May 13, 1948. *Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried* out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. *They stripped and carried away everything they could*, destroying what they could not take with them.
> 
> Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, has confirmed that the *Israeli art students* were, in fact, part of *a major Israeli intelligence operation* and that they were *conducting surveillance of the activities of the 9-11 hijackers*. They also worked with the Israeli Urban Moving System employees in New Jersey *who were seen* in at least two Jersey City locations -- Liberty State Park and The Doric apartment building -- *celebrating the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center.*
> 
> 
> The Israelis at Liberty State Park *were dressed in Arab-style clothing* wh*en they were witnessed celebrating the first attack.* The FBI later confiscated a videotape they filmed of the first attack.
> 
> *Israeli art students who shadowed 9-11 hijackers were part of a major Mossad intelligence operation - Looking Glass News*
> 
> *Google *Irgun, Haganah and Stern gangs and you will get 144,000 hits
> 
> BTW: The Haganah gang later became the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
> The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.
> 
> The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.
> 
> The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the time the Mandate was created after WWI there was not ONE SOUL in the region of Palestine who cared themselves Palestinians.
> 
> You wish to make all Jews foreign to their own land.  Fine.
> 
> You will have to make all Arabs totally foreign to the region of Palestine as well, since not only are they Indigenous of Arabia, but thousands of Arabs came from all over Asia and Europe into that region after 1850 because Jews were creating jobs and hiring those Arabs.  Those Arab foreigners who ended up finding themselves in a war they did not want to be a part of, but were forced into it by those who became the Arab's "Leaders" of a war against the Jewish RIGHT to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> You use and abuse the word "Palestinian" and think that Jesus or Allah, whichever one you abuse Jews for, is happy smiling at you.
> 
> That is all simpletons like you are capable of.
> 
> So, where is your "salvation" Tinmoore?  When is that going to happen?
> When all Jews are gone?  Or when they all convert to either one of these sick ideologies you are so fond of?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You haven't been reading my posts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The ones where the Indigenous Jews are actually foreigners and Israel does not exist, or have the right to exist?
> 
> Those posts?
> 
> You surely like to use the word "foreign" when it comes to Jews, but not to Arabs
Click to expand...

Zurich is in Palestine?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will not bother to ask how your mind went from this:
> 
> "Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishingfantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.'
> 
> ......To what you chose to post, which has nothing to do with what I posted.
> 
> But you want to know who threw the first rock, or shot the first bullet, Jews or Arabs?
> 
> Do not forget the 1920s:
> 
> Arab Riots of the 1920's
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish community had anticipated the Arab reaction to the Allies’ convention, and was ready to meet it. Jewish affairs in Palestine were then being administered from Jerusalem by the _Vaad Hatzirim_ (Council of Delegates), appointed by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) (which became the Jewish Agency in 1929).​
> The Palestinians were fighting against the foreign colonization of Palestine.
> 
> The foreign World Zionist Organization's settler colonial project was carried out locally by the foreign Jewish Agency. The foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.
> 
> The Zionist's settler colonial project was a foreign attack on Palestine. The Palestinians are still defending themselves from that attack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At the time the Mandate was created after WWI there was not ONE SOUL in the region of Palestine who cared themselves Palestinians.
> 
> You wish to make all Jews foreign to their own land.  Fine.
> 
> You will have to make all Arabs totally foreign to the region of Palestine as well, since not only are they Indigenous of Arabia, but thousands of Arabs came from all over Asia and Europe into that region after 1850 because Jews were creating jobs and hiring those Arabs.  Those Arab foreigners who ended up finding themselves in a war they did not want to be a part of, but were forced into it by those who became the Arab's "Leaders" of a war against the Jewish RIGHT to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> You use and abuse the word "Palestinian" and think that Jesus or Allah, whichever one you abuse Jews for, is happy smiling at you.
> 
> That is all simpletons like you are capable of.
> 
> So, where is your "salvation" Tinmoore?  When is that going to happen?
> When all Jews are gone?  Or when they all convert to either one of these sick ideologies you are so fond of?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You haven't been reading my posts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The ones where the Indigenous Jews are actually foreigners and Israel does not exist, or have the right to exist?
> 
> Those posts?
> 
> You surely like to use the word "foreign" when it comes to Jews, but not to Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Zurich is in Palestine?
Click to expand...

You like to play games.

Bosnia is in Palestine?
Egypt is in Palestine?
Saudi Arabia is in Palestine?
Lebanon is in Palestine?
Syria is in Palesine?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ P F Tinmore et al, 

Oh, but we have been reading your postings. 



P F Tinmore said:


> You haven't been reading my posts.


*(COMMENT)*

What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.   The Arab Palestinian has not demonstrated any protective potential whatsoever in over a hundred years.  In fact, for the last three generations, the Arab Palestinians have been teaching their children to "hate" and "fight" the Jewish People.  In the last generation, the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:



> Tragically, the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas is doing exactly what Mandela warned against: The PA is teaching its children to hate. The PA and the politically dominant Fatah movement that is also headed by Abbas, teach Palestinian children through their official communication structures that Jews and Israelis possess inherently evil character traits.  Fighting them is therefore said to be heroic and even Allah’s will. Terrorists who have murdered dozens of Israeli civilians are said to be national heroes and Islamic Martyrs.  This process is known as "Generational Transference" _(passed from one generation to the next)_:
> 
> Common PA hate messages include:
> 
> •  Israel has no right to exist
> •  Israel will disappear and be replaced by “Palestine”
> •  Violence – “armed struggle” - is legitimate to fight Israel
> •  Muslims must fight an eternal Islamic war against Israel
> •  Killers of Israelis are heroes and role models
> •  Martyrdom-death for Allah is the utmost honor​Children recited poems on official PA TV children’s educational programs in recent years with the following messages:
> 
> •  Jews are “monkeys and pigs”
> •  Jews are “enemies of Allah”
> •  Jews are “most evil of creations”
> •  Zion is “Satan with a tail”​SOURCE:  PMW Comprehensive Report:  Palestinian Authority Education - A Recipe for Hate and Terror -
> by Itamar Marcus, Nan Jacques Zilberdik and Alona Burger




Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, but we have been reading your postings.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't been reading my posts.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.   The Arab Palestinian has not demonstrated any protective potential whatsoever in over a hundred years.  In fact, for the last three generations, the Arab Palestinians have been teaching their children to "hate" and "fight" the Jewish People.  In the last generation, the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tragically, the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas is doing exactly what Mandela warned against: The PA is teaching its children to hate. The PA and the politically dominant Fatah movement that is also headed by Abbas, teach Palestinian children through their official communication structures that Jews and Israelis possess inherently evil character traits.  Fighting them is therefore said to be heroic and even Allah’s will. Terrorists who have murdered dozens of Israeli civilians are said to be national heroes and Islamic Martyrs.  This process is known as "Generational Transference" _(passed from one generation to the next)_:
> 
> Common PA hate messages include:
> 
> •  Israel has no right to exist
> •  Israel will disappear and be replaced by “Palestine”
> •  Violence – “armed struggle” - is legitimate to fight Israel
> •  Muslims must fight an eternal Islamic war against Israel
> •  Killers of Israelis are heroes and role models
> •  Martyrdom-death for Allah is the utmost honor​Children recited poems on official PA TV children’s educational programs in recent years with the following messages:
> 
> •  Jews are “monkeys and pigs”
> •  Jews are “enemies of Allah”
> •  Jews are “most evil of creations”
> •  Zion is “Satan with a tail”​SOURCE:  PMW Comprehensive Report:  Palestinian Authority Education - A Recipe for Hate and Terror -
> by Itamar Marcus, Nan Jacques Zilberdik and Alona Burger
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.


Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
※→ P F Tinmore et al,

Oh, for heaven's sake!



P F Tinmore said:


> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.


Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.[/QUOTE]
*(COMMENT)*

The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.

The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, for heaven's sake!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.

The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.

Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.

Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.



Your silly slogans do nothing as a substitute for a defendable argument.

If there is a handy Press TV YouTube video you have available, please post it. Otherwise, do you have anything to refute the high-tech, first world economy that the Israelis have built?


Israel Economy Facts & Stats


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, but we have been reading your postings.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't been reading my posts.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.   The Arab Palestinian has not demonstrated any protective potential whatsoever in over a hundred years.  In fact, for the last three generations, the Arab Palestinians have been teaching their children to "hate" and "fight" the Jewish People.  In the last generation, the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tragically, the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas is doing exactly what Mandela warned against: The PA is teaching its children to hate. The PA and the politically dominant Fatah movement that is also headed by Abbas, teach Palestinian children through their official communication structures that Jews and Israelis possess inherently evil character traits.  Fighting them is therefore said to be heroic and even Allah’s will. Terrorists who have murdered dozens of Israeli civilians are said to be national heroes and Islamic Martyrs.  This process is known as "Generational Transference" _(passed from one generation to the next)_:
> 
> Common PA hate messages include:
> 
> •  Israel has no right to exist
> •  Israel will disappear and be replaced by “Palestine”
> •  Violence – “armed struggle” - is legitimate to fight Israel
> •  Muslims must fight an eternal Islamic war against Israel
> •  Killers of Israelis are heroes and role models
> •  Martyrdom-death for Allah is the utmost honor​Children recited poems on official PA TV children’s educational programs in recent years with the following messages:
> 
> •  Jews are “monkeys and pigs”
> •  Jews are “enemies of Allah”
> •  Jews are “most evil of creations”
> •  Zion is “Satan with a tail”​SOURCE:  PMW Comprehensive Report:  Palestinian Authority Education - A Recipe for Hate and Terror -
> by Itamar Marcus, Nan Jacques Zilberdik and Alona Burger
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
Click to expand...

Hey TInmore, how come you missed my mention of Bosnia as where foreign Palestinians came from, especially at the end of the 19th century?

Remember the Tamimi Family?  Those Blonde, Blue Eyed beautiful non Arabs you and others like to make believe are indigenous "Palestinians"?

Thank you for the "funny" vote about all of those Non Indigenous Palestinians who moved to the region of Palestine after 1860 thanks to Jews creating jobs and hiring non Jews for them.

  You are always a hoot  

hoot   hoot  hoot


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, for heaven's sake!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.
> 
> The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.

Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.[/QUOTE]
Are you on Opium?  Is that what OPM mean?

Israel was created with Love, Sweat and Tears.  And continues to be built that way.

The Arabs and non Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, have managed to destroy 80% of the Mandate because of their Blood, Revenge and Murder  doctrine.

That is the difference between Jews and Muslims.

Jews Build.
Muslims Destroy.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, for heaven's sake!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.
> 
> The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
Click to expand...

Are you on Opium?  Is that what OPM mean?

Israel was created with Love, Sweat and Tears.  And continues to be built that way.

The Arabs and non Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, have managed to destroy 80% of the Mandate because of their Blood, Revenge and Murder  doctrine.

That is the difference between Jews and Muslims.

Jews Build.
Muslims Destroy.[/QUOTE]
Standard Israeli bullshit,

I can post videos all day long showing Israel destroying stuff.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, for heaven's sake!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.
> 
> The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you on Opium?  Is that what OPM mean?
> 
> Israel was created with Love, Sweat and Tears.  And continues to be built that way.
> 
> The Arabs and non Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, have managed to destroy 80% of the Mandate because of their Blood, Revenge and Murder  doctrine.
> 
> That is the difference between Jews and Muslims.
> 
> Jews Build.
> Muslims Destroy.
Click to expand...

Standard Israeli bullshit,

I can post videos all day long showing Israel destroying stuff.[/QUOTE]
The "stuff" you are referring to are weapons, buildings where they stash those weapons, homes where they hide, schools, mosques and hospitals where they hid and stash their weapons, et. and other things the Arabs should not be building much less thinking about.

But let us stick to the Tamimi clan and all other real foreigners to the region called Palestine.



Hoot.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> I can post videos all day long showing Israel destroying stuff.



Well, actually, your contribution to the forum is dumping YouTube videos into threads all day long.

You’re troubled by Israel taking the steps necessary to destroy islsmic terrorist infrastructure. You would far more troubled if Israel chose to abandon the “proportionate” steps it now takes in response to Islamic terrorist attacks and decided instead to respond with overwhelming force.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your silly slogans do nothing as a substitute for a defendable argument.
> 
> If there is a handy Press TV YouTube video you have available, please post it. Otherwise, do you have anything to refute the high-tech, first world economy that the Israelis have built?
> 
> 
> Israel Economy Facts & Stats
Click to expand...

Not Press TV, but...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ※→ P F Tinmore et al,
> 
> Oh, for heaven's sake!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Look what happened to Palestine in the hands if the Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The part that is in the sovereign hands of Israel is the more developed than any other regional country.
> 
> The part that the Arab Palestinians have touched is a disaster.  The PLO has even been run out of Jordan.  The Arab Palestinians sabotaged themselves.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you on Opium?  Is that what OPM mean?
> 
> Israel was created with Love, Sweat and Tears.  And continues to be built that way.
> 
> The Arabs and non Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, have managed to destroy 80% of the Mandate because of their Blood, Revenge and Murder  doctrine.
> 
> That is the difference between Jews and Muslims.
> 
> Jews Build.
> Muslims Destroy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Standard Israeli bullshit,
> 
> I can post videos all day long showing Israel destroying stuff.
Click to expand...

The "stuff" you are referring to are weapons, buildings where they stash those weapons, homes where they hide, schools, mosques and hospitals where they hid and stash their weapons, et. and other things the Arabs should not be building much less thinking about.

But let us stick to the Tamimi clan and all other real foreigners to the region called Palestine.



Hoot.[/QUOTE]
More standard Israeli bullshit.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your silly slogans do nothing as a substitute for a defendable argument.
> 
> If there is a handy Press TV YouTube video you have available, please post it. Otherwise, do you have anything to refute the high-tech, first world economy that the Israelis have built?
> 
> 
> Israel Economy Facts & Stats
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not Press TV, but...
Click to expand...



But what a waste of bandwidth.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> Bosnia is in Palestine?
> Egypt is in Palestine?
> Saudi Arabia is in Palestine?
> Lebanon is in Palestine?
> Syria is in Palesine?



I am not sure what your point was but I do believe Judea was in Palestine.


----------



## watchingfromafar

RoccoR said:


> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.



Until the Israeli's accept the Palestinians as fellow neighbors the Israeli's will remain in isolation until there are none left to care one way or another.



RoccoR said:


> In fact, for the last three generations, the Arab Palestinians have been teaching their children to "hate" and "fight" the Jewish People. In the last generation,



And their fight continues--




Knowing the the IDF has murdered a large number of Palestinian children and continue to do so I would.t blame the Palestinians for  such feelings but having said that, the Palestinians don't "hate" anyone.

The above is just mumbo-jumbo with no substance in fact. But it does create another excuse to murder more Palestinian children.



RoccoR said:


> the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:



To be kind to you I will just state that the above is just not true.


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bosnia is in Palestine?
> Egypt is in Palestine?
> Saudi Arabia is in Palestine?
> Lebanon is in Palestine?
> Syria is in Palesine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure what your point was but I do believe Judea was in Palestine.
> View attachment 236202
Click to expand...

My point was all those Arabs who immigrated from Europe and other parts of Asia into the region of Palestine, who now want the world to believe that they are indigenous to the area for the past 100,000 years by calling themselves Palestinians, and not the Jewish people who actually are indigenous to the area.

The Tamimi family is from Bosnia.  The Arabs themselves will tell the world that part of them came from Egypt and the other part from Saudi Arabia.


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> What you do not understand, is that NO Israeli is going to voluntarily place the fate of the Jewish National Home into the *UNTRUSTWORTHY* hands of the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until the Israeli's accept the Palestinians as fellow neighbors the Israeli's will remain in isolation until there are none left to care one way or another.
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, for the last three generations, the Arab Palestinians have been teaching their children to "hate" and "fight" the Jewish People. In the last generation,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And their fight continues--
> View attachment 236203
> 
> Knowing the the IDF has murdered a large number of Palestinian children and continue to do so I would.t blame the Palestinians for  such feelings but having said that, the Palestinians don't "hate" anyone.
> 
> The above is just mumbo-jumbo with no substance in fact. But it does create another excuse to murder more Palestinian children.
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be kind to you I will just state that the above is just not true.
Click to expand...

Repeating lies ad nauseam, will not make them come true.
You do not wish to see the videos, etc of the Palestinians teaching their children to kill Jews, or their Summer camps where they teach them to deal with real weapons.

You need to deal with that denial.


----------



## watchingfromafar

P F Tinmore said:


> Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.



You are so right. If it wasn't for the US $$billions in annual handouts Israel would dry up and blow away.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> You do not wish to see the videos, etc of the Palestinians teaching their children to kill Jews, or their Summer camps where they teach them to deal with real weapons.



Oh my sweet plump dumpling, the Palestinian schools are run by the UN. And I doubt that the UN sponsors would condone such things. But I am sure you have seen a few Israeli video's that are shown to Israeli children about the unholy Palestinians. Please do me a favor and share some of them here for all of us to see.

thanks in advance -


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel can mooch better than anybody. Whoop dee do.
> 
> Israel was created with OPM and lives on OPM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are so right. If it wasn't for the US $$billions in annual handouts Israel would dry up and blow away.
Click to expand...

You do know that the PA and Hamas are only fighting Israel instead of agreeing to a Peace Treaty (like Egypt and Jordan) because Iran, Qatar, the US, the EU and others are flooding those two with Billions of dollars and weapons? 

Right?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> My point was all those Arabs who immigrated from Europe and other parts of Asia *into the region of Palestine*, who now want the world to believe that they are indigenous to the area for the past 100,000 years *by calling themselves Palestinians*, and not the Jewish people who actually are indigenous to the area.



You need to make up your mind, either Palestine never existed or it did. You can't have it both ways.

Palestinian, by the nature of the word means Palestinian people.

note: I emboldened a few of your post words for clarity purposes


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do not wish to see the videos, etc of the Palestinians teaching their children to kill Jews, or their Summer camps where they teach them to deal with real weapons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my sweet plump dumpling, the Palestinian schools are run by the UN. And I doubt that the UN sponsors would condone such things. But I am sure you have seen a few Israeli video's that are shown to Israeli children about the unholy Palestinians. Please do me a favor and share some of them here for all of us to see.
> 
> thanks in advance -
Click to expand...

Keep telling these ugly lies to those who do not know better, which is the kind of people you are looking for.

Go to the thread "Who are the Palestinians" and look for the videos and articles there.

These thread is about who is Indigenous to the land and you are attempting to derail it into your favorite attacks on Israel.

Bye......


----------



## Sixties Fan

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point was all those Arabs who immigrated from Europe and other parts of Asia *into the region of Palestine*, who now want the world to believe that they are indigenous to the area for the past 100,000 years *by calling themselves Palestinians*, and not the Jewish people who actually are indigenous to the area.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to make up your mind, either Palestine never existed or it did. You can't have it both ways.
> 
> Palestinian, by the nature of the word means Palestinian people.
Click to expand...

A region is not the same as a State.

A State is what the "Palestinians" are claiming always existed.



Yes, Palestinian People, as they have started to exist on the year
1964 CE after Arafat went to Moscow and drummed this up with the KGB.  Before that they were only Arab Muslims, and still continue to see themselves as such, first and foremost.

Goodbye.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> You do know that the PA and Hamas are only fighting Israel instead of agreeing to a Peace Treaty (like Egypt and Jordan) because Iran, Qatar, the US, the EU and others are flooding those two with Billions of dollars and weapons?



You do know that the Palestinians have no border to defend because the Israeli's refuse to give them one.-

right?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  watchingfromafar, et al,

Offered in mitigation of my mistake.



watchingfromafar said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> the Arab Palestinians have formalized violence and hatred into the curriculum in schools, as well as, in Summer programs for children:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be kind to you I will just state that the above is just not true.
Click to expand...

*(OPEN SOURCE)*


			
				EXCERPTS • Gaza's HAMAS authorities have blocked a U.N. refugee agency from introducing textbooks promoting human rights said:
			
		

> Palestinian children attend classes at a United Nations school in the Shati refugee camp in Gaza City. Gaza’s Hamas authorities have blocked a U.N. refugee agency from introducing a book promoting human rights into local schools, saying it ignores Palestinian cultural mores and focuses too heavily on “peaceful” means of conflict resolution.
> 
> The group also objected to the books' inclusion of the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights,"
> SOURCE:
> *Hamas objects to UN human rights book in schools *IBRAHIM BARZAK
> Associated Press_•_February 13, 2014





			
				[URL='https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict']EXCERPTS • Jerusalem PostArab-Israeli Conflict said:
			
		

> [/URL]
> 
> The contents of the books were analyzed focusing on the depiction of the Jewish/ Israeli “other,” which revealed three fundamentals: delegitimization, demonization, and indoctrination to violent struggle instead of peace.
> SOURCE:  New UNRWA textbooks for Palestinians demonize Israel and Jews According to the Palestinian schoolbooks, Jews have no rights whatsoever in the region but only "greedy ambitions." The books also say that Jews have no holy places. By Danielle Ziri  September 28, 2017



*(COMMENT)*

OK, I could be wrong _(it is always a possibility)_.  There are more than a half-dozen reports covering this topic.  But it was observations such as these that inspired researcher to look at "Generational Transference of Hatred." 

Also, see:

•  *REPORT: * Palestinian Authority textbooks: the attitude to Jews, Israel and peace (Update, June 2018) •

*•  Indiscretions in the newest UNRWA textbooks By Arnon Groiss 9 March 2018 •*​

•  The US Continues Funding UNRWA Schools – New Textbooks “Worse Than The Old Ones” Teaching Jihad & Jew Hatred* (2018) •
*
*•  Hamas bashes UNRWA’s human rights curriculum •*

*•  UNRWA’s Anti-Peace Curriculum Violates UN Charter •*​
Now to be fair, I will post an opposing view:



			
				EXCERPT:  John M Hummasti's Blog said:
			
		

> In their March 18, 2016 email, the WH official stated_, “While there is still work to be done, the Palestinian government has made significant progress in reducing inflammatory rhetoric and revising official textbooks. Over the past few years, the PA has helped improve the Palestinian curriculum, including textbooks that discuss human rights and the Holocaust, which has contributed to a better education for young Palestinians. The Palestinian curriculum is transparent, and all textbooks are available for review in Arabic on the website of the official Palestinian Curriculum Development Center. The Government of Israel even approves of and utilizes the Palestinian texts for schools in East Jerusalem.“_




			
				EXCERPT:  John M Hummasti's Blog said:
			
		

> *SOURCE:  US gov’t fabrication : that PA/UNRWA school books meet standards of peace education*
> Posted on February 12, 2017 by johnmhummasti
> by Media Reprints – March 25, 2016


https://johnmhummasti.wordpress.com...hool-books-meet-standards-of-peace-education/​https://johnmhummasti.wordpress.com...hool-books-meet-standards-of-peace-education/

*(APOLOGY)*

Now it is possible that every one of my sources as listed are wrong.  Yes - it could be so.  And on the assumption that you are correct, I make this open apology.

Sincerely,
R


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> A State is what the "Palestinians" are claiming always existed.



Only because the Palestinians have always been members of Palestine; hence the term "Palestinian"

Israelite's on the other hand never had a state of their own until the UN let then steal a chunk of Palestine just to get them off of the world's back just after WW2. Either the winners of WW2 welcome them into their countries or give them a right to a place far away from them.

now just guess which choice they chose?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
watchingfromafar, et al,

Well, I thought that the Arab Higher Committee rejected the recommended Arab State.



watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the PA and Hamas are only fighting Israel instead of agreeing to a Peace Treaty (like Egypt and Jordan) because Iran, Qatar, the US, the EU and others are flooding those two with Billions of dollars and weapons?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the Palestinians have no border to defend because the Israeli's refuse to give them one.-
> 
> right?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There are two treaties that address international borders.

•  Israeli - Jordanian



 ​•  Israeli - Egyptian



 ​
There is a big reason why there are no borders to the (so-called) State of Palestine.  Because no authority has actually established sovereign territory for the Arab Palestinians. Where do the Arab Palestinians have sovereign authority?  Only Area "A" and the "Gaza Strip."  The GAZA Strip is under the control of HAMAS _(a terrorist actor)_ and the Area "A" under the control of the Ramallah based Palestinian Authority Government.

You can't blame Israel for the "Three NO's" or the fact that the Palestinians want claim to the entirety of the territory_ (from the River to the Sea)_ that was formerly under the Authority of the Palestinian Mandate. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

These thread is again being hijacked, by anti Israel posters, to discuss issues not pertinent to this thread, issues which  belong in other threads in this community.

Thanks


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Well, I thought that the Arab Higher Committee rejected the recommended Arab State.


Link?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I thought that the Arab Higher Committee rejected the recommended Arab State.
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

Wrong thread.  Move on.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I thought that the Arab Higher Committee rejected the recommended Arab State.
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


The same link you have been given a dozen or more times?

^^^^ what Sixties Fan said.


----------



## rylah

*"Gatekeepers of G-d's Holy Mountain"*
The RiverWinds share about the Temple Mount and the theft of holy places from indigenous peoples from the perspective of Native Americans. The RiverWinds are a dynamic, down-to-earth couple with a well-grounded enthusiasm for life. Both survivors of their own personal Trail of Tears, the RiverWinds are resilient overcomers who focus on forgiveness, reconciliation, and love. They build bridges of reconciliation between nations and support the State of Israel and her people as Ambassadors.

**


----------



## The Original Tree

watchingfromafar said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the PA and Hamas are only fighting Israel instead of agreeing to a Peace Treaty (like Egypt and Jordan) because Iran, Qatar, the US, the EU and others are flooding those two with Billions of dollars and weapons?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the Palestinians have no border to defend because the Israeli's refuse to give them one.-
> 
> right?
Click to expand...

*Wrong.  THE So called Palestinians which are really Syrians, Jordanians, and Egyptians can defend the borders of Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.  

Or they can accept The Homeland The World gave them 100 years ago which is East of The Jordan, called Transjordan.  

Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> watchingfromafar, et al,
> 
> Well, I thought that the Arab Higher Committee rejected the recommended Arab State.
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the PA and Hamas are only fighting Israel instead of agreeing to a Peace Treaty (like Egypt and Jordan) because Iran, Qatar, the US, the EU and others are flooding those two with Billions of dollars and weapons?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know that the Palestinians have no border to defend because the Israeli's refuse to give them one.-
> 
> right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are two treaties that address international borders.
> 
> •  Israeli - Jordanian
> 
> View attachment 236211​•  Israeli - Egyptian
> 
> View attachment 236212​
> There is a big reason why there are no borders to the (so-called) State of Palestine.  Because no authority has actually established sovereign territory for the Arab Palestinians. Where do the Arab Palestinians have sovereign authority?  Only Area "A" and the "Gaza Strip."  The GAZA Strip is under the control of HAMAS _(a terrorist actor)_ and the Area "A" under the control of the Ramallah based Palestinian Authority Government.
> 
> You can't blame Israel for the "Three NO's" or the fact that the Palestinians want claim to the entirety of the territory_ (from the River to the Sea)_ that was formerly under the Authority of the Palestinian Mandate.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> There is a big reason why there are no borders to the (so-called) State of Palestine.


The UN disagrees with you. So do the Palestinians.


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.



That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...

Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.


----------



## The Original Tree

José said:


> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
Click to expand...

*Please define Transjordan!*


----------



## Sixties Fan

José said:


> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
Click to expand...

There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.

In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.


Know history !


----------



## The Original Tree

*Mandatory Palestine*




1920–1948





*Everything outside of Mandatory Palestine and to The East of The Jordan can be settled by the so called Palestinians.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> *Mandatory Palestine*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1920–1948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Everything outside of Mandatory Palestine and to The East of The Jordan can be settled by the so called Palestinians.*


There is another thread to discuss the creation of Israel and any Arab State.  Thanks.

All who lived in what became Mandatory Palestine were called 
Palestinians from 1920 to 1948.  The Arabs did not like being called Palestinians, then.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
Click to expand...

*Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*


----------



## The Original Tree

*The formation of Palestine has a lot to do with who is indigenous.
If anyone is Indigenous, it is the Jews who have settle The Promised Land for over 5,000 continuous years.  

The Promised Land was Promised to Abraham, and Inherited to Isaac whom God renamed Israel.

There are no legitimate claims outside of that.*


----------



## José

If God has ever promised any homeland to europeans of jewish faith the only possible candidate is the Pale of Settlement in Eastern Europe.


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> José said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
Click to expand...

I do not know where you got that .....

"Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
*
*
......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.

I will not go into it and try to unravel it. 

Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.

And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.

Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.


----------



## Sixties Fan

José said:


> If God has ever promised any homeland to europeans of jewish faith the only possible candidate is the Pale of Settlement in Eastern Europe.


You can move to the "Pale" as soon as you like.

Jews are Asians indigenous of the Land of Israel, and it does not matter how long they spent outside of Israel, they are still indigenous of that Land.

Are you telling me that Arabs who leave Arabia cannot ever be considered indigenous of that Peninsula again?  Of course not.

And you do know that the same goes for people from anywhere else.

Irish, Italians, Apache, Aboriginals, Africans, so on and so forth.

But the endless game of "Jews from Europe are not really Jews" simply makes your heart beat faster, does it not?


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> José said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
Click to expand...

*That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.

History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia

Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.

But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*


----------



## The Original Tree

From Wiki:

The *history of the Jews in the Roman Empire* traces the interaction of Jews and Romans during the period of the Roman Empire (27 BC – AD 476). Their cultures began to overlap in the centuries just before the Christian Era. Jews, as part of the Jewish diaspora, migrated to Rome and Roman Europe from the Land of Israel, Asia Minor, Babylon and Alexandria in response to economic hardship and incessant warfare over the land of Israel between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid empires. In Rome, Jewish communities enjoyed privileges and thrived economically, becoming a significant part of the Empire's population (perhaps as much as ten percent).[1]

The Roman general Pompey in his eastern campaign established the Roman province of Syria in 64 BC and conquered Jerusalem in 63 BC. Julius Caesar conquered Alexandria c. 47 BC and defeated Pompey in 45 BC. Under Julius Caesar, Judaism was officially recognised as a legal religion, a policy followed by the first Roman emperor, Augustus. Herod the Great was designated ‘King of the Jews’ by the Roman Senate in c. 40 BC, the Roman province of Egypt was established in 30 BC, and Judea proper, Samaria and Idumea (biblical Edom) were converted to the Roman province of Iudaea in 6 AD. Jewish-Roman tensions resulted in several Jewish–Roman wars, 66-135 AD, which resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple and institution of the Jewish Tax in 70 and Hadrian's attempt to create a new Roman colony named Aelia Capitolina c. 130.

*Jewish–Roman wars[edit]*
Main article: Jewish–Roman wars



Relief from the Arch of Titus in Rome depicting a menorah and other objects looted from the Temple of Jerusalem carried in a Roman triumph
In 66 AD, the First Jewish–Roman War began. The revolt was put down by the future Roman emperors Vespasian and Titus. In the Siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Romans destroyed much of the Temple in Jerusalem and, according to some accounts, plundered artifacts from the Temple, such as the Menorah. Jews continued to live in their land in significant numbers, the Kitos War of 115-117 notwithstanding, until Julius Severus ravaged Judea while putting down the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132–136. 985 villages were destroyed and most of the Jewish population of central Judaea was essentially wiped out – killed, sold into slavery, or forced to flee.[8] Banished from Jerusalem, which was renamed Aelia Capitolina, the Jewish population now centered on Galilee,[9] initially at Yavneh.

*After the Jewish-Roman wars (66–135), Hadrian changed the name of Iudaea province to Syria Palaestina and Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina in an attempt to erase the historical ties of the Jewish people to the region.[10] *

In addition, after 70, Jews and Jewish Proselytes were only allowed to practice their religion if they paid the Jewish tax, and after 135 were barred from Jerusalem except for the day of Tisha B'Av.

History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia


----------



## The Original Tree

*So there you go.  Calling Israel....... Palestine is an Attempt to ERASE THE HISTORICAL TIES of THE HEBREWS TO ISRAEL. 

It's what The Roman Empire did it for.  It's proven in History.  They called the Hebrews, Palestinians and tried to exterminate them and used The Term Palestinian to refer to them in that way for the sole purposes of attempting to break their historical connections to The Promised Land by referring to them in a general derogatory term.

In other words to call the Promised Land, Israel....  Palestine is RACIST, DISCRIMINATORY, AND RECALLS GENOCIDE, AND ATTEMPTS TO NOT ONLY EXTERMINATE THE JEWS , BUT TO ERASE THEM FROM HISTORY AND ERASE THEIR TIES TO THE PROMISED LAND SPOKEN OF BY MOSES GIVEN UNTO ABRAHAM.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> José said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *The Original Tree*
> Any so called Palestinian not living in Transjordan is simply a squatter with no claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
Click to expand...

The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.

We have no disagreements there.

There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.

The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.

During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> José said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I said this tree is mentally impaired and desperately needs a chainsaw...
> 
> Even the League of Nations, the puppet organization created by Britain and France to give a legal facade to their imperial ambitions recognised the human and civil rights of the arab population living west of the Jordan river when it included the Balfour Declaration in the Mandate:
> 
> His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, *it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
> 
> 
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
Click to expand...

*They should call themselves Hebrews again.

You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that. 

Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Jews in to Captivity.*


*Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*

*Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).

Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.

Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).

I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.

Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.

IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.

This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> 
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
Click to expand...

I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.

{Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}

No such thing happened.
4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded. 
 The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.

You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.

Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
Click to expand...


*I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.

All better now?

The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.





The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite

The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
Discovered: 1896
Created: c. 1208 BC
Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo

Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia

So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.

Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.

Here is another quote from that page:

Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt

Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.

Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.

The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.

Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"

NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?

According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.

In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.

The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).

So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut

Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .

If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.

Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.

That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.

The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.

Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").

River of blood

It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.
*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.*
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to that site where it says that Egypt invaded Israel 4000 years ago?

Thanks.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> 
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to that site where it says that Egypt invaded Israel 4000 years ago?
> 
> Thanks.
Click to expand...


*It was provided in the previous post #2516
Where Hebrew Slaves ever in Egypt?  

I also provided evidence that Egypt used the term Israel when commemorating a major military victory over them. 3,200 years ago, all in the post immediately above your last post. # 2518

So we know historically that the term "Israel" has been in use for at least 3,200 years, and most likely for the past 4,000 years just like I said.
*
*After all Isaac, The Son of Abraham had a son named Jacob and Jacob had his name changed to Israel by Yahweh Himself*

*Israel The Nation is named after Jacob, and Jacob was renamed Israel by Yahweh.*

*Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 32:22-32 - Contemporary English Version*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite
> 
> The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
> Discovered: 1896
> Created: c. 1208 BC
> Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo
> 
> Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia
> 
> So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.
> 
> Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.
> 
> Here is another quote from that page:
> 
> Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt
> 
> Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.
> 
> Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.
> 
> The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.
> 
> Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"
> 
> NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?
> 
> According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.
> 
> In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.
> 
> The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).
> 
> So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut
> 
> Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .
> 
> If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.
> 
> Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.
> 
> That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.
> 
> The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.
> 
> Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").
> 
> River of blood
> 
> It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.*
Click to expand...

The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
Israel was Jacob's new name.
There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.

Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.


----------



## Shusha

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite
> 
> The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
> Discovered: 1896
> Created: c. 1208 BC
> Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo
> 
> Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia
> 
> So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.
> 
> Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.
> 
> Here is another quote from that page:
> 
> Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt
> 
> Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.
> 
> Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.
> 
> The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.
> 
> Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"
> 
> NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?
> 
> According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.
> 
> In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.
> 
> The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).
> 
> So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut
> 
> Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .
> 
> If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.
> 
> Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.
> 
> That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.
> 
> The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.
> 
> Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").
> 
> River of blood
> 
> It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.*
Click to expand...


The Anastasi Papyrus VI does not mention who the shasu worshipped. At least not in the translation I read.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> 
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite
> 
> The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
> Discovered: 1896
> Created: c. 1208 BC
> Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo
> 
> Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia
> 
> So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.
> 
> Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.
> 
> Here is another quote from that page:
> 
> Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt
> 
> Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.
> 
> Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.
> 
> The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.
> 
> Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"
> 
> NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?
> 
> According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.
> 
> In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.
> 
> The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).
> 
> So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut
> 
> Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .
> 
> If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.
> 
> Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.
> 
> That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.
> 
> The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.
> 
> Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").
> 
> River of blood
> 
> It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
> Israel was Jacob's new name.
> There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.
> 
> Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.
Click to expand...


*That is your interpretation.  A Nation can be a genetically homogeneous people like The Cherokee Nation.

You are debating then what you define as a Nation, and The Word Nation.
Not the fact that Israel was a Nation that inhabited The Promised Land for at least 4,000 years that we know of. 

Israel then was a Nation, named after Jacob the Grandson of Abraham who passed down his Inheritance of The Promised Land and The Abrahamic Convenant to Issac, Abraham's son, who then passed it on To Jacob, who was named Israel by Yahweh.  So The Grandson of Abraham is Israel, and The Children of Israel are a Nation today, and they were a Nation back then.

There is also historical evidence that Israel was in captivity in Egypt as long ago as 3,600 years ago which further reinforces my assertion that Israel has been a Nation for at least 4,000 years.

We can agree to disagree, but Israel has been a Nation according to evidence found in Egypt as long as 3,600 years ago.  

So, I am fine with saying Israel has been a Nation for 4,000 years and has occupied what we call Israel for 4,000 years.  They have survived numerous attempts at genocidal extermination, and slavery by The Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Nazi Germany and many many more.  They will survive the next Holocaust launched by Islam against them, as Yahweh has promised they would.

If they were "just a people" and "not a nation" then how did they survive thousands of years of assaults and attempts at extermination, and enslavement if they were not a Nation, when faced against so many Nations who were so powerful in their day, we called them EMPIRES?

The Promised Land, and The People of Israel have persisted in ISRAEL for 4,000 Years, despite THE GREATEST EMPIRE'S attempts to remove them, and The Land is theirs, and there is no debating that at all.  They will persist until the Return of Christ and after that as well.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite
> 
> The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
> Discovered: 1896
> Created: c. 1208 BC
> Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo
> 
> Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia
> 
> So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.
> 
> Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.
> 
> Here is another quote from that page:
> 
> Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt
> 
> Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.
> 
> Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.
> 
> The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.
> 
> Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"
> 
> NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?
> 
> According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.
> 
> In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.
> 
> The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).
> 
> So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut
> 
> Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .
> 
> If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.
> 
> Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.
> 
> That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.
> 
> The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.
> 
> Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").
> 
> River of blood
> 
> It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
> Israel was Jacob's new name.
> There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.
> 
> Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That is your interpretation.  A Nation can be a genetically homogeneous people like The Cherokee Nation.
> 
> You are debating then what you define as a Nation, and The Word Nation.
> Not the fact that Israel was a Nation that inhabited The Promised Land for at least 4,000 years that we know of.
> 
> Israel then was a Nation, named after Jacob the Grandson of Abraham who passed down his Inheritance of The Promised Land and The Abrahamic Convenant to Issac, Abraham's son, who then passed it on To Jacob, who was named Israel by Yahweh.  So The Grandson of Abraham is Israel, and The Children of Israel are a Nation today, and they were a Nation back then.
> 
> There is also historical evidence that Israel was in captivity in Egypt as long ago as 3,600 years ago which further reinforces my assertion that Israel has been a Nation for at least 4,000 years.
> 
> We can agree to disagree, but Israel has been a Nation according to evidence found in Egypt as long as 3,600 years ago.
> 
> So, I am fine with saying Israel has been a Nation for 4,000 years and has occupied what we call Israel for 4,000 years.  They have survived numerous attempts at genocidal extermination, and slavery by The Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Nazi Germany and many many more.  They will survive the next Holocaust launched by Islam against them, as Yahweh has promised they would.
> 
> If they were "just a people" and "not a nation" then how did they survive thousands of years of assaults and attempts at extermination, and enslavement if they were not a Nation, when faced against so many Nations who were so powerful in their day, we called them EMPIRES?
> 
> The Promised Land, and The People of Israel have persisted in ISRAEL for 4,000 Years, despite THE GREATEST EMPIRE'S attempts to remove them, and The Land is theirs, and there is no debating that at all.  They will persist until the Return of Christ and after that as well.*
Click to expand...

I am Jewish.  I know the history of my people.  I know what Genesis says.  You have not read it.  I have.

I go by what Jewish history says, and not what many links say, which change some of the history a bit, as I have pointed out to you.

Thank you.


----------



## The Original Tree

*I have read the Bible Cover to Cover.

Egypt erected a stone Monument 3,200 years ago to commemorate a major military victory over “Israel”

The Egyptian Empire would never honor a loose collection of Hebrews even in defeat with a stone monument commemorating a major military victory over Israel if it was not a Nation worthy of noting such an event on such a monument.

They fought and defeated an Army.  The Nation of Israel’s Army.

Egypt wouldn’t bother mentioning such a battle, let alone would they waste their time carving a permanent marker of such an event on a monument if it were not a significant victory over a Rival Nation.

To downplay the idea that Israel was not a Nation that Egypt defeated in battle is like you going over to the next block and beating up a group of little kids and then putting a Billboard in your front yard declaring to your neighborhood what a Warrior you are.

You wouldn’t broadcast that to the world.



Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:





Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:





Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:



			They should call themselves Hebrews again.

You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that. 

Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.


Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes

Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).

Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.

Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).

I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.

Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.

IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.

This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.
		
Click to expand...

I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.

{Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}

No such thing happened.
4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
 The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.

You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.

Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
		
Click to expand...


I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.

All better now?

The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.





The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite

The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
Discovered: 1896
Created: c. 1208 BC
Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo

Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia

So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.

Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.

Here is another quote from that page:

Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt

Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.

Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.

The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.

Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"

NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?

According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.

In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.

The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).

So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut

Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .

If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.

Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.

That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.

The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.

Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").

River of blood

It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.

Click to expand...

The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
Israel was Jacob's new name.
There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.

Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.
		
Click to expand...


That is your interpretation.  A Nation can be a genetically homogeneous people like The Cherokee Nation.

You are debating then what you define as a Nation, and The Word Nation.
Not the fact that Israel was a Nation that inhabited The Promised Land for at least 4,000 years that we know of. 

Israel then was a Nation, named after Jacob the Grandson of Abraham who passed down his Inheritance of The Promised Land and The Abrahamic Convenant to Issac, Abraham's son, who then passed it on To Jacob, who was named Israel by Yahweh.  So The Grandson of Abraham is Israel, and The Children of Israel are a Nation today, and they were a Nation back then.

There is also historical evidence that Israel was in captivity in Egypt as long ago as 3,600 years ago which further reinforces my assertion that Israel has been a Nation for at least 4,000 years.

We can agree to disagree, but Israel has been a Nation according to evidence found in Egypt as long as 3,600 years ago.  

So, I am fine with saying Israel has been a Nation for 4,000 years and has occupied what we call Israel for 4,000 years.  They have survived numerous attempts at genocidal extermination, and slavery by The Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Nazi Germany and many many more.  They will survive the next Holocaust launched by Islam against them, as Yahweh has promised they would.

If they were "just a people" and "not a nation" then how did they survive thousands of years of assaults and attempts at extermination, and enslavement if they were not a Nation, when faced against so many Nations who were so powerful in their day, we called them EMPIRES?

The Promised Land, and The People of Israel have persisted in ISRAEL for 4,000 Years, despite THE GREATEST EMPIRE'S attempts to remove them, and The Land is theirs, and there is no debating that at all.  They will persist until the Return of Christ and after that as well.

Click to expand...

I am Jewish.  I know the history of my people.  I know what Genesis says.  You have not read it.  I have.

I go by what Jewish history says, and not what many links say, which change some of the history a bit, as I have pointed out to you.

Thank you.
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> *I have read the Bible Cover to Cover.
> 
> Egypt erected a stone Monument 3,200 years ago to commemorate a major military victory over “Israel”
> 
> The Egyptian Empire would never honor a loose collection of Hebrews even in defeat with a stone monument commemorating a major military victory over Israel if it was not a Nation worthy of noting such an event on such a monument.
> 
> They fought and defeated an Army.  The Nation of Israel’s Army.
> 
> Egypt wouldn’t bother mentioning such a battle, let alone would they waste their time carving a permanent marker of such an event on a monument if it were not a significant victory over a Rival Nation.
> 
> To downplay the idea that Israel was not a Nation that Egypt defeated in battle is like you going over to the next block and beating up a group of little kids and then putting a Billboard in your front yard declaring to your neighborhood what a Warrior you are.
> 
> You wouldn’t broadcast that to the world.
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am sorry.  You may be confusing history of other people with the history of the early Hebrews.
> 
> {Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked Israel and led many Jews in to Captivity.}
> 
> No such thing happened.
> 4000 years ago, Israel as a Nation did not exist. Abraham had not yet moved to Canaan, and Judaism had not been founded.
> The Hebrews, the 12 tribes, became slaves after going to Egypt due to a draught.  The whole area of Canaan was controlled by Egypt, then.  At first they stayed there as free people, then a Pharaoh decided to enslave them.  It is written in Genesis.
> 
> You may be answering Jose, so I will leave you to it.
> 
> Actually, there is no point in explaining anything to him.  His mind is set on denying the Jewish connection to their ancestors and their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.
> 
> All better now?
> 
> The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite
> 
> The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
> Discovered: 1896
> Created: c. 1208 BC
> Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo
> 
> Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia
> 
> So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.
> 
> Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.
> 
> Here is another quote from that page:
> 
> Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt
> 
> Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.
> 
> Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.
> 
> The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.
> 
> Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"
> 
> NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?
> 
> According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.
> 
> In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.
> 
> The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).
> 
> So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut
> 
> Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .
> 
> If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.
> 
> Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.
> 
> That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.
> 
> The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.
> 
> Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").
> 
> River of blood
> 
> It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
> Israel was Jacob's new name.
> There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.
> 
> Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is your interpretation.  A Nation can be a genetically homogeneous people like The Cherokee Nation.
> 
> You are debating then what you define as a Nation, and The Word Nation.
> Not the fact that Israel was a Nation that inhabited The Promised Land for at least 4,000 years that we know of.
> 
> Israel then was a Nation, named after Jacob the Grandson of Abraham who passed down his Inheritance of The Promised Land and The Abrahamic Convenant to Issac, Abraham's son, who then passed it on To Jacob, who was named Israel by Yahweh.  So The Grandson of Abraham is Israel, and The Children of Israel are a Nation today, and they were a Nation back then.
> 
> There is also historical evidence that Israel was in captivity in Egypt as long ago as 3,600 years ago which further reinforces my assertion that Israel has been a Nation for at least 4,000 years.
> 
> We can agree to disagree, but Israel has been a Nation according to evidence found in Egypt as long as 3,600 years ago.
> 
> So, I am fine with saying Israel has been a Nation for 4,000 years and has occupied what we call Israel for 4,000 years.  They have survived numerous attempts at genocidal extermination, and slavery by The Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Nazi Germany and many many more.  They will survive the next Holocaust launched by Islam against them, as Yahweh has promised they would.
> 
> If they were "just a people" and "not a nation" then how did they survive thousands of years of assaults and attempts at extermination, and enslavement if they were not a Nation, when faced against so many Nations who were so powerful in their day, we called them EMPIRES?
> 
> The Promised Land, and The People of Israel have persisted in ISRAEL for 4,000 Years, despite THE GREATEST EMPIRE'S attempts to remove them, and The Land is theirs, and there is no debating that at all.  They will persist until the Return of Christ and after that as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am Jewish.  I know the history of my people.  I know what Genesis says.  You have not read it.  I have.
> 
> I go by what Jewish history says, and not what many links say, which change some of the history a bit, as I have pointed out to you.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *


The invasion on the Kingdom of Israel by an Egyptian Pharaoh is off by about 300 years.


*925 BC* – Sack of Jerusalem (925 BC) – Pharaoh Sheshonk I of the Third Intermediate Period invades Canaan following the Battle of Bitter Lakes. Possibly the same as Shishak, the Pharaoh mentioned in the Bible in the book of Kings 1, who captured and pillaged Jerusalem (1 Kings 14: 25).

Timeline of the history of the region of Palestine - Wikipedia


----------



## The Original Tree

*I wonder if they executed the huckster who carved that monument commemorating a major military victory of The Egyptian Empire over The Nation of Israel a full 300 years earlier 3,200 years ago?

You do realize that Egypt had numerous wars and batttles with Israel, right?

That’s what rival nations do.  Especially in Ancient Times.

Let me ask you a question:

With all The Empires and Nations who have tried to Exterminate Israel for the last 4,000 years continually, bind them in captivity, attempt to Erase them from History, deny them their birthright, deny them The Promised Land, Deny them The Abrahamic Covenant, and yet they are still here.....

Why is The Nation of Israel called a “Cup of Trembling for Many Nations”?


Zechariah 12:2

“Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.”

12-3

“And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.”




Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:



			I have read the Bible Cover to Cover.

Egypt erected a stone Monument 3,200 years ago to commemorate a major military victory over “Israel”

The Egyptian Empire would never honor a loose collection of Hebrews even in defeat with a stone monument commemorating a major military victory over Israel if it was not a Nation worthy of noting such an event on such a monument.

They fought and defeated an Army.  The Nation of Israel’s Army.

Egypt wouldn’t bother mentioning such a battle, let alone would they waste their time carving a permanent marker of such an event on a monument if it were not a significant victory over a Rival Nation.

To downplay the idea that Israel was not a Nation that Egypt defeated in battle is like you going over to the next block and beating up a group of little kids and then putting a Billboard in your front yard declaring to your neighborhood what a Warrior you are.

You wouldn’t broadcast that to the world.



Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:





Sixties Fan said:





The Original Tree said:



			I changed my post to defer to your sensitivity for dotted "i" and crossed 't' to Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Hebrews in to Captivity.

All better now?

The reference to 4,000 years ago was a citation from a web page about History.  So, my bad, but you can take that up with them.





The Merneptah Stele, which states: "Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more." Not quite

The Merneptah Stele—also known as the Israel Stele or the Victory Stele of Merneptah—is an inscription by the ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (reign: 1213 to 1203 BC) discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1896 at Thebes, and now housed in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
Discovered: 1896
Created: c. 1208 BC
Present location: Egyptian Museum, Cairo

Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia

So, 1,200 BC, 3,219 years ago The Term Israel was used by Egypt when they commemorated a major military victory over them.

Care to tell me again, how "ISRAEL" did not exist 4,000 years ago?  If the term "Israel" was used 3,200 years ago in a commemoration of a victory over "Israel" then "Israel" most likely existed as a nation 4,000 years ago.

Here is another quote from that page:

Clues to Israelite presence in Egypt

Conclusively, Semitic slaves there were. However, critics argue there's no archaeological evidence of a Semitic tribe worshiping Yahweh in Egypt.

Because of the muddy conditions of the East Delta, almost no papyri have survived – but those that did, may provide further clues in the search for the lost Israelites.

The papyrus Anastasi VI from around 3200 years ago describes how the Egyptian authorities allowed a group of Semitic nomads from Edom who worshiped Yahweh to pass the border-fortress in the region of Tjeku (Wadi Tumilat) and proceed with their livestock to the lakes of Pithom.

Interestng HUH?  So wait, There was a Stele depicting a Military Victory over ISRAEL, 3,200 years ago, and then a Papyrus from 3,200 years ago that talks about Egypt allowing a group of semetic people to Worship Yaweh.  So many of these people had to be CAPTIVES of that Military Victory over "ISRAEL"

NOW lets ask if MOSES Existed?

According to the scribe Manetho, the founder of monotheism was Osarisph, who later adopted name Moses, and led his followers out of Egypt in Akhenaten's reign. Akhenaten was the heretic Pharaoh who abolished polytheism and replaced it with monotheism, worshiping only the sun disc, Aten.

In 1987, a team of French archaeologists discovered the tomb of a man named Aper-el or Aperia (his name is spelled both ways in Egyptian inscriptions), commander of the charioteers and vizier to Ahmenotep II and to his son Akhenaten.

The vizier's name ending in -el could well be related to the Hebraic god Elohim; and the ending Aper-Ia could be indicative of Ya, short for Yahweh. This interpretation supports the argument that Hebrews were present in Egypt during the 18th dynasty starting 3,600 years ago (1543-1292 BCE).

So did the Exodus happen? Ask Hatshepsut

Ex. 12:37 says “600,000 men on foot, beside children” went out from Egypt. That extrapolates to around two million people making the exodus (extrapolated from Numbers 1:46) .

If around 2 million people left Egypt, when the entire population has been estimated at around 3 to 4.5 million, it would have been noticed, and would have resounded in Egyptian records.

Note that Herodotus claims that a million Persians invaded Greece in 480 BCE. The numbers were undoubtedly exaggerated, as in most ancient records. But nobody claims the invasion of Greece never happened.

That said, as the Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen points out, the Hebrew word for thousand, eleph, can mean different things depending upon context. It can even denote a group/clan or a leader/chief. Elsewhere in the bible, "eleph" could not possibly mean "a thousand”. For example: 1 Kings 20:30 mentions a wall falling in Aphek that killed 27,000 men. If we translate eleph as leader, the text more sensibly says that 27 officers were killed by the falling wall. Bv that logic, some scholars propose that the Exodus actually consisted of about 20,000 people.

The absence of evidence of a sojourn in the wilderness proves nothing. A Semitic group in flight wouldn't have left direct evidence: They would not have built cities, built monuments or done anything but leave footprints in the desert sand.

Yet more support for the Haggadah may lie in an interesting poem copied onto a papyrus dating to the 13th century BCE (although original is believed to be much older), called the "Admonitions of Impuwer or the Lord of All").

River of blood

It portrays a devastated Egypt haunted by plagues, droughts, violent uprisings – culminating in the escape of slaves with Egypt's wealth. In short, the Impuwer papyrus seems to be telling the story of Exodus from the Egyptian point of view, from a river of blood to the devastation of the livestock to darkness.

Click to expand...

The Stele refers to The Children of Israel.
Israel was Jacob's new name.
There was no Nation of Israel, yet at that time.

Read Genesis, instead of any of these links you are looking at.
		
Click to expand...


That is your interpretation.  A Nation can be a genetically homogeneous people like The Cherokee Nation.

You are debating then what you define as a Nation, and The Word Nation.
Not the fact that Israel was a Nation that inhabited The Promised Land for at least 4,000 years that we know of. 

Israel then was a Nation, named after Jacob the Grandson of Abraham who passed down his Inheritance of The Promised Land and The Abrahamic Convenant to Issac, Abraham's son, who then passed it on To Jacob, who was named Israel by Yahweh.  So The Grandson of Abraham is Israel, and The Children of Israel are a Nation today, and they were a Nation back then.

There is also historical evidence that Israel was in captivity in Egypt as long ago as 3,600 years ago which further reinforces my assertion that Israel has been a Nation for at least 4,000 years.

We can agree to disagree, but Israel has been a Nation according to evidence found in Egypt as long as 3,600 years ago.  

So, I am fine with saying Israel has been a Nation for 4,000 years and has occupied what we call Israel for 4,000 years.  They have survived numerous attempts at genocidal extermination, and slavery by The Babylonian Empire, Assyrian Empire, Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, and Nazi Germany and many many more.  They will survive the next Holocaust launched by Islam against them, as Yahweh has promised they would.

If they were "just a people" and "not a nation" then how did they survive thousands of years of assaults and attempts at extermination, and enslavement if they were not a Nation, when faced against so many Nations who were so powerful in their day, we called them EMPIRES?

The Promised Land, and The People of Israel have persisted in ISRAEL for 4,000 Years, despite THE GREATEST EMPIRE'S attempts to remove them, and The Land is theirs, and there is no debating that at all.  They will persist until the Return of Christ and after that as well.

Click to expand...

I am Jewish.  I know the history of my people.  I know what Genesis says.  You have not read it.  I have.

I go by what Jewish history says, and not what many links say, which change some of the history a bit, as I have pointed out to you.

Thank you.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...

The invasion on the Kingdom of Israel by an Egyptian Pharaoh is off by about 300 years.
		
Click to expand...

*


Sixties Fan said:


> *925 BC – Sack of Jerusalem (925 BC) – Pharaoh Sheshonk I of the Third Intermediate Period invades Canaan following the Battle of Bitter Lakes. Possibly the same as Shishak, the Pharaoh mentioned in the Bible in the book of Kings 1, who captured and pillaged Jerusalem (1 Kings 14: 25).*
> *
> Timeline of the history of the region of Palestine - Wikipedia*


----------



## Shusha

The Original Tree 

You are adding a lot of your own personal interpretations to ancient monuments and papyri not actually present in the writings of the monuments and papyri themselves.


----------



## Sixties Fan

While Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula traveled to Egypt, the bulk of Semites coming there in ancient times were not of that origin–regardless of wishful thinking by espousers of the Winckler-Caetani Theory–which, among other things, makes Babylonians, Canaanites, Assyrians, Hebrews, and others all Arabs as well…like those Cathy is dealing with, assert.

Given that Abraham (son of a Babylonian Chaldean Semite), surfaced in history when he did, coincidental with the Semitic Hyksos conquest of Egypt, Hagar was most likely a native _non-_Semitic or Semitic Hyksos Egyptian. She was not likely Arab–so neither was her son, Ishmael.

Furthermore, when the Jews made reference to Arabs–in the few places where they did–they were not shy to call them that.

So, for example, _Geshem the Arab_ appears in Nehemiah 2:19 and 6:1-6. He was recorded as one of the three leaders opposing the Jews rebuilding the Temple after their return from Babylonian exile upon being freed by ancient Iran’s Cyrus the Great (not exactly the Ayatollah’s ideal Persian leader, if you get my drift)…

In short, if Hagar was an Arab, the Jews would have had no reason not to say so. She wasn’t–so neither was Ishmael, the half brother of Abraham’s Hebrew son with Sarah, Isaac, whom Arabs sought/seek to supplant.

After the Arab imperial conquest of Egypt and much of the rest of the region some twenty-seven centuries since the time of Abraham, it was convenient for Arabs to then write themselves into the original Hebraic story in the Jews’ sacred writings. Adding insult to injury, they next claimed that both Jews and Christians corrupted the original version.

(full article online)

The myth of the non-Jewish Abraham


----------



## The Original Tree

*I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.

The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.

Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.

I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.

Are you sure you are a Jew?

Thanks for playing.

Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry

Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*

*Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*

*Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).

 In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago. 

The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.


You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."

You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*


Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.

Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.

Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
Click to expand...


*Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.

It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.  I was only trying to show that there is evidence that The Bible is True, when it says That Ishmael is The Half Brother of Isaac, who begot Jacob, whom God named Israel which makes the Arab - Jew conflict a matter of The Arabs trying to steal Jacob's - Israel's birth right which is The Promised Land and Abrahamic Covenant with Yahweh.

And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years, so in that context, Arabs also again, have no claim to The Promised Land as defined by The Abrahamic Covenant.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
Click to expand...

Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
Ishmael is what?

Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.

It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.

You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.

You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
Click to expand...


*I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.  

Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?

I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.

I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.

Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
Click to expand...

You have really not noticed?

This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.

What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.

Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.


----------



## The Original Tree

Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
Click to expand...


*The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????  

The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.

I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.

The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.  

If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.

Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
Click to expand...




The Original Tree said:


> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????


The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.
Click to expand...

NO record, for the Jews. 
Amazing how much archeology of Jewish history is found for before 1400 years ago, before the Muslim invasion, and NONE can be found for the endless Arab presence of the so called "Palestinians" who never existed.

The Palestinians do not exist in the Torah
The Palestinians do not exist in the NT 
The Palestinians do not exist in the Quran
The Palestinians do not exist in Iranian/ Persian history
Or in Hindu history
Or in Babylonian history
Or in Assyrian history
Or in Egyptian history
Or before the Arab leaders went to Moscow in 1964 and decided on calling the Arabs in the Mandate " Palestinians", but ONLY because that word had been used for the Mandate for Palestine.

Just imagine if the British had been honorable and decent and called the Mandate as it should have been called.

The Mandate for ISRAEL


Oh, how the Arabs would be tripping over themselves now saying that they are the "True Hebrew/Israelites/Judeans/Jews


Give us another reason to laugh tin man .


----------



## The Original Tree

P F Tinmore said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Ishmael can be both Egyptian and Arab since there were Arabs in Egypt.  Egypt is a place more than it is an ethnicity.  Jesus and his family spent around 20 years in Egypt,  So.....Is Messiah, Egyptian or Jewish?  He is The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.  He is Jewish, Hebrew, or Israeli.  However you would like to put it.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if Ishmael is Egyptian or Arab, because Ishmael is not part of The Abrahamic Covenant.  Does not have any claim to The Promised Land.
> 
> And it's been established that The Hebrews-Jews have occupied The Promised Land for the last 4,000 years.*
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.
Click to expand...


*That is absolutely false.  There is both Genetic Evidence through DNA, Historical Evidence via Granite Monuments commemorating battles with Israel, documents, from Egyptian Scrolls written on Papyrus, to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even a Copper plate found, and other stone monuments that show that The Hebrews & Israel has existed for 4,000 years occupying the area and beyond what we call modern day Israel.

There is No such thing as a Palestinian unless you want to talk about a Racial Slur The Roman Empire created to ridicule and insult Jews living in Israel under Roman Occupation.

Secret of Dead Sea Copper Scroll Unlocked, Revealing Location of Lost Temple Treasures

8 Jewish archaeological discoveries*


*Ceramic shard may bear oldest Hebrew inscription

A 6-by-6-inch pottery shard unearthed at the archaeological dig site of Hirbet Qeiyafa (the Elah Fortress) in Israel, shown here, contains five lines of faded characters that may bear the oldest Hebrew inscription ever found. The 3,000-year-old text dates to the time of the Hebrew Bible's King David and is thought to be written in proto-Canaanite, a precursor to the Hebrew alphabet. While other people used proto-Canaanite characters as well, the inscription contains a three-letter verb meaning "to do" that existed only in Hebrew, according to Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist in charge of the dig. "That leads us to believe that this is Hebrew, and that this is the oldest Hebrew inscription that has been found," he told the Associated Press. Other scholars, however, have urged caution until more is known about the inscription and its context.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

The Original Tree said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus and his family spent 20 years ....where?
> Ishmael is what?
> 
> Everything a sick mind like yours decides to change or interpret in order to undo Judaism does MATTER.  Always.
> 
> It is like saying that the First Nations are not the First Nations of the Americas and that there was a population there before them and they invaded and took over, no matter that there is no proof of it.  Or changing each and every history of those 500 Nations as if they have no rights and no say about it.
> 
> You have really NOT read the Torah, nor the NT, or you would not be posting such idiotic things as true, hoping that none of us ever read or knows anything about the Torah or the NT.
> 
> You are totally delusional, and very dangerous, like so many who want to wipe out Jewish history and turn it into their own playground where nobody and nothing matters because it is their "interpretation" of things past.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That is absolutely false.  There is both Genetic Evidence through DNA, Historical Evidence via Granite Monuments commemorating battles with Israel, documents, from Egyptian Scrolls written on Papyrus, to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even a Copper plate found, and other stone monuments that show that The Hebrews & Israel has existed for 4,000 years occupying the area and beyond what we call modern day Israel.
> 
> There is No such thing as a Palestinian unless you want to talk about a Racial Slur The Roman Empire created to ridicule and insult Jews living in Israel under Roman Occupation.
> 
> Secret of Dead Sea Copper Scroll Unlocked, Revealing Location of Lost Temple Treasures
> 
> 8 Jewish archaeological discoveries*
> 
> 
> *Ceramic shard may bear oldest Hebrew inscription
> 
> A 6-by-6-inch pottery shard unearthed at the archaeological dig site of Hirbet Qeiyafa (the Elah Fortress) in Israel, shown here, contains five lines of faded characters that may bear the oldest Hebrew inscription ever found. The 3,000-year-old text dates to the time of the Hebrew Bible's King David and is thought to be written in proto-Canaanite, a precursor to the Hebrew alphabet. While other people used proto-Canaanite characters as well, the inscription contains a three-letter verb meaning "to do" that existed only in Hebrew, according to Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist in charge of the dig. "That leads us to believe that this is Hebrew, and that this is the oldest Hebrew inscription that has been found," he told the Associated Press. Other scholars, however, have urged caution until more is known about the inscription and its context.*
Click to expand...

So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> 
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That is absolutely false.  There is both Genetic Evidence through DNA, Historical Evidence via Granite Monuments commemorating battles with Israel, documents, from Egyptian Scrolls written on Papyrus, to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even a Copper plate found, and other stone monuments that show that The Hebrews & Israel has existed for 4,000 years occupying the area and beyond what we call modern day Israel.
> 
> There is No such thing as a Palestinian unless you want to talk about a Racial Slur The Roman Empire created to ridicule and insult Jews living in Israel under Roman Occupation.
> 
> Secret of Dead Sea Copper Scroll Unlocked, Revealing Location of Lost Temple Treasures
> 
> 8 Jewish archaeological discoveries*
> 
> 
> *Ceramic shard may bear oldest Hebrew inscription
> 
> A 6-by-6-inch pottery shard unearthed at the archaeological dig site of Hirbet Qeiyafa (the Elah Fortress) in Israel, shown here, contains five lines of faded characters that may bear the oldest Hebrew inscription ever found. The 3,000-year-old text dates to the time of the Hebrew Bible's King David and is thought to be written in proto-Canaanite, a precursor to the Hebrew alphabet. While other people used proto-Canaanite characters as well, the inscription contains a three-letter verb meaning "to do" that existed only in Hebrew, according to Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist in charge of the dig. "That leads us to believe that this is Hebrew, and that this is the oldest Hebrew inscription that has been found," he told the Associated Press. Other scholars, however, have urged caution until more is known about the inscription and its context.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
Click to expand...


----------



## The Original Tree

P F Tinmore said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I have read The Pentateuch and New Testament, and I not only read them, I studied them, studied Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic in reference to certain phrases and words in both The Old Testament and New Testament.
> 
> Why do you refuse to discuss The Book of Zacharia?
> 
> I do not want to wipe out Jewish History.  I want to defend Israel's right to The Promise Land.  It can be proven they are genetically and historically tied to Israel for about the last 4,000 years.  It can be shown they Sojourned in Egypt, just like The Bible states they did.
> 
> I am affirming Jewish History, not denying it.
> 
> Why don't you want to answer my question about The Book of Zacharia?*
> 
> 
> 
> You have really not noticed?
> 
> This is NOT, the religion community and this is NOT a religion thread.
> 
> What a joke, you AFFIRM Jewish history by changing what is actually written.
> 
> Have a nice life rearranging history to your liking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> The Bible is both a religious book and a Historical Reference which has repeatedly been proven to be accurate and true, so excluding mention of The Promised Land in The Bible does a disservice to the discussion.
> 
> I have provided Biblical Sources, Historical Sources, and Genetic Studies that prove ISRAEL is for ISRAELIS, and only THE JEW, THE HEBREW is INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL.
> 
> The Religious context interjected in to the discussion is only in reference to The Abrahamic Covenant, and Abraham whom both Jew and Arab claim as their Patriarch, and the fact that Abraham passed on his Inheritance, and The Abrahamic Covenant to Isaac whom passed it on to Jacob-Israel, and that Ishmael was ENTIRELY EXCLUDED from The ABRAHAMIC Covenant, and has NO RIGHT to The Promised Land.  He instead was given a different promise, that his children would become a great and many people, which according to all I have studied, are THE Arabs.
> 
> If you like, you can limit that to just The Egyptians, but it does not change anything I have factually laid out here in this discussion.
> 
> Are you sure, you are Jewish?  You don't seem to like the fact I am able to show That Israel is for Jews, and Jews alone, and has been for 4,000 years.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion became religious in nature when the discussion was about WHO IS INDIGENOUS to ISRAEL or PALESTINE, Jew or Arab.....????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians had lived in that territory for thousands of years without dispute. Then some settlers came down from Europe, who had no record that any of them had any ancestors from that territory, and claimed it for themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That is absolutely false.  There is both Genetic Evidence through DNA, Historical Evidence via Granite Monuments commemorating battles with Israel, documents, from Egyptian Scrolls written on Papyrus, to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even a Copper plate found, and other stone monuments that show that The Hebrews & Israel has existed for 4,000 years occupying the area and beyond what we call modern day Israel.
> 
> There is No such thing as a Palestinian unless you want to talk about a Racial Slur The Roman Empire created to ridicule and insult Jews living in Israel under Roman Occupation.
> 
> Secret of Dead Sea Copper Scroll Unlocked, Revealing Location of Lost Temple Treasures
> 
> 8 Jewish archaeological discoveries*
> 
> 
> *Ceramic shard may bear oldest Hebrew inscription
> 
> A 6-by-6-inch pottery shard unearthed at the archaeological dig site of Hirbet Qeiyafa (the Elah Fortress) in Israel, shown here, contains five lines of faded characters that may bear the oldest Hebrew inscription ever found. The 3,000-year-old text dates to the time of the Hebrew Bible's King David and is thought to be written in proto-Canaanite, a precursor to the Hebrew alphabet. While other people used proto-Canaanite characters as well, the inscription contains a three-letter verb meaning "to do" that existed only in Hebrew, according to Yossi Garfinkel, a Hebrew University archaeologist in charge of the dig. "That leads us to believe that this is Hebrew, and that this is the oldest Hebrew inscription that has been found," he told the Associated Press. Other scholars, however, have urged caution until more is known about the inscription and its context.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
Click to expand...


*Yes.

Syria, Egypt and Jordan launched them over the Israeli border in catapults.






There is no such thing as a Palestinian.

That word is a racial slur The Roman Empire came up with to humiliate and insult Jews.  It is equivalent of using The "N" word.  So everytime you call the Arabs in that area a Palestinian, you are calling them The "N" word.

Hilarious that we can't say the "N" word, but we can call an Arab an "N" word when we call him a Palestinian.*


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

You keep clinging to this 1924 date _(year of the Treaty of Lausanne)_, as if it was a birth of the Palestinian.  You try to equate what the term "Palestine" meant then to the "Palestine" of today.  The word is the same, but the meaning evolved.

You cling to the Treaty of Lausanne as if it had a special impact on the Palestinians of today.  But you forget that the Treaty of Lausanne does not even mention "Palestine."  Nor does the Treaty confer any special relationship or authority to the inhabitance of the territory.



P F Tinmore said:


> So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestinians of 1924 were the name designation of the of the inhabitants under the Government of Palestine (GoP).  The GoP was the generalization for the territory to which the British Mandate for Palestine applied.  In 1924, the term "Palestine" _(not mentioned even once in the treaty)_ meant something entirely different than the meaning in which you are trying to fit upon it today.

*(IN SHORT)*

•  To answer your Question:  Did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?

⟴  No.  The designation was an apolitical name given to the people of the territory within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers and the Mandatory selected by the Allied Powers.

For the purposes of The Palestine Order in Council (1922) pending the introduction of an Order in Council _(ie the Citizenship Order of 1925)_ regulating Palestinian citizenship, the following persons were considered Palestinian citizens:






 ◈  All persons having a residence within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers at the time the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order (1922) went into effect.






 ◈  All other persons making application to, and subsequently approved by, the Office of the High Commissioner.​
Most Respectfully.
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> You keep clinging to this 1924 date _(year of the Treaty of Lausanne)_, as if it was a birth of the Palestinian.  You try to equate what the term "Palestine" meant then to the "Palestine" of today.  The word is the same, but the meaning evolved.
> 
> You cling to the Treaty of Lausanne as if it had a special impact on the Palestinians of today.  But you forget that the Treaty of Lausanne does not even mention "Palestine."  Nor does the Treaty confer any special relationship or authority to the inhabitance of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Palestinians of 1924 were the name designation of the of the inhabitants under the Government of Palestine (GoP).  The GoP was the generalization for the territory to which the British Mandate for Palestine applied.  In 1924, the term "Palestine" _(not mentioned even once in the treaty)_ meant something entirely different than the meaning in which you are trying to fit upon it today.
> 
> *(IN SHORT)*
> 
> •  To answer your Question:  Did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
> 
> ⟴  No.  The designation was an apolitical name given to the people of the territory within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers and the Mandatory selected by the Allied Powers.
> 
> For the purposes of The Palestine Order in Council (1922) pending the introduction of an Order in Council _(ie the Citizenship Order of 1925)_ regulating Palestinian citizenship, the following persons were considered Palestinian citizens:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ◈  All persons having a residence within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers at the time the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order (1922) went into effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ◈  All other persons making application to, and subsequently approved by, the Office of the High Commissioner.​
> Most Respectfully.
> R
Click to expand...

In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory. In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.

No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> You keep clinging to this 1924 date _(year of the Treaty of Lausanne)_, as if it was a birth of the Palestinian.  You try to equate what the term "Palestine" meant then to the "Palestine" of today.  The word is the same, but the meaning evolved.
> 
> You cling to the Treaty of Lausanne as if it had a special impact on the Palestinians of today.  But you forget that the Treaty of Lausanne does not even mention "Palestine."  Nor does the Treaty confer any special relationship or authority to the inhabitance of the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Palestinians of 1924 were the name designation of the of the inhabitants under the Government of Palestine (GoP).  The GoP was the generalization for the territory to which the British Mandate for Palestine applied.  In 1924, the term "Palestine" _(not mentioned even once in the treaty)_ meant something entirely different than the meaning in which you are trying to fit upon it today.
> 
> *(IN SHORT)*
> 
> •  To answer your Question:  Did the Palestinians just fall out of the sky in 1924?
> 
> ⟴  No.  The designation was an apolitical name given to the people of the territory within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers and the Mandatory selected by the Allied Powers.
> 
> For the purposes of The Palestine Order in Council (1922) pending the introduction of an Order in Council _(ie the Citizenship Order of 1925)_ regulating Palestinian citizenship, the following persons were considered Palestinian citizens:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ◈  All persons having a residence within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers at the time the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order (1922) went into effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ◈  All other persons making application to, and subsequently approved by, the Office of the High Commissioner.​
> Most Respectfully.
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory. In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.
> 
> No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.
Click to expand...


So then, you're back to again writing your own version of history.

Tell us again how the Treaty of Lausanne created your invented "country of Pal'istan"

Interesting how you describe dejure facts as becoming, you know, facts.


----------



## The Original Tree

*People making all of these crazy arguments keep leaving out the fact that when discussing Palestine that it was divided in two.  All of so called "Palestine" West of The Jordan to The Mediterranean is The Homeland of The Jews.  All of so called "Palestine" East of The River Jordan is Transjordan and is desiginated as the homeland of any Arabs living in Palestine who want to settle there.

There are two Palestines.  East Palestine, and West Palestine.

It would be easy to resolve this entire issue, if people would just go settle their designated areas, and leave each other alone.  

You may even want to call that idea, a two state solution, but these two states have been in existence for 100 years, and still you can not get The Arabs to accept the two state solution.  They reject every single agreement and have for the past 100 years.

They want all of it, despite the fact that they have millions of square miles of territory dwarfing the size of The United States for themselves all surrounding Israel, already, and Israel is no bigger than The State of New Jersey!





West Palestine (Israel)






East Palestine





Palestine (East & West)




Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
*


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.



Sure. Sort of.  But states don't just pop into being without a government and a few other things, like the ability to act on the international stage.  The fact that the borders of a particular territory were set does NOT cause a State to come into being.  

That was the whole POINT of the Mandates.  Those territories were not yet capable of self-government and statehood.  The Mandates were to ensure that emerging territories which weren't properly self-governed didn't dissolve into the crappy, terrorist-riddled, tyrant-controlled, who-gives-a-crap-about-the-citizens, pockets of ugliness (you know, like Gaza and the "West Bank").

*And you keep forgetting (cough cough) that those international borders enclosed the intended National Homeland for the Jewish people.* *And that the Jewish people are capable of self-government and statehood.  And they have it.*



> No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.


Sure.  Sort of.  But internal groups DO.  That is what self-determination IS.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,




Hollie said:


> So then, you're back to again writing your own version of history.  Interesting how you describe dejure facts as becoming, you know, facts.


*(COMMENT)*

Our friend Hollie is absolutely correct _(supra)_...  You are altering the historical facts.  



P F Tinmore said:


> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory. In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.
> 
> No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.


*(COMMENT)*

A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(__included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_. 

In regards to the demarcation between Israel and the Egyptian Military Governorship, which is today called the Gaza Strip, the Armistice said:



			
				Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice • Article V(2) said:
			
		

> 2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims, and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.



Even if the Armistice did say something to support a Hostile Arab Palestinian Claim 

•  The Hostile Arab Palestinians nor the Arab High Committee were parties to the Armistice.

•  The Armistice Agreement became historical in nature ONLY when, embedded by agreement, upon the peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved.  See:  Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, • 26 March 1979 •​
Similarly, the Armistice and Treaty between Israel and Jordan had nearly the same stipulations.  

•  "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved"

•  "The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto."​
As you are already aware, the Permanent International boundaries are specified in the associated Peace Treaty. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> So then, you're back to again writing your own version of history.  Interesting how you describe dejure facts as becoming, you know, facts.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Our friend Hollie is absolutely correct _(supra)_...  You are altering the historical facts.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory. In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.
> 
> No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_.
> 
> In regards to the demarcation between Israel and the Egyptian Military Governorship, which is today called the Gaza Strip, the Armistice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice • Article V(2) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims, and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if the Armistice did say something to support a Hostile Arab Palestinian Claim
> 
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians nor the Arab High Committee were parties to the Armistice.
> 
> •  The Armistice Agreement became historical in nature ONLY when, embedded by agreement, upon the peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved.  See:  Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, • 26 March 1979 •​
> Similarly, the Armistice and Treaty between Israel and Jordan had nearly the same stipulations.
> 
> •  "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved"
> 
> •  "The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto."​
> As you are already aware, the Permanent International boundaries are specified in the associated Peace Treaty.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> 
> So then, you're back to again writing your own version of history.  Interesting how you describe dejure facts as becoming, you know, facts.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Our friend Hollie is absolutely correct _(supra)_...  You are altering the historical facts.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory. In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts. The borders were set as Palestine's international borders. These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements. Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925.
> 
> No foreign powers have the authority to change these legal factors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_.
> 
> In regards to the demarcation between Israel and the Egyptian Military Governorship, which is today called the Gaza Strip, the Armistice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice • Article V(2) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims, and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if the Armistice did say something to support a Hostile Arab Palestinian Claim
> 
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians nor the Arab High Committee were parties to the Armistice.
> 
> •  The Armistice Agreement became historical in nature ONLY when, embedded by agreement, upon the peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved.  See:  Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, • 26 March 1979 •​
> Similarly, the Armistice and Treaty between Israel and Jordan had nearly the same stipulations.
> 
> •  "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved"
> 
> •  "The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto."​
> As you are already aware, the Permanent International boundaries are specified in the associated Peace Treaty.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.
Click to expand...

Your points have been addressed from here to Shanghai.  The problem is you do not want it to be true. You cannot deal with the fact that the Arabs are the invaders and the Land of Israel/Palestine is not THEIRS, and that the indigenous Jews managed to legally get some of their land back.

Oh, but it is the SOME which continues to bother you.  NONE would be your dream amount.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,



P F Tinmore said:


> OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.


(COMMENT)

You don't have a point here.  It is a jumble of inaccuracies.



P F Tinmore said:


> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory.


*(COMMENT)*

No, it was not "occupied" in 1922.



P F Tinmore said:


> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts.


*(COMMENT)*

I don't know what a "preliminary border" is in relation to international law or international recognition.  The demarcation was set by:  


			
				ARTICLE 1 • FRANCO-BRITISH  CONVENTION (1920) said:
			
		

> The boundaries between the territories under the French mandate of Syria and the Lebanon on the one hand and the British mandates of Mesopotamia and Palestine on the other are determined as follows: *LINK TO* →





P F Tinmore said:


> The borders were set as Palestine's international borders.


*(COMMENT)*

Although the Mandate precluded the parceling of the territory, it did not prohibit the subdivision.  The original boundary of the territory to which the Mandate applied did not represent a permanent international boundary to a State known as Palestine.



P F Tinmore said:


> These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements.


*(COMMENT)*

No



P F Tinmore said:


> Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925


*(COMMENT)*

No  The Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 may have been many things, but "domestic law" was not one of them.

And what relevance to the Citizenship, or any othe Order in Council, have to do with domestic approval by the Arab Palestinians.  The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in any manner in the governce over the territory.  So even if the issue of citizenship was brought to the table for discussion, the Arab Palestinians would not have been present to render a voice on the matter.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah

The Original Tree said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were more than Arabs and Jews living in the Mandate.  Therefore your "civil rights of the Arab population"  does not exist anywhere in the Balfour Declaration.
> 
> In 1920 TransJordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine, as the homeland for the Jewish people.  By 1922, the British decided to give TranJordan to the ARAB Hashemites who had just been kicked out of Arabia.
> And what did this Arabs do?  Interfere with the civil and religious rights of all Jews who lived in TransJordan for thousands of years, and wrote a law prohibiting Jews from ever living there again.
> 
> Know history !
> 
> 
> 
> *Transjordan The East Bank of The Jordan has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do not know where you got that .....
> 
> "Transjordan, The East Bank of The Jordan, has always been the home of the so called Egyptian-Syrian-Jordanian people living in The West Bank and Gaza who like to call themselves Palestinians"
> *
> *
> ......from.  You seem to be confusing some things and put them all together.
> 
> I will not go into it and try to unravel it.
> 
> Since there never was a people known as Palestinians before 1964 CE, I really do not know which source you got that saying from, as it has no validity to it at all.
> 
> And "always" for the Arabs began in the 7th Century CE  after the Kurdish and Arab Muslim invasion.
> 
> Therefore, there hasn't been an "always" presence of those Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, in Gaza, Areas A and B and even in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *That's not true either.  Palestine is what The Roman Empire renamed Israel during their occupation of Israel before the time of Christ over 2,000 years ago.  They called Israelis Palestinians at that time.  And Israel and the area it was located in has been called Palestine since The Roman Empire occupied it, and The Empire Dissolved. If any argument can ever be made about who The Palestinians are, Hebrews or Israelis is the correct answer.
> 
> History of the Jews in the Roman Empire - Wikipedia
> 
> Regarding the last 100 years, The Balfour Declaration, and The Mandatory Palestine Declaration handed down by The High Commission of Palestine still referred to Israel as Palestine in general.  But also with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, and High Commission of Palestine, and The Peele Commission they differentiated between The Hebrews already living in that area, and the Arabs living in that area.
> 
> But you are correct.  There actually is not actual genetic population called Palestinians.  It's more or less a general term like saying The Middle East, and refers to a locale, namely the general area of Israel and outlying lands and not an actual people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans name Judea and the area, Israel, Palestine after the 135 CE defeat of Bar Kochba, which was about 100 years AFTER the time of Jesus.
> Yes, the people who lived there were Jews, plus a few others, like Greeks, etc.  But no Arabs, as the Arabs are trying to say now.
> 
> We have no disagreements there.
> 
> There is no genetic population called Palestinians, but the Arab leaders and the KGB chose in 1964, to adopt that name (national identity) more in order to confuse the idea that the Arabs are the true indigenous people of the area, and not the descendants of the Hebrews and Israelites.
> 
> The Jewish People have not called themselves Hebrews since Israel first came to be 3000 years ago, with King David.
> 
> During Roman times they were known as Judeans, or Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They should call themselves Hebrews again.
> 
> You are correct to say there were NO ARABS in Israel until around 650 AD when The Roman Empire was dissolving.  The Hebrews inhabited Israel long before that.  The Babylonian Captivity was a full 1,200 years before that.
> 
> Around 4,000 years ago Egypt attacked The Hebrews living in The Promised Land and led many Jews in to Captivity.*
> 
> 
> *Were Hebrews ever slaves in ancient Egypt? Yes*
> 
> *Starting over 4,000 years ago, Semites began crossing the deserts from Palestine into Egypt. The tomb of the high priest Khnumhotep II of the 20th century BCE even shows a scene of Semitic traders bringing offerings to the dead (top picture).
> 
> Some of these Semites came to Egypt as traders and immigrants. Others were prisoners of war, and yet others were sold into slavery by their own people. A papyrus mentions a wealthy Egyptian lord whose 77 slaves included 48 of Semitic origin.
> 
> Physical evidence of slaves working there isn't likely to have survived. But a leather scroll dating to the time of Ramesses II (1303 BCE-1213 BCE) describes a close account of brick-making apparently by enslaved prisoners of war from an area that can roughly be deduced to be Israel which sounds very much like the biblical account. The scroll describes 40 taskmasters, each with a daily target of 2,000 bricks (see Exodus 5:6).
> 
> I call The Israelis Hebrews, because It was The Hebrews who survived The Babylonian and Assyrian Captivities, and they were called Hebrews initially when Rome began to occupy Israel.
> 
> Both The Term Jew....from Judea, and Palestine and Palestinian are Greco Roman Terms given to The Hebrews-Israelis.  It is more correct then to call a Jew a Hebrew or an Israeli, and to call their Religion Judaism which is the Roman Term they adopted for their religion when many of them lived in Rome and were 'Helenized'.  It is still ok to call a Hebrew, or Israeli a Jew, but  when you do so, you are referring then more to their religion than their ethnicity.
> 
> IT IS NEVER OK to call a Hebrew-Israeli a Palestinian, nor is it ever OK to call Israel Palestine, as that is actually a Racial Slur similar to calling a Black Man the "N" word.
> 
> This is why certain peoples love using the word Palestine, and Palestinian as it is an insult to Jewish Peoples, and it has Racist Undertones, and Racist Overtones.*
Click to expand...


In the Russian language are still called Hebrews.
It is the common,and official term.

A big tribe of Israelis still identify as Hebrews.


----------



## The Original Tree

Wait, I missed this entirely!

I got you to 3,800 Years which means that you and I are just 200 years apart.

I’ll take that!





Sixties Fan said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I'll take Genetics for $5,000 Alex.
> 
> The Bible says Ishmael, and Isaac were half brothers.  Therefore Israel and Arabs according to the Bible are the offspring of Abraham.
> 
> Genetics say That Jews and Arabs have the same Paternal Ancestor.
> 
> I assert that I am correct in stating The Arab-Jew Conflict is a Sibling Rivalry with Arabs wanting The Birthright, "The Promised Land" & "The Abrahamic Covenant" that was inherited by Jacob-Israel and given to them by Yahweh.
> 
> Are you sure you are a Jew?
> 
> Thanks for playing.
> 
> Jews and Arabs Share Recent Ancestry
> https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/10/jews-and-arabs-share-recent-ancestry
> 
> Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese*
> 
> *Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes*
> 
> *Jewish religion and culture can be traced back to Semitic tribes that lived in the Middle East approximately 4,000 years ago. The Babylonian exile in 586 B.C. marked the beginning of major dispersals of Jewish populations from the Middle East and the development of various Jewish communities outside of present-day Israel (1).
> 
> In summary the combined results suggest that a major portion of NRY biallelic diversity present in most of the contemporary Jewish communities surveyed here traces to a common Middle Eastern source population several thousand years ago.
> 
> The implication is that this source population included a large number of distinct paternal and maternal lineages, reflecting genetic variation established in the Middle East at that time. In turn, this source diversity has been maintained within Jewish communities, despite numerous migrations during the Diaspora and long-term residence as isolated subpopulations in numerous geographic locations outside of the Middle East.
> 
> 
> You never answered my question about why Israel - Jerusalem is a "Cup of Trembling for Many Nations."
> 
> You claimed to have read The Bible, yet had no desire to comment on that.  Have you read much on The Book of Zechariah?  Especially Chapters 11-14.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for changing Ishmael's origins from being Egyptian to being an Arab, which is something Islam has been doing for 1400 years.
> 
> Never mind......that the Arabs kept quiet for 2400 years before Islam was created because they never heard of Ishmael, and much less could care about him, Abraham, Jews, etc.
> 
> Keep your religious beliefs, we shall keep our history intact the way it has been for the past 3800 years, before Christians and Muslims decided to borrow, steal and then try to kill all Jews in order for their versions to be the valid ones.
Click to expand...


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan, The Original Tree

I see a lot of agreement, coming from a good place.
As Rabbi Abramowitz said  starting at 7:27 in the video::

"Please humble our heart before You, look at us here today, there're Jews, there's Christians, there's fundamental differences in our understandings. There' fundamental understandings, that I as a Jew, believe that they believe is wrong and vice versa. Humble our hearts to come together in love for each other and love for all of mankind, have mercy on us on the generation and the world, and build Your habitation in this world. Build the Beit HaMikdash soon in our days."


----------



## The Original Tree

I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.

I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.

I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.

“Be it unto me according to Thy Word”

But when The Earth Trembles as a woman about to give birth, I know my redemption draws near, and after that, The Judgment and then Peace, and The Messiah, The Prince of Peace, and a Fountain of Grace will flow out of Jerusalem to wash away The Sins of The People.

Those that Drink The Living Water Shall Never Thirst Again!

Those who will see these days with their own eyes and see it come to pass in Jerusalem shall truly be blessed.

Zacharia

In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.

On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

Yahweh will be King over all the earth. In that day Yahweh will be one, and his name one.




rylah said:


> Sixties Fan, The Original Tree
> 
> I see a lot of agreement, coming from a good place.
> As Rabbi Abramowitz said  starting at 7:27 in the video::
> 
> "Please humble our heart before You, look at us here today, there're Jews, there's Christians, there's fundamental differences in our understandings. There' fundamental understandings, that I as a Jew, believe that they believe is wrong and vice versa. Humble our hearts to come together in love for each other and love for all of mankind, have mercy on us on the generation and the world, and build Your habitation in this world. Build the Beit HaMikdash soon in our days."


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.
> 
> 
> 
> (COMMENT)
> 
> You don't have a point here.  It is a jumble of inaccuracies.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, it was not "occupied" in 1922.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know what a "preliminary border" is in relation to international law or international recognition.  The demarcation was set by:
> 
> 
> 
> ARTICLE 1 • FRANCO-BRITISH  CONVENTION (1920) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The boundaries between the territories under the French mandate of Syria and the Lebanon on the one hand and the British mandates of Mesopotamia and Palestine on the other are determined as follows: *LINK TO* →
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The borders were set as Palestine's international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Although the Mandate precluded the parceling of the territory, it did not prohibit the subdivision.  The original boundary of the territory to which the Mandate applied did not represent a permanent international boundary to a State known as Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No  The Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 may have been many things, but "domestic law" was not one of them.
> 
> And what relevance to the Citizenship, or any othe Order in Council, have to do with domestic approval by the Arab Palestinians.  The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in any manner in the governce over the territory.  So even if the issue of citizenship was brought to the table for discussion, the Arab Palestinians would not have been present to render a voice on the matter.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




P F Tinmore said:


> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory.


*(COMMENT)*

No, it was not "occupied" in 1922.

Britain occupied Palestine in 1917. The name of the occupation changed, but Palestine remained under British military occupation until 1948.


----------



## Shusha

The Original Tree said:


> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.



So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!  

Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.
> 
> 
> 
> (COMMENT)
> 
> You don't have a point here.  It is a jumble of inaccuracies.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, it was not "occupied" in 1922.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know what a "preliminary border" is in relation to international law or international recognition.  The demarcation was set by:
> 
> 
> 
> ARTICLE 1 • FRANCO-BRITISH  CONVENTION (1920) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The boundaries between the territories under the French mandate of Syria and the Lebanon on the one hand and the British mandates of Mesopotamia and Palestine on the other are determined as follows: *LINK TO* →
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The borders were set as Palestine's international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Although the Mandate precluded the parceling of the territory, it did not prohibit the subdivision.  The original boundary of the territory to which the Mandate applied did not represent a permanent international boundary to a State known as Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No  The Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 may have been many things, but "domestic law" was not one of them.
> 
> And what relevance to the Citizenship, or any othe Order in Council, have to do with domestic approval by the Arab Palestinians.  The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in any manner in the governce over the territory.  So even if the issue of citizenship was brought to the table for discussion, the Arab Palestinians would not have been present to render a voice on the matter.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




P F Tinmore said:


> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts.


*(COMMENT)*

I don't know what a "preliminary border" is in relation to international law or international recognition.  The demarcation was set by:


			
				ARTICLE 1 • FRANCO-BRITISH  CONVENTION (1920) said:
			
		

> The boundaries between the territories under the French mandate of Syria and the Lebanon on the one hand and the British mandates of Mesopotamia and Palestine on the other are determined as follows: *LINK TO* →



The last international border was defined with Transjordan. Since this happened before 1924 it is irrelevant in regard to Palestine's international borders.​


----------



## The Original Tree

Shusha said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
Click to expand...


More like those that hate Israel will throw themselves against The Mountains of God in suicidal futility.  And It’s God they will be at war with.

There will also be The 4 Horseman of The apocalypse White, Red, Black and Green unleashed upon The Earth.

What is the end times timeline?

The 7 trumpets, 7 seals, and 7 bowls.

What are the seven seals, seven trumpets, and seven bowls in the Book of Revelation?

Antichrist and The False Prophet who make a treaty with Israel and in the middle of that treaty defile the temple stirring God’s wrath against them.

Then the final end times battles where God, The Son of God descends from heaven to defend Israel, and defeat all The armies of Earth who come against Israel.

Then comes Judgment day and The millennial reign of Christ who will sit upon the Throne of David in Jerusalem.

When Messiah comes to end all War upon The Earth, All Israel will realize that He had already came 2,000 years ago as Messiah Bin Joseph to suffer for His people and has returned as Messiah Bin David to Rule.

They will mourn over the fact that they did not understand Jesus came to them as Messiah and had to suffer, die and be resurrected to serve as The Lamb of God.  The Passover Lamb.  But they shall also be happy because Messiah has come.  And He will call them His People and they will call Him their God.

For though it was the first Adam who lost his crown and Lordship over The Earth, it is The 2nd Adam, Emanuel, who will restore that crown.  Redeemer, Prince of Peace, Wonderful, Counselor, The Lion of The Tribe of Judah.

Messiah will offer Adam his crown again whom he defeated Lucifer for, but Adam will not take his crown in that day.  He and all the Saints will throw their crowns at His feet, and cry Holy, Holy, Holy is The Lamb of God, and Peace and knowledge of God will cover the whole Earth.

Zachariah 12:10

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications, And they have looked unto Me whom they pierced, And they have mourned over it, Like a mourning over the only one, And they have been in bitterness for it, Like a bitterness over the first-born.

So as best as I can tell it The return of Messiah will be preceded by trials and tribulations that will try the souls of men.  It will separate the wheat from the chaff.

Some will follow Antichrist and The False Prophet, and the righteous will wait upon The Lord.  But many harsh things will people have to endure as Messiah draws near.

This is what I meant by “Tribulations”. “Trials and Tribulations”


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
Click to expand...


Didn't they already?
Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.

The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
We Jews ask for "Rahamim", we cannot fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.


----------



## The Original Tree

rylah said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't they already?
> Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.
> 
> The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
> We Jews ask for "Be Rahamim", we canno't fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.
Click to expand...

How do you feel about Daniel's Visions and Prophecies and how they dovetail with St. John’s Revelations?

How do you feel about The 7 Year End Time Treaty The Antichrist deceives Israel in to signing which he breaks in the middle when he defiles The Temple as “The Abomination of Desolation”?

Some say Messiah comes then to start His ministry on Earth to preach the gospel again to Israel, and then at the end of The 7 years Antichrist goes to war with Him.

Some say Messiah comes after The 7 year tribulation is completed instead and then Je defeats All the armies strayed against Israel, and defeats Antichrist and The False Prophet then.

I don’t mean to derail the thread.  I-We can talk in a Religious thread or a prophecy thread if there is one.


----------



## rylah

By the way here is a curious coincidence 
 the word 'elections' in Hebrew is "Bhirot", 
the laws regarding the Temple, in Rambam's "Mishne Torah" are called "Hilchot Beith *HaBhirah*"


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, but I don't see where all that addresses my points.
> 
> 
> 
> (COMMENT)
> 
> You don't have a point here.  It is a jumble of inaccuracies.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1922 Palestine was occupied enemy (Ottoman) territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, it was not "occupied" in 1922.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In 1924 those preliminary borders and Palestinian citizenship became dejure facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know what a "preliminary border" is in relation to international law or international recognition.  The demarcation was set by:
> 
> 
> 
> ARTICLE 1 • FRANCO-BRITISH  CONVENTION (1920) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The boundaries between the territories under the French mandate of Syria and the Lebanon on the one hand and the British mandates of Mesopotamia and Palestine on the other are determined as follows: *LINK TO* →
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The borders were set as Palestine's international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Although the Mandate precluded the parceling of the territory, it did not prohibit the subdivision.  The original boundary of the territory to which the Mandate applied did not represent a permanent international boundary to a State known as Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> These international borders were referenced by the UN in the 1949 armistice agreements.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unchanged to today. The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by treaty and international law. Later to become Palestinian citizens by domestic law in 1925
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No  The Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 may have been many things, but "domestic law" was not one of them.
> 
> And what relevance to the Citizenship, or any othe Order in Council, have to do with domestic approval by the Arab Palestinians.  The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in any manner in the governce over the territory.  So even if the issue of citizenship was brought to the table for discussion, the Arab Palestinians would not have been present to render a voice on the matter.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

No  The Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925, blah, blah, blah...

The citizenship order was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun.

It has dubious legitimacy.


----------



## The Original Tree

That is interesting.

So maybe some kind of historical election takes place or an historical vote to build the temple occurs.

I have always felt that by a divine act, The Temple Mount is cleared allowing The Third Temple to be built.

But I had not considered the political activity that could be associated with such an event.



rylah said:


> By the way here is a curious coincidence
> the word 'elections' in Hebrew is "Bhirot", the laws regarding the Temple, in Rambam's "Mishne Torah" are called "Hilchot Beith *HaBhirah*"


----------



## rylah

The Original Tree said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't they already?
> Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.
> 
> The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
> We Jews ask for "Be Rahamim", we canno't fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you feel about Daniel's Visions and Prophecies and how they dovetail with St. John’s Revelations?
> 
> How do you feel about The 7 Year End Time Treaty The Antichrist deceives Israel in to signing which he breaks in the middle when he defiles The Temple as “The Abomination of Desolation”?
> 
> Some say Messiah comes then to start His ministry on Earth, and then at the end of The 7 years Antichrist goes to war with Him.
> 
> Some say Messiah comes after The 7 year tribulation is completed instead.
> 
> I don’t mean to derail the thread.  I-We can talk in a Religious thread or a prophecy thread if there is one.
Click to expand...

Those who tell do not know and those who know do not tell.
Don't count the years, work here and now in this world, this is the focus of Jewish thought.

How I feel about the NT?
Looking at truth with a broken mirror, paving the way to acceptance of knowledge of Hashem.

Jewish culture is more about knowledge and application than mere belief.
It's not much religious in the common sense.


----------



## The Original Tree

rylah said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't they already?
> Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.
> 
> The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
> We Jews ask for "Be Rahamim", we canno't fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you feel about Daniel's Visions and Prophecies and how they dovetail with St. John’s Revelations?
> 
> How do you feel about The 7 Year End Time Treaty The Antichrist deceives Israel in to signing which he breaks in the middle when he defiles The Temple as “The Abomination of Desolation”?
> 
> Some say Messiah comes then to start His ministry on Earth, and then at the end of The 7 years Antichrist goes to war with Him.
> 
> Some say Messiah comes after The 7 year tribulation is completed instead.
> 
> I don’t mean to derail the thread.  I-We can talk in a Religious thread or a prophecy thread if there is one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those who tell do not know and those who know do not tell.
> Don't count the years, work here and now in this world, this is the focus of Jewish thought.
> 
> How I feel about the NT?
> Looking at truth with a broken mirror, paving the way to acceptance of knowledge of Hashem.
> 
> Jewish culture is more about knowledge and application than mere belief.
> It's not much religious in the common sense.
Click to expand...

Just to say from a Christian perspective, True Christians love God’s chosen people.

We defend Israel’s right to have Jerusalem as its capital and Israel as a Sovereign Nation.

We respect The Pentateuch, and The Prophets as God’s Word.

We believe in Messiah.

We believe and support The building of The Third Temple.

We believe Messiah will come when The Temple is built.

We want Messiah to come as much as you do, at least I think we do.

And we want to see Messiah Bless Israel and all The Earth through Israel and want God’s Peace to reign over all The Earth when Messiah Comes to reign from Jerusalem.


----------



## rylah

The Original Tree said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want The Third Temple Built Because I know Messiah Bin David will come if it is built.
> 
> I’d help build it with my own hands if I were allowed to come to Israel to do that.
> 
> I know that building The Temple will bring forth Tribulations, & will usher in judgments upon The Earth and The Wicked, and prophecies in The Book of Daniel and elsewhere will be put in to motion. Let it be so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't they already?
> Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.
> 
> The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
> We Jews ask for "Be Rahamim", we canno't fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you feel about Daniel's Visions and Prophecies and how they dovetail with St. John’s Revelations?
> 
> How do you feel about The 7 Year End Time Treaty The Antichrist deceives Israel in to signing which he breaks in the middle when he defiles The Temple as “The Abomination of Desolation”?
> 
> Some say Messiah comes then to start His ministry on Earth, and then at the end of The 7 years Antichrist goes to war with Him.
> 
> Some say Messiah comes after The 7 year tribulation is completed instead.
> 
> I don’t mean to derail the thread.  I-We can talk in a Religious thread or a prophecy thread if there is one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those who tell do not know and those who know do not tell.
> Don't count the years, work here and now in this world, this is the focus of Jewish thought.
> 
> How I feel about the NT?
> Looking at truth with a broken mirror, paving the way to acceptance of knowledge of Hashem.
> 
> Jewish culture is more about knowledge and application than mere belief.
> It's not much religious in the common sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just to say from a Christian perspective, True Christians love God’s chosen people.
> 
> We defend Israel’s right to have Jerusalem as its capital.
> 
> We respect The Pentateuch, and The Prophets.
> 
> We believe in Messiah.
> 
> We believe and support The building of The Third Temple.
> 
> We want Messiah to come as much as you do, at least I think we do.
> 
> And we want to see Messiah Bless Israel and all The Earth through Israel and want God’s Peace to reign over all The Earth when Messiah Comes
Click to expand...


Thank You for listing all the things we can agree upon.


----------



## rylah

I'm sure there're even more to agree.. 
We just don't try to convert each other, focus on Hashem not on ourselves 
and everything is good.


----------



## The Original Tree

You are welcome.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge with me.



rylah said:


> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Original Tree said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, I'm curious as to how you imagine what this will actually look like?!
> 
> Because while you use a nice "clean" word like "Tribulations" (capital letter, TM), I'm reading it as "Muslims will unleash a genocidal war upon Israel and the Jewish people".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't they already?
> Rambam is the most authoritative Halacha source for the Mssianic period, no one argues this issue, and every great posek who comments on Rambam doesn't touch the subject of Meshiah.
> 
> The rule is , good prophecies must materialize, not the bad ones.
> We Jews ask for "Be Rahamim", we canno't fully know because it's dynamic but we'll understand once all Messianic prophecies fulfill. What triggers it is Tshuvah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you feel about Daniel's Visions and Prophecies and how they dovetail with St. John’s Revelations?
> 
> How do you feel about The 7 Year End Time Treaty The Antichrist deceives Israel in to signing which he breaks in the middle when he defiles The Temple as “The Abomination of Desolation”?
> 
> Some say Messiah comes then to start His ministry on Earth, and then at the end of The 7 years Antichrist goes to war with Him.
> 
> Some say Messiah comes after The 7 year tribulation is completed instead.
> 
> I don’t mean to derail the thread.  I-We can talk in a Religious thread or a prophecy thread if there is one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those who tell do not know and those who know do not tell.
> Don't count the years, work here and now in this world, this is the focus of Jewish thought.
> 
> How I feel about the NT?
> Looking at truth with a broken mirror, paving the way to acceptance of knowledge of Hashem.
> 
> Jewish culture is more about knowledge and application than mere belief.
> It's not much religious in the common sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just to say from a Christian perspective, True Christians love God’s chosen people.
> 
> We defend Israel’s right to have Jerusalem as its capital.
> 
> We respect The Pentateuch, and The Prophets.
> 
> We believe in Messiah.
> 
> We believe and support The building of The Third Temple.
> 
> We want Messiah to come as much as you do, at least I think we do.
> 
> And we want to see Messiah Bless Israel and all The Earth through Israel and want God’s Peace to reign over all The Earth when Messiah Comes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank You for listing all the things we can agree upon.
> I'm sure there're even more. We just don't try to convert each other, focus on Hashem not on ourselves and everything is good.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Original Tree

rylah said:


> I'm sure there're even more. We just don't try to convert each other, focus on Hashem not on ourselves and everything is good.


I won’t try to convert you.  I only want to talk about Messiah and hear how Hebrews see Messiah.

If ever there is a conversion to happen there is enough in The Old Books for that if one sought it out.

But even Jesus said if you believed in Him you would be saved.  So whether you believe Messiah has come once and is coming again or whether you still await Messiah to come....don’t we both believe in Messiah still?

Maybe we don’t think about Him the same ways.  Maybe for some...like a Christian May think, Messiah came to fulfill some of the prophecies. Or like a Jew thinks, Messiah will do all of that in the future.

We still base our belief in Messiah and Yahweh from The Old Testament and The Prophets.

If I could simplify it, I’d say Christians believe that Messiah came once as Messiah Bin Joseph and is coming as Messiah Bin David again.

Jews, as I understand it, believe that Messiah is coming as Messiah Bin David.

So either way Messiah comes and we believe Messiah comes.

And I think Yahweh honors that belief.


----------



## rylah

The discussion would certainly fit the religion forum,
but then it would loose all relevance to real heart beating life.
I prefer the Jungian approach of framing cultures in archtypes of their mythology, ideals and dreams. This is a more relevant approach for modern lexicon when discussing current politics. And indeed makes a lot of sense when trying to understand international relationships and attitudes towards a region so symbolically significant and attached to religion.

This same approach fits with the indigenous discussion as well,
as was built exactly on research in this field.


----------



## rylah

The Original Tree said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure there're even more. We just don't try to convert each other, focus on Hashem not on ourselves and everything is good.
> 
> 
> 
> I won’t try to convert you.  I only want to talk about Messiah and hear how Hebrews see Messiah.
> 
> If ever there is a conversion to happen there is enough in The Old Books for that if one sought it out.
> 
> But even Jesus said if you believed in Him you would be saved.  So whether you believe Messiah has come once and is coming again or whether you still await Messiah to come....don’t we both believe in Messiah still?
> 
> Maybe we don’t think about Him the same ways.  Maybe for some...like a Christian May think, Messiah came to fulfill some of the prophecies. Or like a Jew thinks, Messiah will do all of that in the future.
> 
> We still base our belief in Messiah and Yahweh from The Old Testament and The Prophets.
> 
> If I could simplify it, I’d say Christians believe that Messiah came once as Messiah Bin Joseph and is coming as Messiah Bin David again.
> 
> Jews, as I understand it, believe that Messiah is coming as Messiah Bin David.
> 
> So either way Messiah comes and we believe Messiah comes.
> 
> And I think Yahweh honors that belief.
Click to expand...


Let me think of an appropriate answer, while we see how the thread evolves with the other participants after we've reached a real peaceful agreement.

May You be blessed as You bless the nation of Israel.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

That would be wrong.  While there were units of the British Expeditionary Forces in play, the surrender of the remaining Ottoman/Turkish Forces did not occur until the *Armistice of Mudros* (30 October 1918).



P F Tinmore said:


> Britain occupied Palestine in 1917. The name of the occupation changed, but Palestine remained under British military occupation until 1948.



Obviously, you did not read the *Posting #2548* where I explained and brought forth documentation of information contrary to your position.  You even asked how did that address your posting.



RoccoR said:


> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_.



The last sentence in Section II of the First Annual Report _(supra)_ reads:  "Such was the economic condition of the country, and such was the political atmosphere, when on July 1st, 1920, by order of His Majesty's Government a Civil Administration was established in Palestine."  While there were military forces in the Territory, they were there to support Civil Administration, not to establish a Military Governorship.

I have often noticed that pro-Palestinians, not unlike yourself, make this claim that they were under Hague Regulation Occupation for the entirety of the period under Mandate.  But as you can see → this is misinformation and fact manipulation → easily challenged, as demonstrated in Posting #2548.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## WelfareQueen

Coyote said:


> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*




Both the Jews and Philistines (i.e. Palestinians) have lived in Israel for thousands years according to the Bible.  

Also, according to the Bible, the Jewish People were deeded the Holy Land as "God's Chosen People."  The Torah predates Muhammad and Islam by several thousand years.  If Muslims want their religion and their beliefs respected then they must respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.  You cannot have it both ways.  


Israel is Jewish land according to the Torah.  The question for Muslims:  Will you respect Jewish faith and beliefs?


----------



## Sixties Fan

WelfareQueen said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both the Jews and Philistines (i.e. Palestinians) have lived in Israel for thousands years according to the Bible.
> 
> Also, according to the Bible, the Jewish People were deeded the Holy Land as "God's Chosen People."  The Torah predates Muhammad and Islam by several thousand years.  If Muslims want their religion and their beliefs respected then they must respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.  You cannot have it both ways.
> 
> 
> Israel is Jewish land according to the Torah.  The question for Muslims:  Will you respect Jewish faith and beliefs?
Click to expand...

Please, the Philistines were invaders from Greece who created an Empire in the area of Gaza.

The Palestinians are Arabs, from Arabia.

Pro or Con, let us please get the identity of the players correct.

Because the Arabs would love for everyone to believe that they have been in Ancient Canaan for "thousands of years" when it wasn't even their ancestors but the Kurdish Muslims who were the first to invade the Land of Israel/region of Palestine in the 7th Century.  

Islam does not allow for Muslims to "respect" the Jews.  Especially as free people.  The Jews must never be sovereign over any Muslims.

Which is why so many Muslims will lie, and lie, and destroy and destroy any and all Jewish history and archeology they can find, and call themselves the natives of the land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> That would be wrong.  While there were units of the British Expeditionary Forces in play, the surrender of the remaining Ottoman/Turkish Forces did not occur until the *Armistice of Mudros* (30 October 1918).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Britain occupied Palestine in 1917. The name of the occupation changed, but Palestine remained under British military occupation until 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously, you did not read the *Posting #2548* where I explained and brought forth documentation of information contrary to your position.  You even asked how did that address your posting.
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The last sentence in Section II of the First Annual Report _(supra)_ reads:  "Such was the economic condition of the country, and such was the political atmosphere, when on July 1st, 1920, by order of His Majesty's Government a Civil Administration was established in Palestine."  While there were military forces in the Territory, they were there to support Civil Administration, not to establish a Military Governorship.
> 
> I have often noticed that pro-Palestinians, not unlike yourself, make this claim that they were under Hague Regulation Occupation for the entirety of the period under Mandate.  But as you can see → this is misinformation and fact manipulation → easily challenged, as demonstrated in Posting #2548.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> I have often noticed that pro-Palestinians, not unlike yourself, make this claim that they were under Hague Regulation Occupation for the entirety of the period under Mandate.


Unlike when Britain established its Mandate in Transjordan, when it withdrew its troops leaving behind a handful of advisors, Britain maintained its military forces in its Mandate for Palestine. Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?

Any time the Palestinians moved to self determination, Britain smashed the movement with its military. Every unpopular law or policy was imposed at the point of a gun.

Britain did not withdraw its military until 1948.

Military occupation?


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> That would be wrong.  While there were units of the British Expeditionary Forces in play, the surrender of the remaining Ottoman/Turkish Forces did not occur until the *Armistice of Mudros* (30 October 1918).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Britain occupied Palestine in 1917. The name of the occupation changed, but Palestine remained under British military occupation until 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously, you did not read the *Posting #2548* where I explained and brought forth documentation of information contrary to your position.  You even asked how did that address your posting.
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> A few months after the San Remo Convention _(April 1920) _the Allied Powers transitioned the holding under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration _(OETA) (1918 → 1920)_  over much or the Levant _(included all of the Eastern Mediterranean)_ → and the subdivisions which we are concerned with here _(Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip)_.  And the OETA relinquished the British portion of the OETA in June 1920 to the "Interim Civil Administration."  By definition, on the handover of the OETA to the Civil Administration, the Occupation ended no longer being under the authority of the hostile army _(Article 42, Hague Regulation of 1907)_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The last sentence in Section II of the First Annual Report _(supra)_ reads:  "Such was the economic condition of the country, and such was the political atmosphere, when on July 1st, 1920, by order of His Majesty's Government a Civil Administration was established in Palestine."  While there were military forces in the Territory, they were there to support Civil Administration, not to establish a Military Governorship.
> 
> I have often noticed that pro-Palestinians, not unlike yourself, make this claim that they were under Hague Regulation Occupation for the entirety of the period under Mandate.  But as you can see → this is misinformation and fact manipulation → easily challenged, as demonstrated in Posting #2548.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have often noticed that pro-Palestinians, not unlike yourself, make this claim that they were under Hague Regulation Occupation for the entirety of the period under Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Unlike when Britain established its Mandate in Transjordan, when it withdrew its troops leaving behind a handful of advisors, Britain maintained its military forces in its Mandate for Palestine. Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
> 
> Any time the Palestinians moved to self determination, Britain smashed the movement with its military. Every unpopular law or policy was imposed at the point of a gun.
> 
> Britain did not withdraw its military until 1948.
> 
> Military occupation?
Click to expand...


What does any of that circular back and forth
has to do with the theme of the thread?


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan said:


> WelfareQueen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both the Jews and Philistines (i.e. Palestinians) have lived in Israel for thousands years according to the Bible.
> 
> Also, according to the Bible, the Jewish People were deeded the Holy Land as "God's Chosen People."  The Torah predates Muhammad and Islam by several thousand years.  If Muslims want their religion and their beliefs respected then they must respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.  You cannot have it both ways.
> 
> 
> Israel is Jewish land according to the Torah.  The question for Muslims:  Will you respect Jewish faith and beliefs?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please, the Philistines were invaders from Greece who created an Empire in the area of Gaza.
> 
> The Palestinians are Arabs, from Arabia.
> 
> Pro or Con, let us please get the identity of the players correct.
> 
> Because the Arabs would love for everyone to believe that they have been in Ancient Canaan for "thousands of years" when it wasn't even their ancestors but the Kurdish Muslims who were the first to invade the Land of Israel/region of Palestine in the 7th Century.
> 
> Islam does not allow for Muslims to "respect" the Jews.  Especially as free people.  The Jews must never be sovereign over any Muslims.
> 
> Which is why so many Muslims will lie, and lie, and destroy and destroy any and all Jewish history and archeology they can find, and call themselves the natives of the land.
Click to expand...


You know what confuses people?
Arabs repeatedly use the term to mean 'only Arabs', and it works.
While we say "Palestinians are Arabians", playing into their hand,
instead of using the term as defined in the indigenous language.

In the indigenous language, the root of the word 'Palestinians' is invaders.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't think you understand the difference between a "Military Presence" and a "Military Occupation."



P F Tinmore said:


> Britain did not withdraw its military until 1948.
> Military occupation?


*(COMMENT)*

At the conclusion of WWII and the surrender by the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (May 1945), the US maintained a Military Occupation Force in Central Germany and Bavaria until General Treaty (May 1952).  The General Treaty formally ended Germany's status as an occupied territory and recognized its rights of a sovereign state _(Federal Republic of Germany)_.  The US Military Presence (V Corps and VII Corps, with USAF Support) remained, gradually diminishing over time.  Today there is still more than 35,000 US military Personnel assigned in Germany, even after the reunification in 1990.  This is not a "military occupation" but rather an overseas military presence that responds to the ever-evolving international security environment with a view on how the American foreign policy shapes its future role in the world.

The mere physical presence of a military force operating in support of American diplomatic efforts and 
civil requirements → helping to ensure the protection of all interested parties under customary and conventional international law → is not the same thing as an "occupation."

The deployment of British Forces in support of the Civil Administration of the international Mandate was done so to further Article 22 objectives → even in the face of Arab Palestinian opposition that turned to violence.



P F Tinmore said:


> Unlike when Britain established its Mandate in Transjordan when it withdrew its troops leaving behind a handful of advisors, Britain maintained its military forces in its Mandate for Palestine. Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
> 
> Any time the Palestinians moved to self-determination, Britain smashed the movement with its military. Every unpopular law or policy was imposed at the point of a gun.


*(COMMENT)*

The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration.  This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.  And further, the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River demonstrated, over and over again, the unwillingness to cooperate in the accomplishment of Article 22 (LoN Covenant), instead of → demonstrating a propensity for violence and criminal activity; not unlike the → Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River of today.

Attempts to enjoin the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River and create Self-Governing Institutions, in the early years of the Mandate proved unsuccessful.  With the development of organizations like the Palestinian Black Hand, the overall effect was → From 1922 until the end of the Mandate, the British High Commissioner governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials and supplemented by the gradually growing influence of the Jewish Agency.  The Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River absolutely refused to participate in the development of self-governing institutions and instead Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River opted for ever-increasing violence.   The purpose of such lawlessness and criminal acts was an attempt to intimidate the Civil Administration and compel the British Government to abandon the objectives of Article 22.  The Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River exhibited no diplomatic skills but instead chose the path of ever-increasing escalation of criminal behaviors.

*(EPILOG)*

THUS THE NEED FOR MILITARY SUPPORT.  It was true then and it is true even today.  The British did NOT smash the Arab Movement towards self-determination.  The  Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River absolutely refused to participate in the development of self-governing institutions and instead Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River opted for ever-increasing violence.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration. This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.


Under the boot of Britain's military. You are ducking the question as usual.

Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't know that it can be made any planer than that.  The use of the military of any nation is to accomplish a political and diplomatic objective.  The use of the military is a tool in the box of tradecraft.

_Article 5 Mandate for Palestine_

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.​
_Article 12 Mandate for Palestine_

The Mandatory shall be entrusted with the control of the foreign relations of Palestine and the right to issue exequaturs to consuls appointed by foreign Powers. He shall also be entitled to afford diplomatic and consular protection to citizens of Palestine when outside its territorial limit.

_Article 17 Mandate for Palestine_

 The Administration of Palestine may organise on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.

 Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.

 The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads; railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration. This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.
> 
> 
> 
> Under the boot of Britain's military. You are ducking the question as usual.
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I cannot begin to teach you about the role of the military in the diplomacy of a century ago.  Different countries administer their holding and external obligations in many different ways. 

The application of the military in the maintenance of peace and order in jurisdictions just recently released from the status of "Enemy Occupied Territory," except as described in Posting #2579 is based on the conventional wisdom and political perception of the day.   While Jordan was Allied Friendly at the time, the general population Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were not.  The Mandate Period was not a typical post-War phase four territorial condition.

PS:  I was trying to keep my post in the spirit of the OP.  I was not ducking your question.  But if the question you ask were as simple as you portray them to be, the solution would have been found already.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I don't know that it can be made any planer than that.  The use of the military of any nation is to accomplish a political and diplomatic objective.  The use of the military is a tool in the box of tradecraft.
> 
> _Article 5 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.​
> _Article 12 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entrusted with the control of the foreign relations of Palestine and the right to issue exequaturs to consuls appointed by foreign Powers. He shall also be entitled to afford diplomatic and consular protection to citizens of Palestine when outside its territorial limit.
> 
> _Article 17 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Administration of Palestine may organise on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.
> 
> Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads; railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.​
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration. This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.
> 
> 
> 
> Under the boot of Britain's military. You are ducking the question as usual.
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I cannot begin to teach you about the role of the military in the diplomacy of a century ago.  Different countries administer their holding and external obligations in many different ways.
> 
> The application of the military in the maintenance of peace and order in jurisdictions just recently released from the status of "Enemy Occupied Territory," except as described in Posting #2579 is based on the conventional wisdom and political perception of the day.   While Jordan was Allied Friendly at the time, the general population Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were not.  The Mandate Period was not a typical post-War phase four territorial condition.
> 
> PS:  I was trying to keep my post in the spirit of the OP.  I was not ducking your question.  But if the question you ask were as simple as you portray them to be, the solution would have been found already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

The question was:

Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?​
How much military force is required to establish a post office, monetary system, etc.?


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *RoccoR*
> I don't think you understand the difference between a "Military Presence" and a "Military Occupation."



Of course we understand the "difference"... "military presence" is a delicate way to refer to a military occupation.

From 1917 to the end of the Mandate Britain kept in Palestine the necessary number of troops to prevent the native population from overthrowing the foreign government (that was openly creating a separate jewish society in Palestine) and taking control of the their homeland.

Obviously the number of troops necessary to protect the foreign, illegitimate government during periods of peace were smaller than during the arab protests, riots, revolts and episodes of civil disobedience.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Battle of Nur Shams on 21 June *marked an escalation with the largest engagement of British troops against Arab militants* so far in this Revolt.  By the end of September 20,000 British troops in Palestine were deployed to "round up Arab bands".

Despite the intervention of *up to 50,000 British troops and 15,000 Haganah men*, the uprising continued for over three years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936–1939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

To finally crush the 1936 Arab Revolt, Britain was forced to deploy *more troops in Palestine than in the entire Indian subcontinent*.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I don't know that it can be made any planer than that.  The use of the military of any nation is to accomplish a political and diplomatic objective.  The use of the military is a tool in the box of tradecraft.
> 
> _Article 5 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.​
> _Article 12 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entrusted with the control of the foreign relations of Palestine and the right to issue exequaturs to consuls appointed by foreign Powers. He shall also be entitled to afford diplomatic and consular protection to citizens of Palestine when outside its territorial limit.
> 
> _Article 17 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Administration of Palestine may organise on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.
> 
> Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads; railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.​
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration. This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.
> 
> 
> 
> Under the boot of Britain's military. You are ducking the question as usual.
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I cannot begin to teach you about the role of the military in the diplomacy of a century ago.  Different countries administer their holding and external obligations in many different ways.
> 
> The application of the military in the maintenance of peace and order in jurisdictions just recently released from the status of "Enemy Occupied Territory," except as described in Posting #2579 is based on the conventional wisdom and political perception of the day.   While Jordan was Allied Friendly at the time, the general population Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were not.  The Mandate Period was not a typical post-War phase four territorial condition.
> 
> PS:  I was trying to keep my post in the spirit of the OP.  I was not ducking your question.  But if the question you ask were as simple as you portray them to be, the solution would have been found already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question was:
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?​
> How much military force is required to establish a post office, monetary system, etc.?
Click to expand...

Why keep changing the discussion on this thread when there is a whole NEW  ONE where you can discuss that issue, which......

Has been discussed to death, it is just that you cannot accept historical facts?


----------



## P F Tinmore

9+


Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I don't know that it can be made any planer than that.  The use of the military of any nation is to accomplish a political and diplomatic objective.  The use of the military is a tool in the box of tradecraft.
> 
> _Article 5 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.​
> _Article 12 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entrusted with the control of the foreign relations of Palestine and the right to issue exequaturs to consuls appointed by foreign Powers. He shall also be entitled to afford diplomatic and consular protection to citizens of Palestine when outside its territorial limit.
> 
> _Article 17 Mandate for Palestine_
> 
> The Administration of Palestine may organise on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.
> 
> Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.
> 
> The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads; railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces and the carriage of fuel and supplies.​
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Hashemite Royal Family had demonstrated the ability to productively form a government and establish a civil administration. This was something that the Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were unable to accomplish.
> 
> 
> 
> Under the boot of Britain's military. You are ducking the question as usual.
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I cannot begin to teach you about the role of the military in the diplomacy of a century ago.  Different countries administer their holding and external obligations in many different ways.
> 
> The application of the military in the maintenance of peace and order in jurisdictions just recently released from the status of "Enemy Occupied Territory," except as described in Posting #2579 is based on the conventional wisdom and political perception of the day.   While Jordan was Allied Friendly at the time, the general population Arab Palestinians west of the Jordan River were not.  The Mandate Period was not a typical post-War phase four territorial condition.
> 
> PS:  I was trying to keep my post in the spirit of the OP.  I was not ducking your question.  But if the question you ask were as simple as you portray them to be, the solution would have been found already.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question was:
> 
> Why would Britain need military forces to render administrative assistance and advice as prescribed in the LoN covenant?​
> How much military force is required to establish a post office, monetary system, etc.?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why keep changing the discussion on this thread when there is a whole NEW  ONE where you can discuss that issue, which......
> 
> Has been discussed to death, it is just that you cannot accept historical facts?
Click to expand...

Good point. Post transferred.

The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> WelfareQueen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both the Jews and Philistines (i.e. Palestinians) have lived in Israel for thousands years according to the Bible.
> 
> Also, according to the Bible, the Jewish People were deeded the Holy Land as "God's Chosen People."  The Torah predates Muhammad and Islam by several thousand years.  If Muslims want their religion and their beliefs respected then they must respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.  You cannot have it both ways.
> 
> 
> Israel is Jewish land according to the Torah.  The question for Muslims:  Will you respect Jewish faith and beliefs?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please, the Philistines were invaders from Greece who created an Empire in the area of Gaza.
> 
> The Palestinians are Arabs, from Arabia.
> 
> Pro or Con, let us please get the identity of the players correct.
> 
> Because the Arabs would love for everyone to believe that they have been in Ancient Canaan for "thousands of years" when it wasn't even their ancestors but the Kurdish Muslims who were the first to invade the Land of Israel/region of Palestine in the 7th Century.
> 
> Islam does not allow for Muslims to "respect" the Jews.  Especially as free people.  The Jews must never be sovereign over any Muslims.
> 
> Which is why so many Muslims will lie, and lie, and destroy and destroy any and all Jewish history and archeology they can find, and call themselves the natives of the land.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.



It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.

Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Palestinian leaders claim that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanite people who lived in the Land of Canaan before the Israelite tribes settled in it.


What is the source of the name “Palestine?” It is not Arab; it is derived from the name “Palestina,” by which the Roman Emperor Hadrian chose to call the land after the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Revolt in 135 CE. His aim was to erase “Judea.”


According to Palestinian historian Muhammad Y. Muslih, during the entire 400 year period of Ottoman rule (1517-1918), before the British set up the 30-year-long Palestine Mandate, “There was no political unit known as Palestine.” In Arabic, the area was known as al-Ard al-Muqadassa (the holy land), or Surya al-Janubiyya (southern Syria), but not Palestine.


Not a single Palestinian tribe identifies its roots in Canaan; instead, they all see themselves as proud Arabs descended from the most notable Arab tribes of the Hejaz, today’s Iraq, or Yemen. Even the Kanaan family of Nablus locates its origins in Syria. Some Palestinian clans are Kurdish or Egyptian in origin, and in Mount Hebron, there are traditions of Jewish origins.


This study does not deny the right of the Palestinian clans as a whole to define themselves as a Palestinian people. It would be better, however, if the Palestinian leadership were to choose a positive and constructive narrative and not a baseless one that is intended to negate that of the Jews of Israel.

(full article online)

Who Are the Palestinians?


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel


----------



## Sixties Fan

MYTH

The Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites.

FACT

Palestinian claims to be related to the Canaanites are a recent phenom- enon and contrary to historical evidence. The Canaanites disappeared three millennia ago, and no one knows if any of their descendants survived or, if they did, who they would be.

Over the last two thousand years, there have been massive inva- sions (e.g., the Crusades), migrations, the plague, and other manmade or natural disasters that killed off most of the local people. The entire local population has been replaced many times over. During the Brit- ish Mandate alone, more than one hundred thousand Arabs emigrated from neighboring countries and are today considered Palestinians.

Sherif Hussein, the guardian of the Islamic Holy Places in Arabia, said the Palestinians’ ancestors had only been in the area for one thou- sand years.11 Even the Palestinians themselves have acknowledged their association with the region came long after the Jews. In testi- mony before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, for example, they claimed a connection to Palestine of more than one thousand years, dating back no further than the conquest of Muhammad’s fol- lowers in the seventh century.12

By contrast, no serious historian questions the more than three- thousand-year-old Jewish connection to the land of Israel, or the mod- ern Jewish people’s relation to the ancient Hebrews.


https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/mf2017.pdf#page=9


----------



## Shusha

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
Click to expand...



And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
Click to expand...

Islam is a replacement ideology of Judaism based on Christianity's replacement ideology of Judaism.

Since the Mandate, they are both (Islam and Christianity)  seeking to literally REPLACE the Jewish Indigenous population with an Arab one and forever call it their own.  Especially with an Arab Muslim  identity.  Where the Christian Arabs would end up, if successful?
We have already seen what happened in Bethlehem and other places.


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Islam is a replacement ideology of Judaism based on Christianity's replacement ideology of Judaism.
> 
> Since the Mandate, they are both (Islam and Christianity)  seeking to literally REPLACE the Jewish Indigenous population with an Arab one and forever call it their own.  Especially with an Arab Muslim  identity.
Click to expand...



Thats why we need to keep reminding everyone of the insidious and harmful effects of these lies.


----------



## The Original Tree

The Roman Empire
Coined the Word Palestine to do that very thing and it is used the same way today.



Shusha said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Original Tree

No true Christian I know wants to see anything But Hebrews in Israel existing as a Sovereign and independent Nation. 





Sixties Fan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Islam is a replacement ideology of Judaism based on Christianity's replacement ideology of Judaism.
> 
> Since the Mandate, they are both (Islam and Christianity)  seeking to literally REPLACE the Jewish Indigenous population with an Arab one and forever call it their own.  Especially with an Arab Muslim  identity.  Where the Christian Arabs would end up, if successful?
> We have already seen what happened in Bethlehem and other places.
Click to expand...


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
Click to expand...

Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
Click to expand...

And that is different from the Jewish people claiming that tbe Palestinians history is pretend...made up...etc?  Again...the constant refrain from those who also ptomote the idea thst their righrs are less than.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
Click to expand...

Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.

Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .

Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?

Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.

The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
Click to expand...

At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> And I'll add to this and explain why it matters to the Jewish people.  It matters to the Jewish people because Arab Palestinians are using their pretend, made-up, stolen "history" in Israel and Judea and Samaria to DENY or REPLACE Jewish history.  And people believe them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And that is different from the Jewish people claiming that tbe Palestinians history is pretend...made up...etc?  Again...the constant refrain from those who also ptomote the idea thst their righrs are less than.
Click to expand...

Palestinian history is made up.  They never called themselves Palestinians and most of them only moved into the area after Zionism began to build infrastructure and offer jobs in the region known as Palestine.

They have been stuck as Palestinians because their leaders want them to be stuck as such.

Most come from tribes in Arabia, or Egypt, and they say so themselves.

It is enough to say that their leaders refuse any Jewish history in the area, but ONLY since 1948, and actually ONLY since they last lost the war in 1973.

Why would they decide to reject Jewish history since 1973, when for 1400 years they never did so?


----------



## Coyote

By the Sixties, I do agree with you on one point, the Jews have been far more generous than other faiths in allowing access to historuc holy sites.


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb

*The Palestinians are xenophobic and genocidal anti-Semites.
They are not victims.*


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
Click to expand...

Your counter is rather pathetic.

Judaism began in Ancient Canaan.  Islam did not.
Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years.  The Muslims built no nation in the area.  And the Muslim Arabs  even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.

Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.

That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.



Calling the Jewish people "Europeans" is a hateful lie which is intended erase Jewish culture and history in their own homeland.  

Calling the Arab Palestinian people part of an invading, conquering culture (indeed part of a vast Arabic Empire) is an accurate representation intended especially to COUNTER the erasure of the Jewish culture and history by those invading, conquering people.  If the Arab Palestinians did not consistently DENY and REPLACE Jewish culture and history with their own -- there would be no need to even have this discussion about indigeneity.  

It is INDEED separating them out as non-native invaders.  That's what they ARE if you use any accurate understanding of indigeneity.  They are "other".  There is nothing wrong with that.  That is what the conflict is about:  two distinct cultures.  

And it does not affect their rights at all.  Rights for one people does not diminish or remove rights for the other people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Nevertheless, the Arab propaganda machine gets away with publishing fantastic falsehoods, such as this one on the Palestinian Authority’s tourism website: “With a history that envelops more than one million years, Palestine has played an important role in human civilization. The crucible of prehistoric cultures, it is where settled society, the alphabet, religion, and literature developed, and would become a meeting place for diverse cultures and ideas that shaped the world we know today”.

The international community not only approves of these falsehoods, it happily pays for them.

Historian Abd Al-Ghani’s declaration on PA TV was a historic, highly newsworthy admission that ought to have made the headlines everywhere, considering the importance the issue is given by political leaders, diplomats, the media and other establishment figures all over the world.

*After all, if the Arabs themselves admit that the ‘Palestinian people’ is an invented entity, should not the consequence be that the countless UN projects, billions of dollars in international aid, and the endless campaigns against Israel cease and be used for more noble purposes?

The answer is yes, but no one is paying attention.*

We live in a post-factual world. Facts no longer have any currency, unlike feelings and ideological posturing. The truth has been reduced to a troublesome inconvenience and if it happens to stare you in the face, nothing could be easier than closing your eyes or simply looking away.

(full article online)

Arab Historian Admits there is No Palestinian People


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> And that is different from the Jewish people claiming that tbe Palestinians history is pretend...made up...etc?  Again...the constant refrain from those who also ptomote the idea thst their righrs are less than.



No one is claiming that the Palestinian history is pretend or made up.  Well, except for the stuff that IS ACTUALLY pretend or made up. 

The "constant refrain" is not that their rights are less.  Pretty sure Sixties believes that the Arab Palestinians have the rights to self-determination and sovereignty in AT LEAST one State, and possibly up to even three.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your counter is rather pathetic.
> 
> Judaism began in Ancient Canaan.  Islam did not.
> Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years.  The Muslims built no nation in the area.  And the Muslim Arabs  even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.
> 
> Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.
> 
> That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.
Click to expand...

It isnt pathetic at all.  If you are going to label different people invaders then acknowledge your own people were invaders of an earlier people.  That is the problem with labels. The people you dislike are labeled "invaders", the ones you like are "migrants".  At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.



Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
Click to expand...

Palestine


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?



Never.  Never ever.  No invading, conquering culture EVER transitions into being indigenous.  That is a fundamental lack of understanding of what "indigenous" means.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> 
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your counter is rather pathetic.
> 
> Judaism began in Ancient Canaan.  Islam did not.
> Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years.  The Muslims built no nation in the area.  And the Muslim Arabs  even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.
> 
> Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.
> 
> That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isnt pathetic at all.  If you are going to label different people invaders then acknowledge your own people were invaders of an earlier people.  That is the problem with labels. The people you dislike are labeled "invaders", the ones you like are "migrants".  At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?
Click to expand...

You are not discussing who is indigenous now.  You just changed the discussion into something totally different which is not about who is indigenous.

The Jews ARE indigenous of the Land of Canaan.  The Arabs are not, and they will say so for those who care to listen.

The word Palestinian, which the Arab leaders decided to take out of the Mandate for Palestine, does mean invaders, and the Arabs did not even know its meaning because the word Palestine, Palestinian are not part of the Arab language.

You constantly change the meaning of the word indigenous in order to bring all people who have been in a place for a certain number of years, decades or centuries into being indigenous.

As I said above, if the Arabs are "Indigenous" of the Land of Canaan, than so are the British indigenous of all the places I mentioned and so are all the descendants of Spaniards who make up most of South and Central America.

THAT is not the meaning of the word indigenous and it is one thing you apparently will never learn the difference, anymore than all others who do not understand what the issues actually are, and what the Muslims have been not only saying but DOING since 1973.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
Click to expand...

That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.

It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.

It says so in the article:

Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
Click to expand...


That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".

But what is your point?


Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?


----------



## Sixties Fan

By the way, the Philistines were no more Indigenous to the area of Canaan where they built their Empire, than the Arabs are.
They were Greeks.  And the word Philistines does mean invaders, and it is where its changed word, Palestinians comes from and it means exactly the same thing.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.


As that article states:

The whole of the region was referred to as `Canaan’ in Mesopotamian texts and trade records found at Ebla and Mari as early as the 18th century BCE while the term `Palestine’ does not appear in any written records until the 5th century BCE in the _Histories_ of Herodotus. After Herodotus, the term `Palestine’ came to be used for the entire region which was formerly known as Canaan.
-----------
In other words, it was known as Canaan at the time of the Israelites, and it is one reason why one probably does not find the word Palestine referring to the region in the Torah, or the area where the Philistines lived.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
Click to expand...

Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
Click to expand...


I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
Click to expand...

Maybe because since the Romans changed some of the area's name to Syria Palestine some people have chosen to only call it Palestine, and not the whole Syria Palestine name.

And that is exactly what the British did to the Mandate, regardless of knowing that the people who had earned the Mandate were the Jews and the actual name for it should have been Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
Click to expand...

Where does it say that the entire native population moved out and an entirely new population moved in? When did that happen?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does it say that the entire native population moved out and an entirely new population moved in? When did that happen?
Click to expand...

NOBODY said that an "entire population" moved out.
Again, the Jewish people are a melting pot of most of the tribes which were around Canaan at the time.

Now, STOP changing what happened.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
Click to expand...


Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does it say that the entire native population moved out and an entirely new population moved in? When did that happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> NOBODY said that an "entire population" moved out.
> Again, *the Jewish people are a melting pot of most of the tribes which were around Canaan at the time.*
> 
> Now, STOP changing what happened.
Click to expand...


As are the Palestinian people.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.



No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
Click to expand...

Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
Click to expand...

Since the 5th Century BCE, as the article states.  But you would like to make it for at least 10 more centuries before.

And to think that the word Palestine did not exist before the Philistine Greeks arrived.   
The name was given because they were total foreigners to the area and some indigenous people identified them that way.  And the word stuck.  Philistines =  Invaders.

Now, where were the Arabs 10,000 years ago?  Or 5,000 years ago?  Or 3000 years ago?
How many of them can be found in Canaan?
Any mention of them by Alexander?
Any mention of Palestinians?  Of course not.

But somehow, you will continue to insist that the Arabs who have been calling themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE, have been around for at least 3000 years, or more, but just simply did not call themselves Palestinians.

Somehow the Romans did not know that Palestine had a long standing history in the area.

The reason they change Judea's name to Syria Palestina was because the Jews had been once defeated by both the Philistines, and then by the Assyrians.  Not because there were people called Palestinians, or people at the time of the Philistines, actually called the area Palestine.

And......to humiliate the heck out of the Jews


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
Click to expand...

But that is NOT what they say.

So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
Click to expand...

 Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the 5th Century BCE, as the article states.  But you would like to make it for at least 10 more centuries before.
> 
> And to think that the word Palestine did not exist before the Philistine Greeks arrived.
> The name was given because they were total foreigners to the area and some indigenous people identified them that way.  And the word stuck.  Philistines =  Invaders.
> 
> Now, where were the Arabs 10,000 years ago?  Or 5,000 years ago?  Or 3000 years ago?
> How many of them can be found in Canaan?
> Any mention of them by Alexander?
> Any mention of Palestinians?  Of course not.
> 
> But somehow, you will continue to insist that the Arabs who have been calling themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE, have been around for at least 3000 years, or more, but just simply did not call themselves Palestinians.
> 
> Somehow the Romans did not know that Palestine had a long standing history in the area.
> 
> The reason they change Judea's name to Syria Palestina was because the Jews had been once defeated by both the Philistines, and then by the Assyrians.  Not because there were people called Palestinians, or people at the time of the Philistines, actually called the area Palestine.
> 
> And......to humiliate the heck out of the Jews
Click to expand...


5th century BC.  Over 2000 years.  That is plenty long enough.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
Click to expand...

You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.

What if that did not happen?
What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines


Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
Click to expand...

I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.

I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
> 
> But what is your point?
> 
> 
> Edited to add:  Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the 5th Century BCE, as the article states.  But you would like to make it for at least 10 more centuries before.
> 
> And to think that the word Palestine did not exist before the Philistine Greeks arrived.
> The name was given because they were total foreigners to the area and some indigenous people identified them that way.  And the word stuck.  Philistines =  Invaders.
> 
> Now, where were the Arabs 10,000 years ago?  Or 5,000 years ago?  Or 3000 years ago?
> How many of them can be found in Canaan?
> Any mention of them by Alexander?
> Any mention of Palestinians?  Of course not.
> 
> But somehow, you will continue to insist that the Arabs who have been calling themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE, have been around for at least 3000 years, or more, but just simply did not call themselves Palestinians.
> 
> Somehow the Romans did not know that Palestine had a long standing history in the area.
> 
> The reason they change Judea's name to Syria Palestina was because the Jews had been once defeated by both the Philistines, and then by the Assyrians.  Not because there were people called Palestinians, or people at the time of the Philistines, actually called the area Palestine.
> 
> And......to humiliate the heck out of the Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 5th century BC.  Over 2000 years.  That is plenty long enough.
Click to expand...

But they, the "Palestinians" are claiming over 10,000 years.

And no Arab history in the region, not until the 7th century CE.

Plenty is not good enough, since the Arabs had nothing to do with those names, no history in the area, NOTHING.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean the map to the right?  It seems to be  a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it.  Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the 5th Century BCE, as the article states.  But you would like to make it for at least 10 more centuries before.
> 
> And to think that the word Palestine did not exist before the Philistine Greeks arrived.
> The name was given because they were total foreigners to the area and some indigenous people identified them that way.  And the word stuck.  Philistines =  Invaders.
> 
> Now, where were the Arabs 10,000 years ago?  Or 5,000 years ago?  Or 3000 years ago?
> How many of them can be found in Canaan?
> Any mention of them by Alexander?
> Any mention of Palestinians?  Of course not.
> 
> But somehow, you will continue to insist that the Arabs who have been calling themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE, have been around for at least 3000 years, or more, but just simply did not call themselves Palestinians.
> 
> Somehow the Romans did not know that Palestine had a long standing history in the area.
> 
> The reason they change Judea's name to Syria Palestina was because the Jews had been once defeated by both the Philistines, and then by the Assyrians.  Not because there were people called Palestinians, or people at the time of the Philistines, actually called the area Palestine.
> 
> And......to humiliate the heck out of the Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 5th century BC.  Over 2000 years.  That is plenty long enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But they, the "Palestinians" are claiming over 10,000 years.
> 
> And no Arab history in the region, not until the 7th century CE.
> 
> Plenty is not good enough, since the Arabs had nothing to do with those names, no history in the area, NOTHING.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
Click to expand...


And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?

So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I mean more generally.  Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the 5th Century BCE, as the article states.  But you would like to make it for at least 10 more centuries before.
> 
> And to think that the word Palestine did not exist before the Philistine Greeks arrived.
> The name was given because they were total foreigners to the area and some indigenous people identified them that way.  And the word stuck.  Philistines =  Invaders.
> 
> Now, where were the Arabs 10,000 years ago?  Or 5,000 years ago?  Or 3000 years ago?
> How many of them can be found in Canaan?
> Any mention of them by Alexander?
> Any mention of Palestinians?  Of course not.
> 
> But somehow, you will continue to insist that the Arabs who have been calling themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE, have been around for at least 3000 years, or more, but just simply did not call themselves Palestinians.
> 
> Somehow the Romans did not know that Palestine had a long standing history in the area.
> 
> The reason they change Judea's name to Syria Palestina was because the Jews had been once defeated by both the Philistines, and then by the Assyrians.  Not because there were people called Palestinians, or people at the time of the Philistines, actually called the area Palestine.
> 
> And......to humiliate the heck out of the Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 5th century BC.  Over 2000 years.  That is plenty long enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But they, the "Palestinians" are claiming over 10,000 years.
> 
> And no Arab history in the region, not until the 7th century CE.
> 
> Plenty is not good enough, since the Arabs had nothing to do with those names, no history in the area, NOTHING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
Click to expand...

The "Palestinians " are nothing but a people put together to put an end to Israel.  Because if they had succeeded in destroying Israel in 1948 and killed or expelled all the Jews from the area, as the Hashemites did in TranJordan,  as Gaza was emptied of Jews in 1920, and Judea and Samaria were emptied of Jews in 1948, as well.......we would not be having any of these discussions because the Arabs would not be calling themselves Palestinians, No Matter What, and would have added Israel to the rest of what they already had, and would have called themselves a Caliphate, and probably what they wanted to call themselves since WWI.  Syrians.

So from Arabia, Egypt, Bosnia, Armenia, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, so on and so forth.  It does not matter.

They would not find themselves DEAD being called Palestinians had it not been for the fact that they did NOT destroy Israel, and never will.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote
> 
> Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
Click to expand...

That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.

We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.

You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?

in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine. 
After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.

That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.

One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.

But not before Islam was founded.

No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.

And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....

Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:

And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
------

Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:

*Confirmed archaeologically*


Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
*Hebrew Bible and other historiography*


Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)


*Rulers of Tyre*


Abibaal 990–978 BC
Hiram I 978–944 BC
Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
Abdastartus 927–918 BC
Methusastartus 918–906 BC
Astarymus 906–897 BC
Phelles 897–896 BC
Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
Mattan I 829–820 BC
Pygmalion 820–774 BC
Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
Hiram II 739–730 BC
Mattan II 730–729 BC
Elulaios 729 694 BC
Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
Baal I 680–660 BC
_Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
Yakinbaal 564 BC
Chelbes 564–563 BC
Abbar 563–562 BC
Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
Hiram III 551–532 BC
Mattan III (under Persian Control)
Boulomenus
Abdemon c.420–411 BC

Canaan - Wikipedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolute bull-hockey.  There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being.  It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture.  Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion.  Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does it say that the entire native population moved out and an entirely new population moved in? When did that happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> NOBODY said that an "entire population" moved out.
> Again, *the Jewish people are a melting pot of most of the tribes which were around Canaan at the time.*
> 
> Now, STOP changing what happened.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As are the Palestinian people.
Click to expand...

My contention is that whenever a territory is conquered, the elites are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited. With this in mind, the same people have remained from the beginning of time. Surely there has been some mixing of populations during all of this turmoil, but the core group of Palestinians have been there forever.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> 
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.
> 
> It was named after the Philistines and it denotes mainly the area of Gaza where the Philistines built their Empire.
> 
> It says so in the article:
> 
> Palestine in the ancient world was part of the region known as Canaan where the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah were located. The term `Palestine’ was originally a designation of an area of land in southern Canaan which the people known as the Philistines occupied a very small part of, the Canaanites, Canaanite-Phoenicians, and the Israelites, among others, having established themselves in the area much earlier. The Philistines are thought to have come to the area toward the end of the Bronze Age c. 1276 BCE and established themselves on the southern coastal plain of the Mediterranean Sea in an area afterwards known as Philistia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> But that is NOT what they say.
> 
> So, why in the world do you keep insisting on YOUR version of who they are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
Click to expand...

But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.

And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.



So is Israel.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> 
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who was there before the Jewish kingdoms?  As the article I linked to pointed out, they invaded an even earlier people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I base “my” version on what historians and scientists say, not what YOU claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
Click to expand...


Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?



> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........



Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are following the Torah version of the Exodus and "invasion" by Aaron and those who left Egypt.
> 
> What if that did not happen?
> What if indeed they were slaves in Egypt, but once Egypt began to crumble they managed to escape and returned to Canaan which was their original homeland?
> What if they simply migrated and built communities as tribes are bound to do and and as it has been told, their (and other tribes) were conquered by the Philistines, as it did happen, until David happened to defeat Goliath, or whichever way the Philistines
> I believe that I have pointed out that your historians and scientists are nothing but crooks, who would never have come up with those "findings" if it hadn't been that Israel came to be.
> 
> I.....do not claim.  History and conclusive DNA, does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
Click to expand...

You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.

The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.

Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?

The answer is no.

There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs. 

And that is a fact.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
Click to expand...

Not really.

Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
Click to expand...

Israel was conquered by the Assyrians. Not "disappeared " .   The Israelites did not die away.

Judea still existed.  The Jews did not die away.
And let us not forget the Maccabees who defeated the Persians and recreated the Monarchy, 100 years before the Romans showed up.

Where is that map?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> My contention is that whenever a territory is conquered, the elites are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited. With this in mind, the same people have remained from the beginning of time. Surely there has been some mixing of populations during all of this turmoil, but the core group of Palestinians have been there forever.



Oh please.  That's like saying that the "core group of Americans" have been there forever and have always spoken English.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
Click to expand...


Palestine is a name deliberately established by invader conquerers to LITERALLY to erase the homeland of the Jewish people.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Israel disappeared around 700BC.



Israel did not "disappear".  She was invaded and conquered; her people murdered and forcefully removed from the territory.  Those people still exist -- as a people!  As a thriving, fully surviving and re-constituted people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
Click to expand...

From the article you posted a few pages ago:

Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.

Palestine


Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.



If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?  

They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what if they didn’t migrate but invaded?  Interesting choices of words. Invaded for some...migrated for others.  A bit of a bias showing?
> 
> So you suddenly find DNA acceptable?  Really?  Then I guess you will finally agree that the DNA shows Palestinians more closely related to Jews then to Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> 
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.
> 
> The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.
> 
> Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?
> 
> The answer is no.
> 
> There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs.
> 
> And that is a fact.
Click to expand...


The scientists were not pro (or anti) Palestinian.  Why are you trying to politicize the science?  Is it so threatening to identity to find the Palestinians are not as distantly related as you hoped?  This is the weirdest argument.  What the studies tend to show is fairly close relationships among many of the peoples in the region.  Not some sharp division between Jews and “Arabs” in the area.

There are actually multiple studies looking at various aspects of genetics.

And that is a fact.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
Click to expand...

They are Palestinians.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> No.  Where exactly did I say that?  I have always been pretty clear that the Palestinians are an amalgram of many ancient and modern peoples in that region.



But it doesn't MEAN anything.  By your definition, anyone can be indigenous anywhere.  You render the term meaningless.  You make the preservation and protection of specific, distinct cultures irrelevant.  

The Irish people of Canada are an amalgam of many people, therefore the Irish are indigenous to Canada.  Its utterly ridiculous.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.
> 
> The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.
> 
> Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?
> 
> The answer is no.
> 
> There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs.
> 
> And that is a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The scientists were not pro (or anti) Palestinian.  Why are you trying to politicize the science?  Is it so threatening to identity to find the Palestinians are not as distantly related as you hoped?  This is the weirdest argument.  What the studies tend to show is fairly close relationships among many of the peoples in the region.  Not some sharp division between Jews and “Arabs” in the area.
> 
> There are actually multiple studies looking at various aspects of genetics.
> 
> And that is a fact.
Click to expand...

Do post that study again.
And also find me any other study with the same people tested and named which shows that the study you posted before was actually even conducted and actually came out with those conclusions.

That is how scientific I am.

Was there a study conducted on 100 Palestinians ? 
When?
Their names?

Which other agencies conducted a genetic test on those same 100 Palestinians which proves that MOST Palestinians are related to the Jewish People.

And.....did you not say that the Palestinians were not Arabs?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.
> 
> The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.
> 
> Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?
> 
> The answer is no.
> 
> There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs.
> 
> And that is a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The scientists were not pro (or anti) Palestinian.  Why are you trying to politicize the science?  Is it so threatening to identity to find the Palestinians are not as distantly related as you hoped?  This is the weirdest argument.  What the studies tend to show is fairly close relationships among many of the peoples in the region.  Not some sharp division between Jews and “Arabs” in the area.
> 
> There are actually multiple studies looking at various aspects of genetics.
> 
> And that is a fact.
Click to expand...

Multiple studies.

Please,  post the link to each one of them.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
Click to expand...


I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Palestinians.
Click to expand...


Meaningless.  Unless you can make it distinct from all other peoples.  What makes one distinctively Palestinian?  At what point in time did that distinction come to be?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?



Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
Click to expand...

I would say that the Tamimi clan is from Bosnia, but possibly mixed with the Arabs for the past 100 years since they migrated to the area of the Mandate.

The Greek Orthodox never called themselves Palestinians.  They still do not.

The Druze do not see themselves as Palestinians.

And there would be some Jews who chose to move to Gaza finding love there and converted.

Besides those, as Rylah has shown before, most clans have roots in Arabia for thousands of years as they themselves say.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.
Click to expand...

In this case it is not false.  Palestine is a term for the area that has been in use for several thousand years.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> View attachment 250490
Click to expand...

Yes, and this map is from circa 100 CE and not 2000 BCE or 1000 BCE.

Here is a 9th Centure  BCE  map:



Approximate map of the Iron Age kingdom of Israel (blue) and kingdom of Judah(yellow), with their neighbors (tan) (9th century BCE)

History of ancient Israel and Judah - Wikipedia


----------



## WelfareQueen

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> 
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your counter is rather pathetic.
> 
> Judaism began in Ancient Canaan.  Islam did not.
> Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years.  The Muslims built no nation in the area.  And the Muslim Arabs  even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.
> 
> Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.
> 
> That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isnt pathetic at all.  If you are going to label different people invaders then acknowledge your own people were invaders of an earlier people.  That is the problem with labels. The people you dislike are labeled "invaders", the ones you like are "migrants".  At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?
Click to expand...



Coyote I applaud you with this thread.  You really are trying yo be fair and hear from all sides.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In this case it is not false.  Palestine is a term for the area that has been in use for several thousand years.
Click to expand...

But the ARAB Palestinians of today have NO History in it at all.
They are not part of the ancient history.
They were not there during the Greek or Roman invasions, or even the Byzantine invasion.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In this case it is not false.  Palestine is a term for the area that has been in use for several thousand years.
Click to expand...


As have MANY other names.  Why choose that one?  When it is one which was deliberately chosen, and is still being deliberately chosen, to ERASE Jewish history?


----------



## Sixties Fan

*The Public Relations Hype versus Genealogy*

Such is the ethos. When one looks into what the Palestinians say about themselves, how each family describes its lineage, there is no trace of a “Canaanite” ancestry. Most of the families find their origins in Arab tribes, some of them with Kurdish or Egyptian background, and there are even – by word of mouth – widespread stories of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry. Although one might have expected some effort to adduce a Philistine ancestry, there is almost no such phenomenon.21 

In Nablus, there is a family named Kanaan – that is, Canaan. We asked members of the family about its lineage, and they affirmed that they had been Canaanites for 3,000 years. However, a look at the family’s website gave a different picture.22  It is indeed an ancient family – part of it Christian, indicating its pre-Islamic origin; but coming from Aleppo in Syria. From Aleppo, the family branched out to Damascus, Cyprus, and other places, including Nablus. Although the name may indicate Canaanite ancestry, the Canaanite forebears were in Syria, not in the land of Canaan.

According to another source within the family, the clan originated in Homs,23 Syria and became widely dispersed in the Middle East, apparently including Nablus, about 300 years ago. Despite the fact that the name suggests a Canaanite lineage, this source says the family’s origins lie in the ancient Arab Tamim24 tribe.

Thus, apart from the Kanaan family with its possible Canaanite ancestry coming from Syria, not Palestine, and its possible Arab origins, there is no direct or indirect evidence of the Palestinians having descended from the Canaanite people as they claim.

On February 1, 2014, Saeb Erekat locked horns with his negotiating partner, Tzipi Livni, before a European audience in Germany. He pronounced:25  “I am a son of Jericho. My age—10,000 years. I am a proud son of the Canaanites, and I was [here] 5,000 years ago, and 500 years before the coming of Joshua bin Nun, who burned my city, Jericho, and I will not trade in my history [because of a demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state].”

In other words, Erekat’s claimed Canaanite roots entail that he cannot recognize Jewish history; and in any case, Joshua bin Nun, Erekat intimates, was a war criminal.

Is the Erekat family “Canaanite,” as he angrily insisted to Tzipi Livni before a European audience that did not bat an eyelash?

To find out how the family views its lineage, we looked at his family’s genealogical sites.

It turns out that the Erekat family originates in the large Huweitat tribe, and they belong to the Ashraf (families that trace their lineage to the family of the Prophet). They are related to the descendants of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet, who migrated from Medina to the Syrian Desert and settled in the Aqaba area.

The Erekat family itself settled in Abu Dis, Jericho, Amman, and Ajloun (in Jordan). The sheikh of the family was Kamal Erekat, commander of the jihad against the nascent Jewish state in 1948 after Abd al-Kader al-Husseini was killed in the Battle of Kastel during Israel’s War of Independence. Kamal Erekat himself was wounded in the war and later became the first speaker of the Jordanian parliament.

In general, the list of heads of the Erekat family includes many Jordanian cabinet ministers. Why is the family so prominent in Jordan? Because the Huweitat tribe was among the main tribes that backed the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in Mecca, and it moved north along with Laurence of Arabia —that is, at the same time as the Zionists were establishing themselves in Palestine.

The Hejaz-based Huweitat tribe linked up with the branch of the tribe that had already settled in Jordan, and together they conquered Aqaba.


Who Are the Palestinians?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Meaningless.  Unless you can make it distinct from all other peoples.  What makes one distinctively Palestinian?  At what point in time did that distinction come to be?
Click to expand...

It isn’t meaningless.  Is there some specific date needed?  How about self identification.  

I think this argument illustrates something and that is how important it is for some people here to insist that the Palestinians are a “fake” people with a “fake” history.  Why is that so important?  What is the *agenda* behind it?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> *The Public Relations Hype versus Genealogy*
> 
> Such is the ethos. When one looks into what the Palestinians say about themselves, how each family describes its lineage, there is no trace of a “Canaanite” ancestry. Most of the families find their origins in Arab tribes, some of them with Kurdish or Egyptian background, and there are even – by word of mouth – widespread stories of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry. Although one might have expected some effort to adduce a Philistine ancestry, there is almost no such phenomenon.21
> 
> In Nablus, there is a family named Kanaan – that is, Canaan. We asked members of the family about its lineage, and they affirmed that they had been Canaanites for 3,000 years. However, a look at the family’s website gave a different picture.22  It is indeed an ancient family – part of it Christian, indicating its pre-Islamic origin; but coming from Aleppo in Syria. From Aleppo, the family branched out to Damascus, Cyprus, and other places, including Nablus. Although the name may indicate Canaanite ancestry, the Canaanite forebears were in Syria, not in the land of Canaan.
> 
> According to another source within the family, the clan originated in Homs,23 Syria and became widely dispersed in the Middle East, apparently including Nablus, about 300 years ago. Despite the fact that the name suggests a Canaanite lineage, this source says the family’s origins lie in the ancient Arab Tamim24 tribe.
> 
> Thus, apart from the Kanaan family with its possible Canaanite ancestry coming from Syria, not Palestine, and its possible Arab origins, there is no direct or indirect evidence of the Palestinians having descended from the Canaanite people as they claim.
> 
> On February 1, 2014, Saeb Erekat locked horns with his negotiating partner, Tzipi Livni, before a European audience in Germany. He pronounced:25  “I am a son of Jericho. My age—10,000 years. I am a proud son of the Canaanites, and I was [here] 5,000 years ago, and 500 years before the coming of Joshua bin Nun, who burned my city, Jericho, and I will not trade in my history [because of a demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state].”
> 
> In other words, Erekat’s claimed Canaanite roots entail that he cannot recognize Jewish history; and in any case, Joshua bin Nun, Erekat intimates, was a war criminal.
> 
> Is the Erekat family “Canaanite,” as he angrily insisted to Tzipi Livni before a European audience that did not bat an eyelash?
> 
> To find out how the family views its lineage, we looked at his family’s genealogical sites.
> 
> It turns out that the Erekat family originates in the large Huweitat tribe, and they belong to the Ashraf (families that trace their lineage to the family of the Prophet). They are related to the descendants of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet, who migrated from Medina to the Syrian Desert and settled in the Aqaba area.
> 
> The Erekat family itself settled in Abu Dis, Jericho, Amman, and Ajloun (in Jordan). The sheikh of the family was Kamal Erekat, commander of the jihad against the nascent Jewish state in 1948 after Abd al-Kader al-Husseini was killed in the Battle of Kastel during Israel’s War of Independence. Kamal Erekat himself was wounded in the war and later became the first speaker of the Jordanian parliament.
> 
> In general, the list of heads of the Erekat family includes many Jordanian cabinet ministers. Why is the family so prominent in Jordan? Because the Huweitat tribe was among the main tribes that backed the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in Mecca, and it moved north along with Laurence of Arabia —that is, at the same time as the Zionists were establishing themselves in Palestine.
> 
> The Hejaz-based Huweitat tribe linked up with the branch of the tribe that had already settled in Jordan, and together they conquered Aqaba.
> 
> 
> Who Are the Palestinians?


Don’t you think that source might be a bit biased?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> View attachment 250490
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, and this map is from circa 100 CE and not 2000 BCE or 1000 BCE.
> 
> Here is a 9th Centure  BCE  map:
> 
> 
> 
> Approximate map of the Iron Age kingdom of Israel (blue) and kingdom of Judah(yellow), with their neighbors (tan) (9th century BCE)
> 
> History of ancient Israel and Judah - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

And...what exactly is your point?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The Public Relations Hype versus Genealogy*
> 
> Such is the ethos. When one looks into what the Palestinians say about themselves, how each family describes its lineage, there is no trace of a “Canaanite” ancestry. Most of the families find their origins in Arab tribes, some of them with Kurdish or Egyptian background, and there are even – by word of mouth – widespread stories of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry. Although one might have expected some effort to adduce a Philistine ancestry, there is almost no such phenomenon.21
> 
> In Nablus, there is a family named Kanaan – that is, Canaan. We asked members of the family about its lineage, and they affirmed that they had been Canaanites for 3,000 years. However, a look at the family’s website gave a different picture.22  It is indeed an ancient family – part of it Christian, indicating its pre-Islamic origin; but coming from Aleppo in Syria. From Aleppo, the family branched out to Damascus, Cyprus, and other places, including Nablus. Although the name may indicate Canaanite ancestry, the Canaanite forebears were in Syria, not in the land of Canaan.
> 
> According to another source within the family, the clan originated in Homs,23 Syria and became widely dispersed in the Middle East, apparently including Nablus, about 300 years ago. Despite the fact that the name suggests a Canaanite lineage, this source says the family’s origins lie in the ancient Arab Tamim24 tribe.
> 
> Thus, apart from the Kanaan family with its possible Canaanite ancestry coming from Syria, not Palestine, and its possible Arab origins, there is no direct or indirect evidence of the Palestinians having descended from the Canaanite people as they claim.
> 
> On February 1, 2014, Saeb Erekat locked horns with his negotiating partner, Tzipi Livni, before a European audience in Germany. He pronounced:25  “I am a son of Jericho. My age—10,000 years. I am a proud son of the Canaanites, and I was [here] 5,000 years ago, and 500 years before the coming of Joshua bin Nun, who burned my city, Jericho, and I will not trade in my history [because of a demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state].”
> 
> In other words, Erekat’s claimed Canaanite roots entail that he cannot recognize Jewish history; and in any case, Joshua bin Nun, Erekat intimates, was a war criminal.
> 
> Is the Erekat family “Canaanite,” as he angrily insisted to Tzipi Livni before a European audience that did not bat an eyelash?
> 
> To find out how the family views its lineage, we looked at his family’s genealogical sites.
> 
> It turns out that the Erekat family originates in the large Huweitat tribe, and they belong to the Ashraf (families that trace their lineage to the family of the Prophet). They are related to the descendants of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet, who migrated from Medina to the Syrian Desert and settled in the Aqaba area.
> 
> The Erekat family itself settled in Abu Dis, Jericho, Amman, and Ajloun (in Jordan). The sheikh of the family was Kamal Erekat, commander of the jihad against the nascent Jewish state in 1948 after Abd al-Kader al-Husseini was killed in the Battle of Kastel during Israel’s War of Independence. Kamal Erekat himself was wounded in the war and later became the first speaker of the Jordanian parliament.
> 
> In general, the list of heads of the Erekat family includes many Jordanian cabinet ministers. Why is the family so prominent in Jordan? Because the Huweitat tribe was among the main tribes that backed the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in Mecca, and it moved north along with Laurence of Arabia —that is, at the same time as the Zionists were establishing themselves in Palestine.
> 
> The Hejaz-based Huweitat tribe linked up with the branch of the tribe that had already settled in Jordan, and together they conquered Aqaba.
> 
> 
> Who Are the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> Don’t you think that source might be a bit biased?
Click to expand...

Not if the research done is based on factual Arab websites and interviews conducted on other Arabs.

Would you care to do a research on Arab Leader Erekart's family just to check it out?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> 
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.
> 
> The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.
> 
> Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?
> 
> The answer is no.
> 
> There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs.
> 
> And that is a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The scientists were not pro (or anti) Palestinian.  Why are you trying to politicize the science?  Is it so threatening to identity to find the Palestinians are not as distantly related as you hoped?  This is the weirdest argument.  What the studies tend to show is fairly close relationships among many of the peoples in the region.  Not some sharp division between Jews and “Arabs” in the area.
> 
> There are actually multiple studies looking at various aspects of genetics.
> 
> And that is a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Multiple studies.
> 
> Please,  post the link to each one of them.
Click to expand...


This article references several.

Blood brothers: Palestinians and Jews share genetic roots


Now you show me studies indicating they are not related.  Disprove those studies.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The Public Relations Hype versus Genealogy*
> 
> Such is the ethos. When one looks into what the Palestinians say about themselves, how each family describes its lineage, there is no trace of a “Canaanite” ancestry. Most of the families find their origins in Arab tribes, some of them with Kurdish or Egyptian background, and there are even – by word of mouth – widespread stories of Jewish or Samaritan ancestry. Although one might have expected some effort to adduce a Philistine ancestry, there is almost no such phenomenon.21
> 
> In Nablus, there is a family named Kanaan – that is, Canaan. We asked members of the family about its lineage, and they affirmed that they had been Canaanites for 3,000 years. However, a look at the family’s website gave a different picture.22  It is indeed an ancient family – part of it Christian, indicating its pre-Islamic origin; but coming from Aleppo in Syria. From Aleppo, the family branched out to Damascus, Cyprus, and other places, including Nablus. Although the name may indicate Canaanite ancestry, the Canaanite forebears were in Syria, not in the land of Canaan.
> 
> According to another source within the family, the clan originated in Homs,23 Syria and became widely dispersed in the Middle East, apparently including Nablus, about 300 years ago. Despite the fact that the name suggests a Canaanite lineage, this source says the family’s origins lie in the ancient Arab Tamim24 tribe.
> 
> Thus, apart from the Kanaan family with its possible Canaanite ancestry coming from Syria, not Palestine, and its possible Arab origins, there is no direct or indirect evidence of the Palestinians having descended from the Canaanite people as they claim.
> 
> On February 1, 2014, Saeb Erekat locked horns with his negotiating partner, Tzipi Livni, before a European audience in Germany. He pronounced:25  “I am a son of Jericho. My age—10,000 years. I am a proud son of the Canaanites, and I was [here] 5,000 years ago, and 500 years before the coming of Joshua bin Nun, who burned my city, Jericho, and I will not trade in my history [because of a demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state].”
> 
> In other words, Erekat’s claimed Canaanite roots entail that he cannot recognize Jewish history; and in any case, Joshua bin Nun, Erekat intimates, was a war criminal.
> 
> Is the Erekat family “Canaanite,” as he angrily insisted to Tzipi Livni before a European audience that did not bat an eyelash?
> 
> To find out how the family views its lineage, we looked at his family’s genealogical sites.
> 
> It turns out that the Erekat family originates in the large Huweitat tribe, and they belong to the Ashraf (families that trace their lineage to the family of the Prophet). They are related to the descendants of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet, who migrated from Medina to the Syrian Desert and settled in the Aqaba area.
> 
> The Erekat family itself settled in Abu Dis, Jericho, Amman, and Ajloun (in Jordan). The sheikh of the family was Kamal Erekat, commander of the jihad against the nascent Jewish state in 1948 after Abd al-Kader al-Husseini was killed in the Battle of Kastel during Israel’s War of Independence. Kamal Erekat himself was wounded in the war and later became the first speaker of the Jordanian parliament.
> 
> In general, the list of heads of the Erekat family includes many Jordanian cabinet ministers. Why is the family so prominent in Jordan? Because the Huweitat tribe was among the main tribes that backed the Great Arab Revolt of the Hashemites in Mecca, and it moved north along with Laurence of Arabia —that is, at the same time as the Zionists were establishing themselves in Palestine.
> 
> The Hejaz-based Huweitat tribe linked up with the branch of the tribe that had already settled in Jordan, and together they conquered Aqaba.
> 
> 
> Who Are the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> Don’t you think that source might be a bit biased?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not if the research done is based on factual Arab websites and interviews conducted on other Arabs.
> 
> Would you care to do a research on Arab Leader Erekart's family just to check it out?
Click to expand...


Oh come on.  Yes it can still be biased in what it chooses to include, leave out, the words it chooses to use.  You know that.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> View attachment 250490
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, and this map is from circa 100 CE and not 2000 BCE or 1000 BCE.
> 
> Here is a 9th Centure  BCE  map:
> 
> 
> 
> Approximate map of the Iron Age kingdom of Israel (blue) and kingdom of Judah(yellow), with their neighbors (tan) (9th century BCE)
> 
> History of ancient Israel and Judah - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And...what exactly is your point?
Click to expand...

The point continues to be:

Before Israel's time, the area was known as Canaan.
During Israel's time, it was known as Israel, or Israel and Judea, or later Judea.

We are talking just about Canaan.

And let us remember that the Philistines mainly occupied the area of Gaza, plus Ashkelon, etc.

The point is, that by 100 CE, Ptolomeu may have chosen to use the term Palestine for the area in his map.  Who knows.

But where in history books did any invaders like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks or even the Romans invaded "Palestine" and took the "Palestinians" into captivity to Babylon, or the Assyrians conquered Palestine, or the Greeks conquered Palestine.

I cannot find your Palestine anywhere in their history books.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In this case it is not false.  Palestine is a term for the area that has been in use for several thousand years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But the ARAB Palestinians of today have NO History in it at all.
> They are not part of the ancient history.
> They were not there during the Greek or Roman invasions, or even the Byzantine invasion.
Click to expand...

Sure they were.  If they are a composite of all those peoples then they were.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> 
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> View attachment 250490
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, and this map is from circa 100 CE and not 2000 BCE or 1000 BCE.
> 
> Here is a 9th Centure  BCE  map:
> 
> 
> 
> Approximate map of the Iron Age kingdom of Israel (blue) and kingdom of Judah(yellow), with their neighbors (tan) (9th century BCE)
> 
> History of ancient Israel and Judah - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And...what exactly is your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point continues to be:
> 
> Before Israel's time, the area was known as Canaan.
> During Israel's time, it was known as Israel, or Israel and Judea, or later Judea.
> 
> We are talking just about Canaan.
> 
> And let us remember that the Philistines mainly occupied the area of Gaza, plus Ashkelon, etc.
> 
> The point is, that by 100 CE, Ptolomeu may have chosen to use the term Palestine for the area in his map.  Who knows.
> 
> But where in history books did any invaders like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks or even the Romans invaded "Palestine" and took the "Palestinians" into captivity to Babylon, or the Assyrians conquered Palestine, or the Greeks conquered Palestine.
> 
> I cannot find your Palestine anywhere in their history books.
Click to expand...


Well if you can’t find Palestine in history books then your books are clearly deficient since it exists on maps and histories.  You are making a silly argument.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it is deliberately used to erase Jewish history and create a FALSE history for the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In this case it is not false.  Palestine is a term for the area that has been in use for several thousand years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But the ARAB Palestinians of today have NO History in it at all.
> They are not part of the ancient history.
> They were not there during the Greek or Roman invasions, or even the Byzantine invasion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure they were.  If they are a composite of all those peoples then they were.
Click to expand...

I asked you to show me where the Palestinians can prove, via oral or written ways, that they are descendants of any of the Canaanite tribes I posted in my previous post.

The Erekart clan.  Which Canaanite tribe are they from?
The Abbas clan.  Which Canaanite tribe are they from?
The Al Husseini clan.  Which Canaanite tribe are they from?

Any of these tribes below have Canaanite roots?
 Qurei
 Dahlan. ...
Rajoub. ...
Yusuf. ...
Shaath.
Meshal
Al Hindi
Barghouti
*Nusseibeh
Abed Rabbo
Nasrallah*


They do say that they come from Canaan for thousands and thousands of years before.

True or false?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> From the article you posted a few pages ago:
> 
> Rome involved itself in the region’s affairs in 63 BCE and, after Augustus became emperor,* Palestine became a province known as Roman Judea *in c. 31 BCE.
> 
> Palestine
> 
> 
> Why are you assuming that there were TWO separate regions, when Judea is the one which the Romans eventually changed its name into Syria Palestina in135 CE?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not assuming anything.  I looked at a map.  Why is ancient terminology such a big deal?
> 
> View attachment 250490
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, and this map is from circa 100 CE and not 2000 BCE or 1000 BCE.
> 
> Here is a 9th Centure  BCE  map:
> 
> 
> 
> Approximate map of the Iron Age kingdom of Israel (blue) and kingdom of Judah(yellow), with their neighbors (tan) (9th century BCE)
> 
> History of ancient Israel and Judah - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And...what exactly is your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point continues to be:
> 
> Before Israel's time, the area was known as Canaan.
> During Israel's time, it was known as Israel, or Israel and Judea, or later Judea.
> 
> We are talking just about Canaan.
> 
> And let us remember that the Philistines mainly occupied the area of Gaza, plus Ashkelon, etc.
> 
> The point is, that by 100 CE, Ptolomeu may have chosen to use the term Palestine for the area in his map.  Who knows.
> 
> But where in history books did any invaders like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks or even the Romans invaded "Palestine" and took the "Palestinians" into captivity to Babylon, or the Assyrians conquered Palestine, or the Greeks conquered Palestine.
> 
> I cannot find your Palestine anywhere in their history books.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well if you can’t find Palestine in history books then your books are clearly deficient since it exists on maps and histories.  You are making a silly argument.
Click to expand...

What I continue not to be able to find, as I showed in a post above, is a reference to Canaan as being Palestine, at the time Canaan was Canaan.

What I did find, was Palestine being first used by Herodotus after 5th Century BCE, long after Canaan stopped being used, because the area became known as Israel around 1000 BCE.


----------



## Shusha

Of all the POSSIBLE names to call the geographical area


Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Meaningless.  Unless you can make it distinct from all other peoples.  What makes one distinctively Palestinian?  At what point in time did that distinction come to be?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t meaningless.  Is there some specific date needed?  How about self identification.
> 
> I think this argument illustrates something and that is how important it is for some people here to insist that the Palestinians are a “fake” people with a “fake” history.  Why is that so important?  What is the *agenda* behind it?
Click to expand...


The agenda is the protection and preservation of the Jewish people; their history; their culture; their monuments; their religious faith; their homeland. 

No one is removing the rights of Arab Palestinians to self-identify as Arab Palestinians. 

We are rejecting their desire to rewrite history in an effort to deny and replace the Jewish people. 

There is nothing curlturally about Arab Palestinians which is distinctly a culture other than Arab. There is no connection culturally between Arab Palestinians and any people from ancient times in that homeland. 

Self-identification alone is not the criteria for indigeneity. I can "identify" all I want with ancient Canaanite culture. It doesn't make me Canaanite. I can identify all I want to Coast Salish culture. It doesn't make me Coast Salish. 

The Arab Palestinians are deliberately creating a false cultural connection to ancient tribes where there is NO cultural connection in order to usurp and replace the Jewish people. 

Indigeneity has a meaning. By saying that anyone of any culture can "self-identify" with any ancient culture you are making the term "indigenous" completely meaningless. 

There is NO connection and NO cultural identification between the Arab peoples and the ancient cultures which existed in this particular homeland. 

Again, that doesn't mean they have no rights. Just that they can't build those rights on a fake history.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Please, let us not discuss what name Ancient Canaan had, at any time, anymore.  It truly does not matter.

The issue of this thread is Who Is Indigenous to Ancient Canaan/Palestine who can trace the roots of their people there.

The Jewish People, clearly have traced their roots and founding of Judaism in Ancient Canaan.

The argument is that most most of today's Palestinians also trace their roots to that area.

I have posted a list of Arab leaders above, as  all claim ancestral lineage to ancient Canaanite tribes, and would like to know to which tribes in Ancient Canaan do they trace ancestral lineage.

Here is a map of Ancient Canaan giving the ancient tribes in existence  about 3500 years ago.








The map may not show, here are the tribes:

The Canaanites

The Amorites

The Hittites

The Jebusites

The Hivites

The Perizzites

The Girgashites

https://www.bible-history.com/map-israel-joshua/



Is there an actual Arab Palestinian archeological history on the land for the past 10,000 years which would prove this statement:

PA deputy district governor accuses Israel of stealing Palestinian heritage; "The antiquities in all of Palestine prove that the land of Palestine is an Arab-Canaanite land”
Source: Official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Sept. 25, 2018



 Who found this clearly Arab Palestinian culture and history the PA Deputy refers to and in which Museums is it being kept?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Here is my puzzlement, and hope someone can clarify it for me.

I posted above the 7 Nations in existence in Canaan at the time of Abraham or King David.

As some have noticed, Abbas and others like Rehmani and his Indian Muslim preacher, are stating that all of those Nations, tribes were Arabs.  

By making Canaan Arab, one would also have to make Mesopotamia, Syria and Phoenicia Arab.  Or would one?

By making Canaan Arab, one would have to make the Hebrews who created the Nation of Israel, Arabs.

My puzzlement stands from the fact that not once Abbas's clan, Husayni, or any other clan has actually confirmed which one of the 7 Nations they come from.

By stating that all of Canaan was Arab, they are also stating that the language spoken in Canaan was Arabic.


I am not refuting that the Arabs have, since the 7th Century CE, added a mixture of some of the peoples they conquered via intermarriage with others.   But I do not believe that it comes to a high percentage to the point where it overtakes the indigenous Arabs themselves.  
 As we know, clans tend to stay very tight within and marry usually amongst themselves.  

There is definitely no proof that the population of  Canaan was 
Arab, or that any of the Nations spoke Arabic.

There is no proof that the Arabs, since their invasion outside of Arabia,  have actually mixed to the point of making some of the other peoples disappear, lose their identity as a Nation.  
The Kurds, the Yazidis, the Assyrians and others continue to be proof of that.
Some Palestinians even have European looks, due to some Europeans converting to Islam, and are now calling themselves Palestinians, even Arabs.  


So, back to my question.

Which Canaanite Nations do the Arabs claim to come from, as they continue to claim that they are Palestinians, and that their ancestors are indeed any one of the 7 Nations which existed at the time?

They are claiming to be Palestinians.... Arabs.  That is how they identify themselves.   But there was no Arab Nation in Canaan at the time.   


Full descent from Canaanite Nations or Full descent  from Arab tribes of the Peninsula until the 7th Century CE?


And why are so many Arabs and non Arabs starting to spread the idea that Canaan was Arab in ancient times?


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan said:


> The Origins of Arab Settlers in the Land of Israel



Yes, basically there were 4 waves of Arab invasion and settlement, one for each Caliphate.
Besides importing populations, virtually no rule managed to hold the borders from constant infiltration.

One only has too look at the first aerial photographed and detailed maps, to see how small and underdeveloped remained the Arab settlement, right up until  the Jewish return.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WelfareQueen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This thread is being set up to prevent our second most common thread derailment (after the Mandate) - please discuss the ancient history of the peoples in the Palestine area here.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both the Jews and Philistines (i.e. Palestinians) have lived in Israel for thousands years according to the Bible.
> 
> Also, according to the Bible, the Jewish People were deeded the Holy Land as "God's Chosen People."  The Torah predates Muhammad and Islam by several thousand years.  If Muslims want their religion and their beliefs respected then they must respect the Jewish and Christian faiths.  You cannot have it both ways.
> 
> 
> Israel is Jewish land according to the Torah.  The question for Muslims:  Will you respect Jewish faith and beliefs?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please, the Philistines were invaders from Greece who created an Empire in the area of Gaza.
> 
> The Palestinians are Arabs, from Arabia.
> 
> Pro or Con, let us please get the identity of the players correct.
> 
> Because the Arabs would love for everyone to believe that they have been in Ancient Canaan for "thousands of years" when it wasn't even their ancestors but the Kurdish Muslims who were the first to invade the Land of Israel/region of Palestine in the 7th Century.
> 
> Islam does not allow for Muslims to "respect" the Jews.  Especially as free people.  The Jews must never be sovereign over any Muslims.
> 
> Which is why so many Muslims will lie, and lie, and destroy and destroy any and all Jewish history and archeology they can find, and call themselves the natives of the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
Click to expand...


Palestinians were not Arabs., this name merely jumps on whoever is the invader in the land.
It's the funniest thing when Bedouins all of a sudden start pretending to be these ancient "sea people",
who's name they cannot even pronounce.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Sixties Fan said:


> Here is my puzzlement, and hope someone can clarify it for me.
> 
> I posted above the 7 Nations in existence in Canaan at the time of Abraham or King David.
> 
> As some have noticed, Abbas and others like Rehmani and his Indian Muslim preacher, are stating that all of those Nations, tribes were Arabs.
> 
> By making Canaan Arab, one would also have to make Mesopotamia, Syria and Phoenicia Arab.  Or would one?
> 
> By making Canaan Arab, one would have to make the Hebrews who created the Nation of Israel, Arabs.
> 
> My puzzlement stands from the fact that not once Abbas's clan, Husayni, or any other clan has actually confirmed which one of the 7 Nations they come from.
> 
> By stating that all of Canaan was Arab, they are also stating that the language spoken in Canaan was Arabic.
> 
> 
> I am not refuting that the Arabs have, since the 7th Century CE, added a mixture of some of the peoples they conquered via intermarriage with others.   But I do not believe that it comes to a high percentage to the point where it overtakes the indigenous Arabs themselves.
> As we know, clans tend to stay very tight within and marry usually amongst themselves.
> 
> There is definitely no proof that the population of  Canaan was
> Arab, or that any of the Nations spoke Arabic.
> 
> There is no proof that the Arabs, since their invasion outside of Arabia,  have actually mixed to the point of making some of the other peoples disappear, lose their identity as a Nation.
> The Kurds, the Yazidis, the Assyrians and others continue to be proof of that.
> Some Palestinians even have European looks, due to some Europeans converting to Islam, and are now calling themselves Palestinians, even Arabs.
> 
> 
> So, back to my question.
> 
> Which Canaanite Nations do the Arabs claim to come from, as they continue to claim that they are Palestinians, and that their ancestors are indeed any one of the 7 Nations which existed at the time?
> 
> They are claiming to be Palestinians.... Arabs.  That is how they identify themselves.   But there was no Arab Nation in Canaan at the time.
> 
> 
> Full descent from Canaanite Nations or Full descent  from Arab tribes of the Peninsula until the 7th Century CE?
> 
> 
> And why are so many Arabs and non Arabs starting to spread the idea that Canaan was Arab in ancient times?



At various different times, the "Palestinians" have claimed to be Canaanites, Philistines and even the ancient Israelites.  Don't try to make sense of it.  Their ancestry changes, depending on what is the most convenient claim at any given moment.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia.  I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity.  People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
> 
> Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand?  Come on Shusha.  You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders.  The "other".  And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.
> 
> Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
> 
> Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
> Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan?  In Gaza?  As they did for thousands of years?
> 
> Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
> 
> The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture.  Be careful who you term invaders.
Click to expand...


Rightful inheritors, conquerors, not invaders.
The "pre-existing" culture spoke Hebrew.

The term for invaders in Hebrew is - 'Palestinians'.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the DNA test YOU want to believe in, not the ones the Palestinians will never put themselves through.
> 
> We are talking about over 3000 years ago.  The Philistines, Egypt, Israel, etc.
> 
> You want to talk about invasion and migration for the Palestinians ?
> 
> in the 7th century CE the Kurdish Muslims invaded and defeated the Byzantine.
> After that, the Arab Muslims invaded.
> After that, whichever Muslims wanted to Migrate into any of the conquered areas, did so.
> 
> That goes for any part outside of Arabia, what is known now as the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Spain.
> 
> One only has to look at the culture and language spoken in many of the modern countries to find out that everywhere the Muslim Kurds, and Moors invaded, the Arabs followed, migrated.
> 
> But not before Islam was founded.
> 
> No history of many Arabs in Canaan, no tribes, no nation, no history.
> 
> And if you have not noticed, Palestinians identify themselves as Arabs, not as Amorites, Canaanites, etc....
> 
> Here is a list of Canaanite Kings.  For some reason, the Palestinians do NOT identify with any of them, or with any of the tribes which made up ancient Canaan:
> 
> And for some reason, most Palestinians will identify with a tribe which comes from Arabia, including Abbas, Arafat and all the Arab leaders and the tribes one finds in Gaza and in areas A and B, and even the Arabs living in Area C, or in Israel.
> ------
> 
> Names of Canaanite kings or other figures mentioned in historiography or known through archaeology:
> 
> *Confirmed archaeologically*
> 
> 
> Niqmaddu I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Yaqarum I of Ugarit (Known from a seal used by Ugaritan Kings)
> Ammittamru I of Ugarit (Amarna letters)
> Niqmaddu II of Ugarit (Amarna letters) (1349–1315 BC)
> Arhalba of Ugarit (1315–1313 BC)
> Niqmepa of Ugarit (1313–1260 BC)
> Ammittamru II of Ugarit (1260–1235 BC)
> Ibiranu of Ugarit (1235–1220 BC)
> Ammurapi of Ugarit (1215–1185 BC)
> Aziru, ruler of Amurru (Amarna letters)
> Labaya, lord of Shechem (Amarna letters)
> Abdikheba, mayor of Jerusalem (Amarna letters)
> Šuwardata, mayor of Qiltu (Amarna letters)
> *Hebrew Bible and other historiography*
> 
> 
> Canaan, son of Ham (Gen. 10:6)
> Sidon, firstborn son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Heth, son of Canaan (Gen. 10:15)
> Cronos (Ilus), founder of Byblos according to Sanchuniathon
> Mamre, an Amorite chieftain (Gen. 13:18)
> Makamaron, king of Canaan (Jubilees 46:6)
> Sihon, king of Amorites (Deut 1:4)
> Og, king of Bashan (Deut 1:4)
> Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem (Josh. 10:1)
> Debir, king of Eglon (Josh. 10:3)
> Jabin, name of two kings of Hazor (Josh. 11:1; Judges 5:6)
> 
> 
> *Rulers of Tyre*
> 
> 
> Abibaal 990–978 BC
> Hiram I 978–944 BC
> Baal-Eser I (Balbazer I) 944–927 BC
> Abdastartus 927–918 BC
> Methusastartus 918–906 BC
> Astarymus 906–897 BC
> Phelles 897–896 BC
> Eshbaal I 896–863 BC
> Baal-Eser II (Balbazer II) 863–829 BC
> Mattan I 829–820 BC
> Pygmalion 820–774 BC
> Eshbaal II 750–739 BC
> Hiram II 739–730 BC
> Mattan II 730–729 BC
> Elulaios 729 694 BC
> Abd Melqart 694–680 BC
> Baal I 680–660 BC
> _Tyre may have been under control of Assyria and/or Egypt for 70 years_
> Eshbaal III 591–573 BC—_Carthage became independent of Tyre in 574 BC_
> Baal II 573–564 BC (under Babylonian overlords)
> Yakinbaal 564 BC
> Chelbes 564–563 BC
> Abbar 563–562 BC
> Mattan III and Ger Ashthari 562–556 BC
> Baal-Eser III 556–555 BC
> Mahar-Baal 555–551 BC
> Hiram III 551–532 BC
> Mattan III (under Persian Control)
> Boulomenus
> Abdemon c.420–411 BC
> 
> Canaan - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have been subject to multiple DNA studies so I don’t know what you are talking about.  Either you believe it or you don’t.  You don’t get to pick and choose just the bits you agree with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But ,   that is exactly what you have been doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly how?  What DNA studies am I picking bits from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since your knowledge of the issue is usually nil......and you won't even comment on how come the Palestinians cannot identify with any of the Canaanite tribes, but have been able to identify with the ones from Arabia .........
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I find your knowledge to be little more than pro-Israeli propaganda you will have to excuse me for not taking what you say seriously.  What genetic studies support your claim?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You already posted a study saying that Palestinians were close in DNA to Jews.
> 
> The point is that the study you pointed out to cannot be confirmed by any other study.
> 
> Was Israel allowed to look at the samples, know who the Palestinians were and conduct the same test on them to get the same result?
> 
> The answer is no.
> 
> There is no conclusive study, outside those who are pro Palestinians, who will say that most Palestinians have DNA closer to the Jews than to the Arabs.
> 
> And that is a fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The scientists were not pro (or anti) Palestinian.
> Why are you trying to politicize the science?
Click to expand...


You don't know, You're the one bringing DNA into a political discussion,
now complain about politicizing science.

Am I the only one noticing how  DNA always ends up to be the last resort of the
_"Palestinians I don't know who, but not Jews"_ band?


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
Click to expand...


Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If they are not just Arabs what else are they?  What other culture do they possess?  What other cultural markers do they possess?  What other identity do they have?  What languages do they speak?  What religions do they follow?  What cultural life events?  Holidays?  Laws?  Customs?  Clothing?
> 
> They are Arabs.  Only Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would say that the Tamimi clan is from Bosnia, but possibly mixed with the Arabs for the past 100 years since they migrated to the area of the Mandate.
> 
> The Greek Orthodox never called themselves Palestinians.  They still do not.
> 
> The Druze do not see themselves as Palestinians.
> 
> And there would be some Jews who chose to move to Gaza finding love there and converted.
> 
> Besides those, as Rylah has shown before, most clans have roots in Arabia for thousands of years as they themselves say.
Click to expand...


The Tamimi tribe is the royal tribe of Qatar.
And one of the largest and most powerful of the Arabian tribes


----------



## rylah

Here's a curious question,

how come Jews who returned from the 4 corners of the world,
including the Arab speaking Jews, Must'arbim, and they all could properly pronounce the names of the land,
while the local Arabs after 1400 of occupation still can't?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
Click to expand...


Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.


----------



## rylah

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
Click to expand...

Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

rylah said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Palestine is a long standing historic term for the region.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
Click to expand...


So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
Click to expand...



If this is true, then Hebrew was still spoken and studied in the Holy Land way, way later than I thought.


----------



## Rehmani

*The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?*Discussion in 'Israel and Palestine' started by Coyote, Dec 27, 2015.
*Who are the indiginous people(s) of the Palestine region?*

 The people who currently identify as Jewish, regardless of where they were born
 The people who currently identify as Palestinian, regardless of where they were born
 Any people who aren't Muslim
 Any people who aren't Jewish
 People of various religions, who's ancestors have lived there for hundreds of years.

This voting can not be correct about Palestine because still a lot of Muslim don't use Internet. If some used but they don't used those sites or forum have support or leaning to israel.
As long as it is concern; Who is indigenous? then I will say we should know the meaning of indigenous/native. "(There is a very important *difference between native *and *indigenous* plant species. ... Well *native* means that the plant is *native* to anywhere in Australia. But *indigenous* means that it comes from a certain area, like the Grampians or even more specific such as one valley.Sep 2, 2013, Google)". Means if you consider jew indigenous then Arab are native and indigenous too.


----------



## Rehmani

Shusha said:


> Labelling Arab Muslim "Palestinians" an indigenous peoples stretches the definition of the term far past breaking point:
> 
> _“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.
> 
> “This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:
> 
> a)  Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
> 
> b)  Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
> 
> c)  Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
> 
> d)  Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
> 
> e)  Residence on certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
> 
> f)  Other relevant factors.
> 
> “On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous populations through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by these populations as one of its members (acceptance by the group).
> 
> “This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference”
> _
> Source
> _
> _
> A culture of the invading and colonizing peoples, by definition, can not be indigenous.



_*May be ancestors left behind in Iraq, but There were no ancestors left behind in holly land, they all left to Cairo,Egypt. After Abraham,Isack And Jacob PBUH means jew lived in holly land only( not in Jerusalem) few years. But Arab Pagan always lived in jerusalem, Holly land. *_


----------



## Rehmani

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
Click to expand...

That is how history change its self.
"_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
Click to expand...


Artichoke??


----------



## rylah

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So is Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
Click to expand...


The Mishna in both Talmuds is mostly Hebrew,
the Aramaic version is called "Galilean Jewish Aramaic", it's the closest language to Hebrew among the semitic languages, and as with any language in use by Jews all was written using Hebrew alphabet.


----------



## Kat

*Stop the personal attacks, get back on topic, or leave the thread.*


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> The Palestinians aren’t just Arabs.


There is no "Palestinians" in Israel, there are Arabs. But once you cross the 1948 armistice lines, the same Arabs suddenly became "Palestinians". "Palestinians" is rather political notion than ethnic one.


----------



## tommyboy80

arabs are terrorist animals


----------



## rylah

tommyboy80 said:


> arabs are terrorist animals



Are You planning on starting to make sense, or just looking to get banned?


----------



## rylah




----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  rylah, tommyboy80, et al,

Tommy, you are truly inspiring*!*



rylah said:


> tommyboy80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> arabs are terrorist animals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are You planning on starting to make sense, or just looking to get banned?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

With the right kind of artwork, we could make a T-shirt and matching bumper sticker.

v/r
R


----------



## Rehmani

Rehmani said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> Israel disappeared around 700BC.  Almost 3000 years ago.  Roman maps referenced Palestine and Judea as separate regions.   I think  historically Palestine Has long been used,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
Click to expand...


Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, somehow while being busy "disappearing" they also managed to write
> the most famous "Palestinian" book, in Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with an artichoke??
Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.


----------



## rylah




----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, the Talmud is written in Aramaic.  The Tanakh (Bible) is in Hebrew though.
> 
> 
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
Click to expand...

No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read the page in the video... simple Hebrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> 
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
Click to expand...


He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.


----------



## rylah

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
Click to expand...


Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jerusalem Talmud is in in Hebrew, while the Babylonian Talmud is in Aramaic?  Or am I going crazy thinking I learned the Talmud in Aramaic back in high-school?
> 
> 
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> *ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem.*
> And Jew copy it but Muslim and Christian called it Holly Land.
Click to expand...


----------



## Rehmani

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is how history change its self.
> "_*(Jerusalem. holy city in ancient Palestine, from Greek Hierousalem , from Hebrew Yerushalayim , literally "foundation of peace," from base of yarah "he threw, cast" + shalom "peace." Jerusalem "artichoke" is folk etymology of Italian girasole "sunflowerGoogle)."*_
> But its not means you owned it. As you hardly lived in Holly land in pieces for few hundreds years. From Abraham, Isac and jacob PBUH (few decades) and then left for Egypt for over 1000 years as slave and after Moses you lived hardly may be couple of century and then again you slaved by Babylonian After syrus from persia you got refuge in holly land for couple of century but again you have to left for persia with the blame that you crucified Jesus PBUH and Roman kicked you out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
Click to expand...

1).One of the oldest cities in the world Jerusalem name came from Greek Word Hierousalem.


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, Some of you keep calling it Jerusalem came from hebru which is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
Click to expand...


Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Midrash says there are 70 names of Jerusalem – and that's in Jewish sources alone. The vagaries of Jerusalem history have added a few more along the way. Yet for a city whose roots go back over 5,000 years, some names have remained remarkably consistent. 

Here are just a few of the names of Jerusalem:









*Salem/Shalem* (Gen 14:18) – in Genesis, Shalem was the city ruled by Melchizedek in the days of Abraham.
*Moriah* (Gen 22:2) – the name of the Temple Mount, it is also the place where Abraham bound his son Isaac.
*Jebus* (Judges 19:10) – the name of a fortress atop the Temple Mount that surrounded a large threshing floor in the days of King David. King David conquered the area from the Jebusites and bought the threshing floor from its owner as the site of the future Temple.
*Yerushalayim* – is the most common name of the city in the Bible and the one still used by Jews and Israelis today. The Midrash says the word derives from _yireh_ (see), from the name Abraham used for it – G-d sees – and _salem_, which means whole, or peace, and was the name of Mechizedek’s city.


Variations of the name Yerushalayim appear in the archaeological record as well:


*Rushalimum* - Egyptian documents mention the city by this name around 2000-1800 BCE.
*Urusalim* – is the name given to Jerusalem in the Egyptian Amarna letters, which date back to between 1388-1332 BCE.
*Ursalimmu* – is how Sennacherib referred to the city in his letters concerning King Hezekiah in 701 BCE.


The first archaeological find of the name Yerushalayim written in Hebrew was discovered near the town of Lachish in a burial cave dating from the 6th century BCE. 

The Greeks called it *Hierosolyma*. This was more than a *simple transliteration of the Hebrew name, hiero means holy.*

During Roman times, the city was renamed Aelia Capitolina. Fortunately, Jerusalem was eventually rid of the Roman occupation and reverted to its real name of Yerushalayim.

Names of Jerusalem


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> 
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
Click to expand...


They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.


----------



## Rehmani

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
Click to expand...


Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you? 

Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.

Greek language/Wikipedia.  
"Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.

Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.

 Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land. 
*Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ." 

Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine? 
⁜→  Rehmani, et al,

No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.

At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.

Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.  

See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
*UN Factsheet*
◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.



Rehmani said:


> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.


*(COMMENT)*

This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.  

But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.


Indeed, like expulsion, theft, and death. All violations of the Palestinian's natural rights.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Rehmani said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
Click to expand...


Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.


----------



## Sixties Fan

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Sorry Rocco,  but your definition of Indigenous people would be fought very strongly by each and every actual indigenous people all over the world.

The UN's lack of definition of the world means absolutely nothing.

The Arab intent in applying that word to themselves in Ancient Canaan and make themselves the ancient  people calling themselves Palestinians is as clear as the clearest water anywhere in the world.

The Arabs are the only ethnicity in the world demanding indigenous status over a land they failed to make remain in Muslim hands.

They are SO indigenous, they do not think twice before destroying anything and everything they find which has nothing to do with the Arab Muslim invasion.  
They do not bother to say.....this was us.
They simply destroy and destroy.

That is not what any indigenous people in the world would ever do.

That is not what the Muslims were doing before WWI either.

Not even the Europeans have had the disrespect of doing that against all other indigenous people in the past 500 years.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry Rocco,  but your definition of Indigenous people would be fought very strongly by each and every actual indigenous people all over the world.
> 
> The UN's lack of definition of the world means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The Arab intent in applying that word to themselves in Ancient Canaan and make themselves the ancient  people calling themselves Palestinians is as clear as the clearest water anywhere in the world.
> 
> The Arabs are the only ethnicity in the world demanding indigenous status over a land they failed to make remain in Muslim hands.
> 
> They are SO indigenous, they do not think twice before destroying anything and everything they find which has nothing to do with the Arab Muslim invasion.
> They do not bother to say.....this was us.
> They simply destroy and destroy.
> 
> That is not what any indigenous people in the world would ever do.
> 
> That is not what the Muslims were doing before WWI either.
> 
> Not even the Europeans have had the disrespect of doing that against all other indigenous people in the past 500 years.
Click to expand...

Cool obfuscation.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry Rocco,  but your definition of Indigenous people would be fought very strongly by each and every actual indigenous people all over the world.
> 
> The UN's lack of definition of the world means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The Arab intent in applying that word to themselves in Ancient Canaan and make themselves the ancient  people calling themselves Palestinians is as clear as the clearest water anywhere in the world.
> 
> The Arabs are the only ethnicity in the world demanding indigenous status over a land they failed to make remain in Muslim hands.
> 
> They are SO indigenous, they do not think twice before destroying anything and everything they find which has nothing to do with the Arab Muslim invasion.
> They do not bother to say.....this was us.
> They simply destroy and destroy.
> 
> That is not what any indigenous people in the world would ever do.
> 
> That is not what the Muslims were doing before WWI either.
> 
> Not even the Europeans have had the disrespect of doing that against all other indigenous people in the past 500 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cool obfuscation.
Click to expand...

No answer at all from you.

Why?

Because you never can.


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population...... and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> ...This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.



Oh Rocco, you know I love you and agree with, like, 95% of your posts, but you are just wrong here.

While claims to territory and sovereignty over territory can shift and be "overtaken by events" no invading, colonizing, conquest culture EVER, EVER, EVER becomes indigenous. 

The entire point of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with its working definition of "indigenous peoples", is to provide protection to non-dominant, pre-existing peoples, to preserve their cultures, their sacred places and their way of life in their homeland and to enshrine, in law, these as inherent rights, along with the right of self-determination.  This unique set of rights NEVER applies to invading, colonizing, people because their culture, by definition, is not at risk. 

And the Jewish people, while being the only indigenous people in the world thus far to fully recover and reconstitute sovereignty in their homeland (though some Canadian and American First Nations are close), are still the non-dominant culture in their region, including some of their historical homeland.  They are surrounded by a culture which absolutely dominates the region through hundreds of years of invasion, conquest and colonization and Empire-building.  The Jewish people are still in need of the protection which is a right of all indigenous peoples. 

And far from being a "red herring" and irrelevant, this concept is the very foundation of the conflict.  The Arab Palestinians are deliberately twisting the concept of indigeneity in order to intentionally deny the Jewish people their rights to protection of their culture and sacred places and way of life.  They deliberately invert their culture and the indigenous Jewish culture, calling the Jewish people invaders and occupiers, in order to deny the Jewish people their inherent rights.  (Just as they have twisted other laws and apply them differently to Israel and the Jewish people.)

Rocco, don't be fooled.


----------



## José

This is RoccoR being lynched and then crucified by an angry, irrational mob for the "crime" of merely recognizing a reality that's in front of his eyes:

"*The europeans who founded the state of Israel 70 years ago didn't have a single drop of semitic blood running through their veins.

They were as foreigners in Palestine as Puritans in Massachussets.*"


----------



## Shusha

José said:


> This is RoccoR being lynched and then crucified by an angry, irrational mob for the "crime" of merely recognizing a reality that's in front of his eyes:
> 
> "*The europeans who founded the state of Israel 70 years ago didn't have a single drop of semitic blood running through their veins.
> 
> They were as foreigners in Palestine as Puritans in Massachussets.*"




Oh, give me a break.  Rocco is not being lynched by an angry mob.  Why does Team Palestine have to be so dramatic all the time?  Do you actually believe the false appeal to emotion helps your arguments?

The Jewish people, like all peoples, have a right to self-determination.  The Jewish people originated in Israel, Judea and Samaria.  That is where they are FROM.  Arguing that this is not true is simply ridiculous.  And it rejects or inverts every definition of history, peoples, indigeneity, or culture that has always operated in the world.  Because....Jooooos.  

The argument that, of course, the Hebrew people existed long ago in the area, built Temples and places of study and worship and tombs to their ancestors and cities; that they spoke Hebrew and Aramaic, and practiced the Jewish religion, and followed Jewish laws, both religious and secular, and celebrated Jews holidays and life celebrations, and then were conquered and disappeared.  And yet that those people in the world today -- including those who never left the homeland --  who also speak Hebrew, and practice the Jewish religion, and follow Jewish laws and celebrate Jewish holidays and life celebrations have NOTHING TO DO with the Hebrew people?!  I can hardly imagine a more ridiculous argument.


----------



## José

Ok Shusha I understand what you are trying to say...

The europeans who founded the state of Israel inherited the religious heritage of the ancient Jews and the cultural practices and idea of peoplehood associated with that religion and, according to you, this makes them indigenous to Palestine regardless of their DNA.

I understand your argument but that was not what Rocco and Rehmani were discussing.

They were clearly debating the genetic ancestry of Askhenazis:

*Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.*

*Rehmani*​*No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.*




​To be completely fair to Rocco, he's not saying european Jews are not genetic descendants of ancient Jews he's saying the whole issue is irrelevant... because it's in the past, because it "has been overtaken by events".

The reason Rocco tries to minimize the issue of the semitic ancestry of Askhenazis is that deep down his heart he knows it's all a big, pathetic joke that can't even be entertained as a serious idea that's worth of debate by anyone with an IQ above 70.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

José said:


> This is RoccoR being lynched and then crucified by an angry, irrational mob for the "crime" of merely recognizing a reality that's in front of his eyes:
> 
> "*The europeans who founded the state of Israel 70 years ago didn't have a single drop of semitic blood running through their veins.
> 
> They were as foreigners in Palestine as Puritans in Massachussets.*"



Aren't you the one who always posted pictures of blond-haired Jews, who aren't the majority of Jews anyway, and asked how could some Semitic ppl be blond?  Of course, that was before Shirley Temper became the poster child for the Palestinian cause by slapping around Israeli soldiers--the same Palestinian Shirley Temper with blond hair and blue eyes!  So much for your theory that Palestinians are Semitic but Jews could never be, due to skin and hair color!  By the way, I took a DNA test.  Although it confirmed that I'm 100% European, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.  And more than 50% of the Jews in Israel are Sephardic or Mizrahi--meaning that they came directly from Middle Eastern countries anyway.  Besides, as Shusha pointed out, the melodrama from your part is way over-the-top.


----------



## Rehmani

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

I agreed, but jew don't. Because that's how they are, and as we know that past always repeat and in case of jew it repeat quit rapidly. And I am sure you will stand by with yours comment for people of Palestine as well by then.


----------



## Rehmani

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
Click to expand...

Are hindu or jew?
Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.


----------



## Shusha

José said:


> Ok Shusha I understand what you are trying to say...
> 
> The europeans who founded the state of Israel inherited the religious heritage of the ancient Jews and the cultural practices and idea of peoplehood associated with that religion and, according to you, this makes them indigenous to Palestine regardless of their DNA.
> 
> I understand your argument but that was not what Rocco and Rehmani were discussing.
> 
> They were clearly debating the genetic ancestry of Askhenazis:
> 
> *Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.*
> 
> *Rehmani*​*No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​To be completely fair to Rocco, he's not saying european Jews are not genetic descendants of ancient Jews he's saying the whole issue is irrelevant... because it's in the past, because it "has been overtaken by events".
> 
> The reason Rocco tries to minimize the issue of the semitic ancestry of Askhenazis is that deep down his heart he knows it's all a big, pathetic joke that can't even be entertained as a serious idea that's worth of debate by anyone with an IQ above 70.



Genetics and DNA are irrelevant.  And ugly.  People's rights in this world are not a function of skin color, or genetics or DNA.  That is literally the basis of all sorts of bullshit which is nothing more than pseudo-science to justify atrocity.


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR 

Seriously, why did you "thank you" Jose' post?!  What am I not understanding about your POV here?


----------



## Rehmani

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Rehmani, et al,
> 
> No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.
> 
> At one point, the Europeans were the immigrants to North America.  It was a time when the various North American Indian tribal populations were indigenous.
> 
> Now, while the North American Indian tribal populations are still considered indigenous, most of those tribal populations have been relocated, and certainly, a vast majority of the territories have been assumed by the Europeans _(now North Americans)_ and now the Canadians and Americans are considered indigenous to any outside invaders.
> 
> See:  *Who are indigenous peoples*?
> *UN Factsheet*
> ◈  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This entire discussion about who is indigenous is a "Red Herring" and irrelevant to the current status of the Israelis and Arab Palestinians.  The Question of Palestine has been overtaken by events.  The Arab Palestinians have to live with the consequences of their political, military and diplomatic efforts → taken directly or by external parties on their behalf.
> 
> But the Israelis as a people or culture were invited to establish a Jewish National Home.  Whatever view the Arab Palestinians may hold, the agreed upon settlement process is the outcome of a series of actions and steps taken in order to achieve that goal.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry Rocco,  but your definition of Indigenous people would be fought very strongly by each and every actual indigenous people all over the world.
> 
> The UN's lack of definition of the world means absolutely nothing.
> 
> The Arab intent in applying that word to themselves in Ancient Canaan and make themselves the ancient  people calling themselves Palestinians is as clear as the clearest water anywhere in the world.
> 
> The Arabs are the only ethnicity in the world demanding indigenous status over a land they failed to make remain in Muslim hands.
> 
> They are SO indigenous, they do not think twice before destroying anything and everything they find which has nothing to do with the Arab Muslim invasion.
> They do not bother to say.....this was us.
> They simply destroy and destroy.
> 
> That is not what any indigenous people in the world would ever do.
> 
> That is not what the Muslims were doing before WWI either.
> 
> Not even the Europeans have had the disrespect of doing that against all other indigenous people in the past 500 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cool obfuscation.
Click to expand...


Its sign of frustration, Means people are loosing the debate, means Jew and their companion are invader means neither legitimate nor indigenous.


----------



## Sixties Fan

José said:


> Ok Shusha I understand what you are trying to say...
> 
> The europeans who founded the state of Israel inherited the religious heritage of the ancient Jews and the cultural practices and idea of peoplehood associated with that religion and, according to you, this makes them indigenous to Palestine regardless of their DNA.
> 
> I understand your argument but that was not what Rocco and Rehmani were discussing.
> 
> They were clearly debating the genetic ancestry of Askhenazis:
> 
> *Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.*
> 
> *Rehmani*​*No matter what you believe, or understand, or even can prove, there comes a point in time when the predominately immigrant populations transitions to the indigenous population.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​To be completely fair to Rocco, he's not saying european Jews are not genetic descendants of ancient Jews he's saying the whole issue is irrelevant... because it's in the past, because it "has been overtaken by events".
> 
> The reason Rocco tries to minimize the issue of the semitic ancestry of Askhenazis is that deep down his heart he knows it's all a big, pathetic joke that can't even be entertained as a serious idea that's worth of debate by anyone with an IQ above 70.


What absolute nonsense.

Mizrahi Jews spent 2700 years amongst people outside of Israel.  They kept their religion, their culture, and did not disappear when any invaders took over those lands, and those who came and conquered did not suddenly become indigenous to those places after those thousands 
of years, any more than the Jews did become the indigenous people of those lands, or ever attempted to call themselves by that word.

Do you know what I am talking about?

Which brings us to Jews who had spent an equal number of years outside of Israel in Europe.

Not only they did not change their religion and culture, unless by force and oppression during the times we know of in history (the same will be true of the Jews in Asia, even before those areas were taken over by the Kurdish or Arab Muslims, they have never called themselves the natives of any of the European Countries they lived in and therefore also the indigenous people to those lands.

BUT.......since so many Christians or Muslims cannot manage to look at Jews and see a human being, then.......

Today, Jews are not the indigenous people of ancient Canaan.
There never was any Jewish History in the area.
There is no archeological evidence of any Temples or Jewish History.
Jews from Europe are indigenous Europeans.
Sepharadim Jews are never mentioned, it must be because they do not exist.
Mizrahi Jews......well.....those really do not exist.

The issue is beyond relevant.

If it weren't, then so many Christians and Muslims would not be lying their heads off and nearly totally, if not totally, wiping out every existence of Jewish history, and attempting to wipe out every Jew in the world as well.


IT IS very relevant, or they would just live without making the amount of fuss they have been making since 1920 about any possible existence or the actual existence of Israel.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

José said:


> This is RoccoR being lynched and then crucified by an angry, irrational mob for the "crime" of merely recognizing a reality that's in front of his eyes:
> 
> "*The europeans who founded the state of Israel 70 years ago didn't have a single drop of semitic blood running through their veins.
> 
> They were as foreigners in Palestine as Puritans in Massachussets.*"



Perhaps it's just a coincidence on your part, but the crucifixion imagery is especially disconcerting, considering Jews have been called Christ-killers for centuries.
And even forgetting Mizrahi Jews for the moment, who represent more than half of Jewry, what's so unbelievable about European Jewry being Semitic?  You live in Europe, Spain I think.  Have you ever been to the Arch of Titus in Rome, which clearly depicts Jewish slaves being brought to Rome in the first century of the Common Era?  Have you heard of the historians Philo and Josephus?  There were certainly Jews in Europe who were descended from the Jews that used to live in Judea!
As for the Palestinians, many Arab immigrants came to Palestine AFTER the first and second Zionist waves of immigration.  This was clearly attested to by Churchill himself.  They were attracted to the area by the lucrative job opportunities presented by the Jews, after the Jews had drained the swamps and established farms (or kibbutzinm) and cities.  In fact, Sherri once posted a document on this Board, from the 1920's, saying that the population from Palestine was constantly being replenished by nomads from Saudi Arabia.  These were not indigenous ppl themselves by a long shot.


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Shusha*
> Oh, give me a break. Rocco is not being lynched by an angry mob. Why does Team Palestine have to be so dramatic all the time? Do you actually believe the false appeal to emotion helps your arguments?





> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> Besides, as Shusha pointed out, the melodrama from your part is way over-the-top.





> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> Perhaps it's just a coincidence on your part, but the crucifixion imagery is especially disconcerting, considering Jews have been called Christ-killers for centuries.



I had a feeling that people had not realized the enormity of what had just happened... hence the crucifixion scene.

The fact that RoccoR, a die-hard Zionist, does not believe in the semitic origin of Askhenazis speaks volumes about the unbelievable absurdity of the claim.

Rocco doesn't like to talk about the genetic origins of the idealizers and founders of the state of Israel and mass arab immigration to Palestine.

Why would a guy who so ardently, so passionately defend the cause of a safe haven for Jews in the Middle East, why would such a guy refrain from advocating these two zionist dogmas?

Why does a knowledgeable poster like RoccoR feel uncomfortable defending these two propositions that would tremendously advance the zionist cause, despite Shusha's objetions?

Because RoccoR knows the semitic origin of Askhenazis and the mass immigration of Arabs into Palestine in the last 200 years are two myths of the zionist movement.

He prefers not to voice his objection outloud, in a direct, open, blatant manner because he does not want to provide "ammunition" to the oppostion, but if you take your time to carefully analyze Rocco's participation in the discussions you'll notice a consistent pattern:

Everytime teddyearp, Coyote, ForeverYoung, Sixties Fan, Old Man Clanton among others start talking about "semitic" Askhenazis and arab mass immigration he immediately withdraws from the debate.


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> By the way, I took a DNA test. Although it confirmed that *I'm 100% European*, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.




First of all I have to praise in the most enthusiastic terms possible, ForeverYoung's almost unbelievable honesty.

He took his DNA test expecting to find the confirmation of his lifelong hope and belief that he was the descendant of palestinian Jews who moved to Europe centuries ago fleeing the roman onslaught.

What prevented ForeverYoung from lying to the entire Board about the results of his genetic test?

Absolutely nothing...

The only thing standing between the DNA results and a big lie was is moral integrity, the righteous nature of his character, his honesty...

This almost unbelievable sincerity deserves a standing ovation.

If everybody had half of ForeverYoung's integrity and compromise with the truth, the internet message boards would not be so full of PHds, nuclear physicists, tycoons and multimillionaires.

Having praised his sincerity enough, I have to say his DNA test proved me right.

We had numerous debates about the origin of the european jewish population and he used to say:

*"I'm a Cohen, I'm this, I'm that..."*​



And his DNA test said he is exactly what I said he was: an european of jewish faith.

The results of his DNA test were such a disapointment to him he even felt the need to focus his attention on the RESIDUAL VESTIGES of semitic DNA, the microscopic remnants of a tiny number of ancestors from the Middle East that are also shared by Europe's gentile population.

Any christian european who took a DNA test would also find microscopic genetic markers from the Middle East area so they mean absolutely nothing.

And I say these words feeling a world of sorrow for him... 

Stressing these genetic markers was his way to cope with the tremendous disillusionment and sadness his DNA test brought him just like Di Caprio desperately clunging to the pieces of wood floating around the Titanic.

So I say this with an extremely heavy heart, I feel sympathy for him.

The online world is often a callous world where a tiny minority of psychopaths mock even the passing of other people's relatives... if you can even imagine that... But I refuse to be like that.

FY is a good guy and I feel sorry his illusions were shattered by his DNA test.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

José said:


> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> By the way, I took a DNA test. Although it confirmed that *I'm 100% European*, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all I have to praise in the most enthusiastic terms possible, ForeverYoung's almost unbelievable honesty.
> 
> He took his DNA test expecting to find the confirmation of his lifelong hope and belief that he was the descendant of palestinian Jews who moved to Europe centuries ago fleeing the roman onslaught.
> 
> What prevented ForeverYoung from lying to the entire Board about the results of his genetic test?
> 
> Absolutely nothing...
> 
> The only thing standing between the DNA results and a big lie was is moral integrity, the righteous nature of his character, his honesty...
> 
> This almost unbelievable sincerity deserves a standing ovation.
> 
> If everybody had half of ForeverYoung's integrity and compromise with the truth, the internet message boards would not be so full of PHds, nuclear physicists, tycoons and multimillionaires.
> 
> Having praised his sincerity enough, I have to say his DNA test proved me right.
> 
> We had numerous debates about the origin of the european jewish population and he used to say:
> 
> *"I'm a Cohen, I'm this, I'm that..."*​
> 
> 
> 
> And his DNA test said he is exactly what I said he was: an european of jewish faith.
> 
> The results of his DNA test were such a disapointment to him he even felt the need to focus his attention on the RESIDUAL VESTIGES of semitic DNA, the microscopic remnants of a tiny number of ancestors from the Middle East that are also shared by Europe's gentile population.
> 
> Any christian european who took a DNA test would also find microscopic genetic markers from the Middle East area so they mean absolutely nothing.
> 
> And I say these words feeling a world of sorrow for him...
> 
> Stressing these genetic markers was his way to cope with the tremendous disillusionment and sadness his DNA test brought him just like Di Caprio desperately clunging to the pieces of wood floating around the Titanic.
> 
> So I say this with an extremely heavy heart, I feel sympathy for him.
> 
> The online world is often a callous world where a tiny minority of psychopaths mock even the passing of other people's relatives... if you can even imagine that... But I refuse to be like that.
> 
> FY is a good guy and I feel sorry his illusions were shattered by his DNA test.
Click to expand...


Thank you for your compliments.  To set matters straight though:

1)  You keep on showing my avatar.  I don't know if you're aware of this, but the picture is of the actor Anthony Michael Hall.  My complexion is a bit darker than that, as was my hair (before most of it fell out).
2)  I didn't mention my Kohen status this time, because I would have to take a separate test for that.  The results of that test would probably also prove what I already know.
3)  I don't feel sorrow in the least.  The results are exactly what I expected, including what the genetic markers say--that my ancestors came from the Middle East.
4)  You didn't address any of my other points, such as Shirley Temper, the Palestinian poster child.
5)  You never told us that you were either a micro-biologist or anthropologist.  That's probably how you know with such precise certainty that all Ashkenazi Jews aren't descended from the ancient Judeans.  Can you please tell us, in your very expert opinion, who the Mizrahi or Sephardi Jews are descended from?


----------



## Shusha

José said:


> ...does not believe in the semitic origin of Askhenazis speaks volumes about the unbelievable absurdity of the claim.



Once again, this whole discussion about genetics is absurd and disgusting.  Once again, this type of genetic questioning has been used elsewhere in the world as an excuse to commit atrocities.  And once again, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples does not require a genetic test.  (Because its abhorrent to even suggest such a thing).  

Membership in a group of Indigenous Peoples is tested and measured by two things:  1.  self-identification.  2.  acceptance in the group.  These are, and should be, tests and measures based on shared culture and identity.  There is clearly, obviously, a shared sense of identity between Jewish people all over the world and between all Jewish people and the homeland on which the Jewish people originated.  

And, what other people in the world are subjected to the suggestion that in order to have self-determination in their OBVIOUS CULTURAL homeland that they must submit to GENETIC TESTING?!  Is anyone suggesting the Catalans can't have self-determination because they are not sufficiently separate from the Spanish?  Is anyone suggesting the Kurds need to be put through a genetic lab?  Is there a demand that Tibetans prove they aren't really just Chinese?  Or that Western Saharans are a sufficiently distinct genetic group to be worthy of self-determination?

Further (!), this blind, stupid obsession with ONLY the Ashkenazi portion of the wide and long Jewish Diaspora just reeks.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  Shusha, José*, *et al,

Ah yes, those little response buttons are a bit confusing at times. 



Shusha said:


> RoccoR
> 
> Seriously, why did you "thank you" Jose' post?!  What am I not understanding about your POV here?


*(COMMENT)*

I thanked José because he expressed himself with a constructive manner.  I may not always agree with someone, but I appreciate all forthright contributions.

I realize that there is just an inordinate number of ways to view the Question (of _Who are Indigenous Peoples?_).  (There is even a debate on the Question of "People" and Peoples."  *AND*  When the issue is expanded to the controversial topic of  "People who inhabited a land (1)* before it was conquered by colonial societies* and who (2)_* consider themselves distinct from the societies currently governing*_ those territories," then the discussion really jumps the rails.  When we look at the Middle East, one has to ask the questions:

◈  How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to extend or maintain its control over the existing people, for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?

◈  Who were the original indigenous populations before the any of the Empires extended control over the territories of the Middle East?​
One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.  I see that understanding in the comment by José.

We must remember that if the contemporary conflict starting with the establishment of Israel in 1948 continues on until 2948 _(a millennium-long war)_, the1948 Israel will have secured an autonomous Jewish Land for only one third the time that the Ancient Egyptians fought and defended their Empire _(3000 BC to 30 BC - the death of Cleopatra VII Philopator)_.  We need to put this struggle and argument into perspective.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Shusha, José*, *et al,
> 
> Ah yes, those little response buttons are a bit confusing at times.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR
> 
> Seriously, why did you "thank you" Jose' post?!  What am I not understanding about your POV here?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I thanked José because he expressed himself with a constructive manner.  I may not always agree with someone, but I appreciate all forthright contributions.
> 
> I realize that there is just an inordinate number of ways to view the Question (of _Who are Indigenous Peoples?_).  (There is even a debate on the Question of "People" and Peoples."  *AND*  When the issue is expanded to the controversial topic of  "People who inhabited a land (1)* before it was conquered by colonial societies* and who (2)_* consider themselves distinct from the societies currently governing*_ those territories," then the discussion really jumps the rails.  When we look at the Middle East, one has to ask the questions:
> 
> ◈  How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to extend or maintain its control over the existing people, for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?
> 
> ◈  Who were the original indigenous populations before the any of the Empires extended control over the territories of the Middle East?​
> One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.  I see that understanding in the comment by José.
> 
> We must remember that if the contemporary conflict starting with the establishment of Israel in 1948 continues on until 2948 _(a millennium-long war)_, the1948 Israel will have secured an autonomous Jewish Land for only one third the time that the Ancient Egyptians fought and defended their Empire _(3000 BC to 30 BC - the death of Cleopatra VII Philopator)_.  We need to put this struggle and argument into perspective.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> ◈ How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to *extend or maintain its control over the existing people,* for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?


Palestine had been conquered and occupied many times. However, each conquest was not a new country with a whole new population. It was not a list of different countries. It was merely different periods in Palestine's history. Surely people have come and gone over the centuries. Some stayed and mingled into the original population. However, the Palestinians are an ancient people who go back to the beginning of time.


----------



## José

You're preaching to the choir, Tinmore.

Rocco has been debating the conflict in Palestine with us for almost 10 years now and he never said a word about the so-called massive arab immigration into Palestine to take advantage of jobs offered by the zionists.

We should concentrate our efforts on making Sixties Fan, Coyote, Old Man Clanton and ForeverYoung see the light, not Rocco...

Rocco is a zionist for sure but he believes even zionist propaganda must meet some quality standards and he recognizes the arab mass immigration into Palestine as the total garbage it is.
__________________________________________________________________________________

Originally posted by José
Because RoccoR knows the semitic origin of Askhenazis and *the mass immigration of Arabs into Palestine in the last 200 years* are two myths of the zionist movement.

He prefers not to voice his objection outloud, in a direct, open, blatant manner because he does not want to provide "ammunition" to the oppostion, but if you take your time to carefully analyze Rocco's participation in the discussions you'll notice a consistent pattern:

Everytime teddyearp, Coyote, ForeverYoung, Sixties Fan, Old Man Clanton among others start talking about "semitic" Askhenazis and *arab mass immigration* he immediately withdraws from the debate.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Shusha, José*, *et al,
> 
> Ah yes, those little response buttons are a bit confusing at times.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR
> 
> Seriously, why did you "thank you" Jose' post?!  What am I not understanding about your POV here?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I thanked José because he expressed himself with a constructive manner.  I may not always agree with someone, but I appreciate all forthright contributions.
> 
> I realize that there is just an inordinate number of ways to view the Question (of _Who are Indigenous Peoples?_).  (There is even a debate on the Question of "People" and Peoples."  *AND*  When the issue is expanded to the controversial topic of  "People who inhabited a land (1)* before it was conquered by colonial societies* and who (2)_* consider themselves distinct from the societies currently governing*_ those territories," then the discussion really jumps the rails.  When we look at the Middle East, one has to ask the questions:
> 
> ◈  How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to extend or maintain its control over the existing people, for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?
> 
> ◈  Who were the original indigenous populations before the any of the Empires extended control over the territories of the Middle East?​
> One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.  I see that understanding in the comment by José.
> 
> We must remember that if the contemporary conflict starting with the establishment of Israel in 1948 continues on until 2948 _(a millennium-long war)_, the1948 Israel will have secured an autonomous Jewish Land for only one third the time that the Ancient Egyptians fought and defended their Empire _(3000 BC to 30 BC - the death of Cleopatra VII Philopator)_.  We need to put this struggle and argument into perspective.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ◈ How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to *extend or maintain its control over the existing people,* for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine had been conquered and occupied many times. However, each conquest was not a new country with a whole new population. It was not a list of different countries. It was merely different periods in Palestine's history. Surely people have come and gone over the centuries. Some stayed and mingled into the original population. However, the Palestinians are an ancient people who go back to the beginning of time.
Click to expand...

WRONG.

Because you would have to apply this methodology to everywhere in the world, and guess what?

You will never do it.  Only to "Palestine".


----------



## Sixties Fan

José said:


> You're preaching to the choir, Tinmore.
> 
> Rocco has been debating the conflict in Palestine with us for almost 10 years now and he never said a word about the so-called massive arab immigration into Palestine to take advantage of jobs offered by the zionists.
> 
> We should concentrate our efforts on making Sixties Fan, Coyote, Old Man Clanton and ForeverYoung see the light, not Rocco...
> 
> Rocco is a zionist for sure but he believes even zionist propaganda must meet some quality standards and he recognizes the arab mass immigration into Palestine as the total garbage it is.
> __________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Originally posted by José
> Because RoccoR knows the semitic origin of Askhenazis and *the mass immigration of Arabs into Palestine in the last 200 years* are two myths of the zionist movement.
> 
> He prefers not to voice his objection outloud, in a direct, open, blatant manner because he does not want to provide "ammunition" to the oppostion, but if you take your time to carefully analyze Rocco's participation in the discussions you'll notice a consistent pattern:
> 
> Everytime teddyearp, Coyote, ForeverYoung, Sixties Fan, Old Man Clanton among others start talking about "semitic" Askhenazis and *arab mass immigration* he immediately withdraws from the debate.


What an amazing pudding you have cooked.

No proofs of anything you said.  Just words, and the ones in red are very underwhelming.

Show some proof to the pudding.


----------



## Sixties Fan

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Shusha, José*, *et al,
> 
> Ah yes, those little response buttons are a bit confusing at times.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR
> 
> Seriously, why did you "thank you" Jose' post?!  What am I not understanding about your POV here?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I thanked José because he expressed himself with a constructive manner.  I may not always agree with someone, but I appreciate all forthright contributions.
> 
> I realize that there is just an inordinate number of ways to view the Question (of _Who are Indigenous Peoples?_).  (There is even a debate on the Question of "People" and Peoples."  *AND*  When the issue is expanded to the controversial topic of  "People who inhabited a land (1)* before it was conquered by colonial societies* and who (2)_* consider themselves distinct from the societies currently governing*_ those territories," then the discussion really jumps the rails.  When we look at the Middle East, one has to ask the questions:
> 
> ◈  How many times were the various territories in the Middle East subject to the political expansionist policies that sought to extend or maintain its control over the existing people, for economic or political gain; as well as commerical opportunities?
> 
> ◈  Who were the original indigenous populations before the any of the Empires extended control over the territories of the Middle East?​
> One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.  I see that understanding in the comment by José.
> 
> We must remember that if the contemporary conflict starting with the establishment of Israel in 1948 continues on until 2948 _(a millennium-long war)_, the1948 Israel will have secured an autonomous Jewish Land for only one third the time that the Ancient Egyptians fought and defended their Empire _(3000 BC to 30 BC - the death of Cleopatra VII Philopator)_.  We need to put this struggle and argument into perspective.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

<<<One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.>>>


Where exactly did you get this idea from?


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Sixties Fan*
> No proofs of anything you said. Just words, and the ones in red are very underwhelming.
> 
> Show some proof to the pudding.



_*Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit*_

"*The burden of proof is always on the person who brings a claim in a dispute.*"

Sixties Fan claims arabs immigrated in large numbers to Palestine in the last 120 years so Sixties Fan has to prove her allegation not José or Tinmore.

Demanding others to disprove your own statement is known as "inversion of the burden of proof".

The problem is Sixties Fan cannot find any evidence to back up her allegation in any neutral, world renowned encyclopedia like Britannica, Larousse, etc...

All the "evidence" Sixties Fan presents comes either from zionist sources or straight out of her ass.


----------



## Sixties Fan

José said:


> Originally posted by *Sixties Fan*
> No proofs of anything you said. Just words, and the ones in red are very underwhelming.
> 
> Show some proof to the pudding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit*_
> 
> "*The burden of proof is always on the person who brings a claim in a dispute.*"
> 
> Sixties Fan claims arabs immigrated in large numbers to Palestine in the last 120 years so Sixties Fan has to prove her allegation not José or Tinmore.
> 
> Demanding others to disprove your own statement is known as "inversion of the burden of proof".
> 
> The problem is Sixties Fan cannot find any evidence to back up her allegation in any neutral, world renowned encyclopedia like Britannica, Larousse, etc...
> 
> All the "evidence" Sixties Fan presents comes either from zionist sources or straight out of her ass.
Click to expand...

Your Larger than life BS  has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine had been conquered and occupied many times. However, each conquest was not a new country with a whole new population. It was not a list of different countries. It was merely different periods in Palestine's history. Surely people have come and gone over the centuries. Some stayed and mingled into the original population. However, the Palestinians are an ancient people who go back to the beginning of time.



Well, sure.  As long as you make the term "Palestinian" a meaningless term not based on the rights of self-determination of any specific cultural peoples.  As long as you reduce "Palestinian" to "whoever happens to be living there at the moment".  As in, some people have been living there "since the beginning of time", therefore anyone living there now is part of the "ancient people".  And any who left (regardless of reason) is no longer part of the "ancient people".  

Um.  Okay.  If you want to ditch the whole concept of self-determination for every cultural peoples, fine by me.  You want to give equal weight to everyone who steps onto the soil, fine be me..  You just solved the right of return problem, the "settlements" problem, the Jerusalem problem, and really any problem that exists.


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> I thanked José because he expressed himself with a constructive manner.  I may not always agree with someone, but I appreciate all forthright contributions.



Ah.  Hero cookies for Team Palestine not being destructive.


----------



## Shusha

RoccoR said:


> I realize that there is just an inordinate number of ways to view the Question (of _Who are Indigenous Peoples?_)



No, there isn't.  Words have meanings.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→  Sixties Fan,* *et al,

It is based on (in my case) the reasoning that the truth is an accumulation of the various arguments_ (the premise of_ "indigenous population _*(undefined)*_" is only one piece of evidence _(shaky as it is)_ for the conclusion that the Arab Palestinians had some undeniable claim to total sovereignty over the entirety of the territory formerly under the Mandate.   No one single argument is representative of the truth.  Certainly, the Israelis did not forcibly take any sovereign territory away from the Arab Palestinians.  The Arab Palestinians never had control of any sovereign territory during the contemporary period of the 20th Century _(not one single square inch)_.  Thus during the 20th Century, the Arab Palestinians did not have any territory they can claim as lost or taken from them. 

In this particular case, not once has the case for the Arab Palestinian been made for the premise that they are the "indigenous population", since there is no universally accepted definition for them to base this claim upon.  Nor have they made a case for the Arab Palestinians having ever (EVER) had the "right and title" to the territory within such boundaries as was fixed by the Allied Powers.  The territory was named by the Allied Powers, assumed under Treaty and International acceptance at the end of the Great War.



Sixties Fan said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing we know for sure is that all the parties, with some gain to be had, over the Question of Palestine, shape, craft, mold and interpret anything and everything in order to establish some pre-existing claim and invalidate their opponents claim.
> 
> 
> 
> Where exactly did you get this idea from?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The conclusion to the deductive argument is a clear reality → is what it is; the territory was under the control of the Allied Powers is not just based upon the evidence given → it actual is the evidence given.

The Israelis never took a square inch of land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.  This again is not a fanciful argument _(legal quibbling or some preponderance of evidence)_, → but is an actual fact.

This particular thread on the matter of "who is considered indigenous to Palestine" presupposes that the term "indigenous people" has some special and defined meaning particular to the Arab Palestinian over the of the Jewish People that established Israel.  Obviously, this is NOT the case.

*(SIDEBAR)*

_The Jewish People_ have suffered from historic injustices as a result of, _inter alia_, the dispossession of their lands, wealth and property, and territories, thus preventing them from development in accordance with their own needs and interests.  In recognition of this fact, beyond those of the inhabitants of the Occupied Enemy Territory at the end of the Great War, the Allied Powers determined that a Jewish National Home was necessary.

Today, after seven decades of the Arab League attempting to crush this decision and to overturn the human development of the Jewish People, well beyond that experienced by any other Arab Country (MENA), Israel represents an outcome of that decision.   The Israeli People have the best of the long and healthy life, education, scientific development, economic success and standard of living of any country MENA.

This is a testament of the validity of the decision behind the San Remo Convention of 1920.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine had been conquered and occupied many times. However, each conquest was not a new country with a whole new population. It was not a list of different countries. It was merely different periods in Palestine's history. Surely people have come and gone over the centuries. Some stayed and mingled into the original population. However, the Palestinians are an ancient people who go back to the beginning of time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, sure.  As long as you make the term "Palestinian" a meaningless term not based on the rights of self-determination of any specific cultural peoples.  As long as you reduce "Palestinian" to "whoever happens to be living there at the moment".  As in, some people have been living there "since the beginning of time", therefore anyone living there now is part of the "ancient people".  And any who left (regardless of reason) is no longer part of the "ancient people".
> 
> Um.  Okay.  If you want to ditch the whole concept of self-determination for every cultural peoples, fine by me.  You want to give equal weight to everyone who steps onto the soil, fine be me..  You just solved the right of return problem, the "settlements" problem, the Jerusalem problem, and really any problem that exists.
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> As in, some people have been living there "since the beginning of time", therefore anyone living there now is part of the "ancient people". And any who left (regardless of reason) is no longer part of the "ancient people".


Where is the evidence that the Zionists who now occupy Palestine have any ancestors from the Holy Land?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine had been conquered and occupied many times. However, each conquest was not a new country with a whole new population. It was not a list of different countries. It was merely different periods in Palestine's history. Surely people have come and gone over the centuries. Some stayed and mingled into the original population. However, the Palestinians are an ancient people who go back to the beginning of time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, sure.  As long as you make the term "Palestinian" a meaningless term not based on the rights of self-determination of any specific cultural peoples.  As long as you reduce "Palestinian" to "whoever happens to be living there at the moment".  As in, some people have been living there "since the beginning of time", therefore anyone living there now is part of the "ancient people".  And any who left (regardless of reason) is no longer part of the "ancient people".
> 
> Um.  Okay.  If you want to ditch the whole concept of self-determination for every cultural peoples, fine by me.  You want to give equal weight to everyone who steps onto the soil, fine be me..  You just solved the right of return problem, the "settlements" problem, the Jerusalem problem, and really any problem that exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> As in, some people have been living there "since the beginning of time", therefore anyone living there now is part of the "ancient people". And any who left (regardless of reason) is no longer part of the "ancient people".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where is the evidence that the Zionists who now occupy Palestine have any ancestors from the Holy Land?
Click to expand...


Why is that a meaningful question?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The Israelis never took a square inch of land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.


Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?

*ARTICLE 4*
States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
Click to expand...


Did you notice the term “states”?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
⁜→ Sixties Fan,* *et al,

I believe you to be wrong.

Sovereignty is NOT dependent on "military force or military strength.

Military might is a defense of the right of a State _(to the exclusion of any other States)_  to exercise sole authority over its own territory. [Sovereign equality _(supreme power or authority)_ applied to UN Members, Article 2(1) UN Charter)]

Sovereignty is but one of several component parts to "self-determination."  "Self-determination encompasses so many is-sues—including individual and minority rights, regional autonomy, government repression, territorial integrity, state sovereignty, and claims to independence, to name but a few—the most difficult task in planning such a meeting was to determine which aspects of the issue would be addressed." 
See:  REPORT FROM ROUNDTABLE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S POLICY PLANNING STAFF, US Institute for Peace, (Author: Patricia Carley)



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of the land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project: Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

*NOTE:*  "Judicial Equality" is NOT the same thing as "Sovereign Equality."  The US, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are all Sovereign in their own right.  It does not mean that any of them equal before the law _(domestically or internationally)_.​Your argument has three important components:  

✦  First is to suggest that the sovereignty of Israel, a state declared independent since May 1948, is somehow deminishedbecause it was successfully able to defende its status as an independent nation not just once, but three times, against acts of aggression by the surrounding Arab League States and the terrorism orchestrated by the separated band of Arab Criminals. 

✦  Secondly - upon the simple fact of its existence - somehow prevented the Arab Palestinians from participating in the establishment of self-governing institutions.

✦   The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."​
There is absolutely NO limitation on the Israelis to establish their own nation under international law.  This is especially true when combined with the fact that the Arrab Palestinians declined the offer to establish its own Article 22 self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan

Could we please not mix Who is Indigenous, with the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.  There is another thread for the second one.

Are the Arabs, any of them including the Palestinians INDIGENOUS to the Land of Israel, Ancient Canaan?

Are the Arabs descendants from ANY of the Seven Nations I mentioned in a previous post at the time Israel existed 3000 years ago, or did they happen to be there as a tribe, a Nation before 3000 years ago to be considered Indigenous of that land?

I posted the Nations and links to them.  Got no answer.


Were the Philistines indigenous to Ancient Canaan, even though they created an Empire over 3000 years ago and conquered a lot of the land?


WHO is Indigenous?

What does Indigenous mean?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ Sixties Fan,* *et al,
> 
> I believe you to be wrong.
> 
> Sovereignty is NOT dependent on "military force or military strength.
> 
> Military might is a defense of the right of a State _(to the exclusion of any other States)_  to exercise sole authority over its own territory. [Sovereign equality _(supreme power or authority)_ applied to UN Members, Article 2(1) UN Charter)]
> 
> Sovereignty is but one of several component parts to "self-determination."  "Self-determination encompasses so many is-sues—including individual and minority rights, regional autonomy, government repression, territorial integrity, state sovereignty, and claims to independence, to name but a few—the most difficult task in planning such a meeting was to determine which aspects of the issue would be addressed."
> See:  REPORT FROM ROUNDTABLE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S POLICY PLANNING STAFF, US Institute for Peace, (Author: Patricia Carley)
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of the land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project: Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *NOTE:*  "Judicial Equality" is NOT the same thing as "Sovereign Equality."  The US, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are all Sovereign in their own right.  It does not mean that any of them equal before the law _(domestically or internationally)_.​Your argument has three important components:
> 
> ✦  First is to suggest that the sovereignty of Israel, a state declared independent since May 1948, is somehow deminishedbecause it was successfully able to defende its status as an independent nation not just once, but three times, against acts of aggression by the surrounding Arab League States and the terrorism orchestrated by the separated band of Arab Criminals.
> 
> ✦  Secondly - upon the simple fact of its existence - somehow prevented the Arab Palestinians from participating in the establishment of self-governing institutions.
> 
> ✦   The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."​
> There is absolutely NO limitation on the Israelis to establish their own nation under international law.  This is especially true when combined with the fact that the Arrab Palestinians declined the offer to establish its own Article 22 self-governing institutions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,


In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.

Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.

Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ Sixties Fan,* *et al,
> 
> I believe you to be wrong.
> 
> Sovereignty is NOT dependent on "military force or military strength.
> 
> Military might is a defense of the right of a State _(to the exclusion of any other States)_  to exercise sole authority over its own territory. [Sovereign equality _(supreme power or authority)_ applied to UN Members, Article 2(1) UN Charter)]
> 
> Sovereignty is but one of several component parts to "self-determination."  "Self-determination encompasses so many is-sues—including individual and minority rights, regional autonomy, government repression, territorial integrity, state sovereignty, and claims to independence, to name but a few—the most difficult task in planning such a meeting was to determine which aspects of the issue would be addressed."
> See:  REPORT FROM ROUNDTABLE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S POLICY PLANNING STAFF, US Institute for Peace, (Author: Patricia Carley)
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of the land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project: Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *NOTE:*  "Judicial Equality" is NOT the same thing as "Sovereign Equality."  The US, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are all Sovereign in their own right.  It does not mean that any of them equal before the law _(domestically or internationally)_.​Your argument has three important components:
> 
> ✦  First is to suggest that the sovereignty of Israel, a state declared independent since May 1948, is somehow deminishedbecause it was successfully able to defende its status as an independent nation not just once, but three times, against acts of aggression by the surrounding Arab League States and the terrorism orchestrated by the separated band of Arab Criminals.
> 
> ✦  Secondly - upon the simple fact of its existence - somehow prevented the Arab Palestinians from participating in the establishment of self-governing institutions.
> 
> ✦   The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."​
> There is absolutely NO limitation on the Israelis to establish their own nation under international law.  This is especially true when combined with the fact that the Arrab Palestinians declined the offer to establish its own Article 22 self-governing institutions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.
> 
> Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.
> 
> Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.
Click to expand...


What “Pal’istanian leaders” from around what state? Are you referring, as usual, to the farcical State of Pal’istan™️ That was created by the Treaty of Lausanne?

What land is under soverign control by the pseudo-government of the non-existent “State of Pal’istan”?


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ Sixties Fan,* *et al,
> 
> I believe you to be wrong.
> 
> Sovereignty is NOT dependent on "military force or military strength.
> 
> Military might is a defense of the right of a State _(to the exclusion of any other States)_  to exercise sole authority over its own territory. [Sovereign equality _(supreme power or authority)_ applied to UN Members, Article 2(1) UN Charter)]
> 
> Sovereignty is but one of several component parts to "self-determination."  "Self-determination encompasses so many is-sues—including individual and minority rights, regional autonomy, government repression, territorial integrity, state sovereignty, and claims to independence, to name but a few—the most difficult task in planning such a meeting was to determine which aspects of the issue would be addressed."
> See:  REPORT FROM ROUNDTABLE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S POLICY PLANNING STAFF, US Institute for Peace, (Author: Patricia Carley)
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of the land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project: Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *NOTE:*  "Judicial Equality" is NOT the same thing as "Sovereign Equality."  The US, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are all Sovereign in their own right.  It does not mean that any of them equal before the law _(domestically or internationally)_.​Your argument has three important components:
> 
> ✦  First is to suggest that the sovereignty of Israel, a state declared independent since May 1948, is somehow deminishedbecause it was successfully able to defende its status as an independent nation not just once, but three times, against acts of aggression by the surrounding Arab League States and the terrorism orchestrated by the separated band of Arab Criminals.
> 
> ✦  Secondly - upon the simple fact of its existence - somehow prevented the Arab Palestinians from participating in the establishment of self-governing institutions.
> 
> ✦   The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."​
> There is absolutely NO limitation on the Israelis to establish their own nation under international law.  This is especially true when combined with the fact that the Arrab Palestinians declined the offer to establish its own Article 22 self-governing institutions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.
> 
> Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.
> 
> Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.
Click to expand...

WRONG   thread.

Please transfer the Mandate discussion to the other thread.
Thank you !


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→ Sixties Fan,* *et al,
> 
> I believe you to be wrong.
> 
> Sovereignty is NOT dependent on "military force or military strength.
> 
> Military might is a defense of the right of a State _(to the exclusion of any other States)_  to exercise sole authority over its own territory. [Sovereign equality _(supreme power or authority)_ applied to UN Members, Article 2(1) UN Charter)]
> 
> Sovereignty is but one of several component parts to "self-determination."  "Self-determination encompasses so many is-sues—including individual and minority rights, regional autonomy, government repression, territorial integrity, state sovereignty, and claims to independence, to name but a few—the most difficult task in planning such a meeting was to determine which aspects of the issue would be addressed."
> See:  REPORT FROM ROUNDTABLE HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE’S POLICY PLANNING STAFF, US Institute for Peace, (Author: Patricia Carley)
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis never took a square inch of the land way from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign control is a function of military might not legal right?
> 
> *ARTICLE 4*
> States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.
> 
> The Avalon Project: Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *NOTE:*  "Judicial Equality" is NOT the same thing as "Sovereign Equality."  The US, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are all Sovereign in their own right.  It does not mean that any of them equal before the law _(domestically or internationally)_.​Your argument has three important components:
> 
> ✦  First is to suggest that the sovereignty of Israel, a state declared independent since May 1948, is somehow deminishedbecause it was successfully able to defende its status as an independent nation not just once, but three times, against acts of aggression by the surrounding Arab League States and the terrorism orchestrated by the separated band of Arab Criminals.
> 
> ✦  Secondly - upon the simple fact of its existence - somehow prevented the Arab Palestinians from participating in the establishment of self-governing institutions.
> 
> ✦   The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts."​
> There is absolutely NO limitation on the Israelis to establish their own nation under international law.  This is especially true when combined with the fact that the Arrab Palestinians declined the offer to establish its own Article 22 self-governing institutions.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 1933 Montevideo Convention also says that "political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.
> 
> Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.
> 
> Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> WRONG   thread.
> 
> Please transfer the Mandate discussion to the other thread.
> Thank you !
Click to expand...

OK.

The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Where is the evidence that the Zionists who now occupy Palestine have any ancestors from the Holy Land?



This is only a little twist on the whole DNA argument, merely substituting "ancestors" for "genetics".  You're asking the wrong question, I suspect deliberately.  

The requirements for indigeneity are: group of people with a distinct culture, who originated on and have historical ties to a specific territory, pre-invasion, pre-colonization.  The test whether a specific individual belongs to the group is self-identification and acceptance.  

There is nothing about ancestors or ancestry.  How would you even measure that, anyway?  How far back would those ancestors have to go to be valid?  One generation?  Five?  A hundred?  What happens to the people who don't have the right "ancestry"?  And if we apply this to the Jewish people, shouldn't we also apply this to the Arab Palestinians?  What objective "ancestry" criteria are you suggesting?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the evidence that the Zionists who now occupy Palestine have any ancestors from the Holy Land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is only a little twist on the whole DNA argument, merely substituting "ancestors" for "genetics".  You're asking the wrong question, I suspect deliberately.
> 
> The requirements for indigeneity are: group of people with a distinct culture, who originated on and have historical ties to a specific territory, pre-invasion, pre-colonization.  The test whether a specific individual belongs to the group is self-identification and acceptance.
> 
> There is nothing about ancestors or ancestry.  How would you even measure that, anyway?  How far back would those ancestors have to go to be valid?  One generation?  Five?  A hundred?  What happens to the people who don't have the right "ancestry"?  And if we apply this to the Jewish people, shouldn't we also apply this to the Arab Palestinians?  What objective "ancestry" criteria are you suggesting?
Click to expand...

The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the evidence that the Zionists who now occupy Palestine have any ancestors from the Holy Land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is only a little twist on the whole DNA argument, merely substituting "ancestors" for "genetics".  You're asking the wrong question, I suspect deliberately.
> 
> The requirements for indigeneity are: group of people with a distinct culture, who originated on and have historical ties to a specific territory, pre-invasion, pre-colonization.  The test whether a specific individual belongs to the group is self-identification and acceptance.
> 
> There is nothing about ancestors or ancestry.  How would you even measure that, anyway?  How far back would those ancestors have to go to be valid?  One generation?  Five?  A hundred?  What happens to the people who don't have the right "ancestry"?  And if we apply this to the Jewish people, shouldn't we also apply this to the Arab Palestinians?  What objective "ancestry" criteria are you suggesting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what the Arabs are.  Ludicrous.

Not only their ancestral religion, culture and dealing with other peoples did not start in Ancient Canaan, their "Right Of Return" to what is now Israel  is non existent exactly because their people and culture did not start there.

The Jewish people have more than proven that their religion, culture and dealings with other peoples and invaders originated in ancient Canaan.

Go visit the Palestinian Museum in Ramallah .   The proof of Arab Palestinian indigenous status to Ancient Canaan is all there.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.



The Jewish people belong to the distinct cultural group which originated in that historical homeland.  They share that culture, self-identify and are accepted into the group.  Done.  

Besides, how would you propose to go about "proving" they had ancestors there?

But it does demonstrate WHY you try to create this ridiculous disconnect between Israel and the Jewish people.  You are deliberately trying to make the return "ludicrous".


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.



Saying that Arabs have been there since the "beginning of time" is ludicrous.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saying that Arabs have been there since the "beginning of time" is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention Arabs.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saying that Arabs have been there since the "beginning of time" is ludicrous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't mention Arabs.
Click to expand...

Abbas does.  Rehmani now does, and so too many others.

If not Arabs, who else are you referring to as having "the Right of Return" which is NOT the subject of this thread, as that was invented after 1967 when Jordan and Egypt lost the lands they had conquered in 1948?

And.....has nothing to do with the creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that "returning" to a land where you had no ancestors in ludicrous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saying that Arabs have been there since the "beginning of time" is ludicrous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't mention Arabs.
Click to expand...



Yes, I know you didn't.  You keep trying to pretend there is a group called "Palestinian" which is inclusive of both Arabs and some Jews.  But there isn't.


----------



## Rehmani

*I will say this debate is won by the people of Palestine.*
By all means, It is proved now that Israelis are not indigenous to Holly Land (Jerusalem).
Jew are invader, transitory, visitor and vagrant, gypsy, vagabond.
Jew are every thing but not legitimate, indigenous and native to Holly Land at all.


----------



## José

You keep on showing my avatar. I don't know if you're aware of this, but the picture is of the actor Anthony Michael Hall.





Never heard of him.... he is or was a good looking young man.


----------



## José

By the way, I took a DNA test. Although it confirmed that *I'm 100% European*, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.

I don't feel sorrow in the least. *The results are exactly what I expected*, including what the genetic markers say--that my ancestors came from the Middle East.




The results were the exact opposite of what you expected them to be, ForeverYoung...

You wanted your DNA test to show you you were 100%, 70% or at least 40 % semitic, not 100% european!!!!

If you're DNA test confirmed you are 100% european, the genetic markers from the region around Syria you are so proud of correspond to a microscopic percentage of your genetic heritage.

Hundreds of millions of european christians, specially in Spain, Portugal and southern Italy also have a microscopic amount of semitic DNA so this has absolutely nothing to do with your religion.

Being 100% european means you are just like this guy:






You are exactly what I said you were: an european whose ancestors converted to Judaism.

Again, I admire your honesty but what's the point in continuing this discussion?

What's the point in destroying a fantasy that brings you so much joy?

The fantasy that your ancestors were palestinian Jews who moved to Europe to escape the wrath of the roman legions.

Your grotesque misinterpretation of your own DNA test makes you happy and that's all that matters.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

José said:


> By the way, I took a DNA test. Although it confirmed that *I'm 100% European*, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.
> 
> I don't feel sorrow in the least. *The results are exactly what I expected*, including what the genetic markers say--that my ancestors came from the Middle East.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The results were the exact opposite of what you expected them to be, ForeverYoung...
> 
> You wanted your DNA test to show you you were 100%, 70% or at least 40 % semitic, not 100% european!!!!
> 
> If you're DNA test confirmed you are 100% european, the genetic markers from the region around Syria you are so proud of correspond to a microscopic percentage of your genetic heritage.
> 
> Hundreds of millions of european christians, specially in Spain, Portugal and southern Italy also have a microscopic amount of semitic DNA so this has absolutely nothing to do with your religion.
> 
> Being 100% european means you are just like this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are exactly what I said you were: an european whose ancestors converted to Judaism.
> 
> Again, I admire your honesty but what's the point in continuing this discussion?
> 
> What's the point in destroying a fantasy that brings you so much joy?
> 
> The fantasy that your ancestors were palestinian Jews who moved to Europe to escape the wrath of the roman legions.
> 
> Your grotesque misinterpretation of your own DNA test makes you happy and that's all that matters.



The makers of this test don't know me and had no idea what I was looking for.  Nevertheless, the report made a very big deal about the fact that my ancestors came from Syria, and they even put a star next to it on a map in included in my report.  It was the only country on this map of the world with a star next to it.  The test cost 35 dollars.  For 100 dollars, I could've gotten a fuller report with details of the migration from the Syrian area to Europe, but I was not prepared to spend that kind of money.  And then there is also that special Kohen chromosome, which I haven't even explored yet.  Furthermore, you have still not explained the blond-haired, blue-eyed Palestinian poster child who slapped around the Israeli soldiers.  So please do that.


----------



## rylah

José said:


> By the way, I took a DNA test. Although it confirmed that *I'm 100% European*, there were also genetic markers indicating that I'm descended from ppl who originally came from the Middle East area.
> 
> I don't feel sorrow in the least. *The results are exactly what I expected*, including what the genetic markers say--that my ancestors came from the Middle East.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The results were the exact opposite of what you expected them to be, ForeverYoung...
> 
> You wanted your DNA test to show you you were 100%, 70% or at least 40 % semitic, not 100% european!!!!
> 
> If you're DNA test confirmed you are 100% european, the genetic markers from the region around Syria you are so proud of correspond to a microscopic percentage of your genetic heritage.
> 
> Hundreds of millions of european christians, specially in Spain, Portugal and southern Italy also have a microscopic amount of semitic DNA so this has absolutely nothing to do with your religion.
> 
> Being 100% european means you are just like this guy:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are exactly what I said you were: an european whose ancestors converted to Judaism.
> 
> Again, I admire your honesty but what's the point in continuing this discussion?
> 
> What's the point in destroying a fantasy that brings you so much joy?
> 
> The fantasy that your ancestors were palestinian Jews who moved to Europe to escape the wrath of the roman legions.
> 
> Your grotesque misinterpretation of your own DNA test makes you happy and that's all that matters.



The common mistake of the Neo-Nazis, is to mask blood purity fantasies with linguistic cultural terms an DNA. Then follows a mad attempt at rating whole nations with that pseudoscience.

*The theme of indigeneity is not about blood purity or DNA, but literally about preservation of a civilization , as quoted in the international law and definitions of the term.*


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with an artichoke??
> Jerusalem is indeed a Hebrew name, theres no meaning for that word in Arabic.
> 
> 
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
Click to expand...


Well, it's Your quote that says otherwise.
How come there's no meaning for the name in Greek while giving several names in Hebrew?


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
Click to expand...


Hodi = Hindu
Yehudi = Jew

Makes all the sense in Hebrew...


----------



## Shusha

rylah said:


> The common mistake of the Neo-Nazis, is to mask blood purity fantasies with linguistic cultural terms an DNA. Then follows a mad attempt at rating whole nations with that pseudoscience....



Well, not whole nation*S.  *Only the Jewish nation.  No one else is subjected to blood purity pseudoscience.


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
Click to expand...

These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it is not hebru it is Greek word. And if Arab and Christian called it Holly Land then whats wrong with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, it's Your quote that says otherwise.
> How come there's no meaning for the name in Greek while giving several names in Hebrew?
Click to expand...

Look you continuously bringing this type nonsense it won't change the fact that Israel is not legitimate and jew are not indigenous from holly land. 
Do your own search.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They say, "You can't fix stupid."  The Greek version is simply a transliteration (if you know what that means) of the Hebrew name of the city.  The Hebrew word Shalem means Complete, because Jerusalem is complete and holy.  It is also a derivation of Shalom, the Hebrew word for Peace.  Abraham called the city Yireh, meaning that Gd "Sees" or looks at that city.  King Melchizedek  of the city (whom some identify as Shem, son of Noah) called it Shalem (the meanings of which I explained earlier).  Jerusalem (or Yerushalayim in Hebrew) is a combination of those 2 names for the city.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
Click to expand...


How do easterners look?
Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this why Your quote mentions several meanings of the name in Hebrew,
> and not a single meaning of the name in Greek?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, it's Your quote that says otherwise.
> How come there's no meaning for the name in Greek while giving several names in Hebrew?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look you continuously bringing this type nonsense it won't change the fact that Israel is not legitimate and jew are not indigenous from holly land.
> Do your own search.
Click to expand...


I should do a research to prove Your nonsense?


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't know what you're talking about because he can't speak Hebrew.  "Foundation of peace", the meaning of the name, comes from Hebrew.  The Greek form of the name was adapted from Hebrew and it doesn't have any meaning in the Greek language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jerusalem, Cna'an and Palestine are simply names in Hebrew, no real meaning in Greek.
> I'm still waiting for his explanation regarding the "Artichoke"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Search Net and correct yours nonsense; "Jerusalem nomes comes from Greek Hierousalem"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, it's Your quote that says otherwise.
> How come there's no meaning for the name in Greek while giving several names in Hebrew?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Look you continuously bringing this type nonsense it won't change the fact that Israel is not legitimate and jew are not indigenous from holly land.
> Do your own search.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I should do a research to prove Your nonsense?
Click to expand...


You can't.


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well then its means you are not fixable..... Are you?
> 
> Second why you are looking at those things like this name is not from here and that name is not from there because it is made you felt better. While it is wrong you are telling to master that they are wrong and you are right.
> If these expert are sharing there views on internet that "Jerusalem name comes from Greek Hierousalem" its mot means they are fool., it means you are idiot who telling to others by manipulating these ancient names.
> 
> Greek language/Wikipedia.
> "Greek has been spoken in the Balkan peninsula since around the 3rd millennium BC,[8] or possibly earlier."
> While jew enter in the holly land 2 millennium BC only for few decade and then left for Cairo,Egypt.
> 
> Why are you thinking that I will believe idiot like you who is full of lies.
> 
> Not only Greek was in Holly Land before Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic was there too, now Arabic is new form of Aramaic.
> Means eurushalem, Hierousalem, Jerusalem all these pronunciation carrying word pronounce "Salem, Salam, Shalam came from Arabic/Aramaic connection and sound like Hebrew enriched itself from these languages after moving into holly land.
> *Aramaic* "The Aramaic alphabet was widely adopted for other languages and is ancestral to the Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic alphabets. During its approximately 3,100 years of written history,[3] Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires, as a language of divine worship and religious study, and as the spoken tongue of a number of Semitic peoples from the Near East ."
> 
> Stop your nonsense and accept the fact that Jew are not indigenous to Holly Land and they are invader or Transit-er or visitor or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
Click to expand...

You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews are the indigenous people of the Holy Land...in fact it's thanks to us that it's even called the Holy Land.  The only one who is a transit-er or invader or vagrant is YOU, who have stolen a huge chunk of India from the indigenous Hindus.
> 
> 
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
Click to expand...


Dude 
Don't forget lizards!




because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..

And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are hindu or jew?
> Facts are jew are invader from USA now, and in history from Iraq.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
Click to expand...


Please learn. 
Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God. 
If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
That is exactly my signature comments about.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hodi = Hindu
> Yehudi = Jew
> 
> Makes all the sense in Hebrew...
> 
> 
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please learn.
> Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
> Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God.
> If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
> That is exactly my signature comments about.
Click to expand...

I actually think it's a great disrespect for G-d's name, for His nation to live scattered and disrespected by others, but still that signature is utter nonsense, insult to the most basic common sense and intelligence.

Do You think it was respectful when Muslims invaded several continents,
and forced their religion on millions of people?


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> These people who are speaking hebrew, look like westerner than easterner means they can be from either from west or east europe. Means they can not be native/indigenous but  they can be gypsy or vagrant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please learn.
> Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
> Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God.
> If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
> That is exactly my signature comments about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually think it's a great disrespect for G-d's name, for His nation to live scattered and disrespected by others, but still that signature is utter nonsense, insult to the most basic common sense and intelligence.
> 
> Do You think it was respectful when Muslims invaded several continents,
> and forced their religion on millions of people?
Click to expand...

You are not jew, otherwise all jew know, why jew use the word g-d. I will tell you why? I asked to Rabbi why jew are using g-d instead of God or Ala in hebrew? He told me that to avoid the insult of "Ala" God. Now for you, this supplementary word g-d become valuable.
Did you agree with the Roman or Persian invasion before Islam? If not, means you won't be agree with islam too.
This world is base on free will. 
Any one who introduce the better idea, people will join him, despite the fact they are invaded by the Muslim and now after 1500 years those region are still living as muslim.
Similar thing happen in Europe.
And if the follower of Abraham PBUH do the same thing and spread the great idea given to jew by all prophets and don't keep to themselves instead they start to think they are special and keep the great idea by themselves.
Now you are telling to people that invasion is wrong because you can not invade or if you do with the help of some one but you can not hold it and if you can not hold, its even worst. 
Remember this world has free will. if you don't spread the great idea then someone else will come and spread the great idea. People will join him and that person will rule the world or part of the world.
In case of islam, because islam has a great idea and this Idea still spreading fast and people are joining it.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do easterners look?
> Actually the most distant eastern Jewish community has the most resemblance in dress and looks with the most distant european communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please learn.
> Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
> Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God.
> If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
> That is exactly my signature comments about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually think it's a great disrespect for G-d's name, for His nation to live scattered and disrespected by others, but still that signature is utter nonsense, insult to the most basic common sense and intelligence.
> 
> Do You think it was respectful when Muslims invaded several continents,
> and forced their religion on millions of people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not jew, otherwise all jew know, why jew use the word g-d. I will tell you why? I asked to Rabbi why jew are using g-d instead of God or Ala in hebrew? He told me that to avoid the insult of "Ala" God. Now for you, this supplementary word g-d become valuable.
> Did you agree with the Roman or Persian invasion before Islam? If not, means you won't be agree with islam too.
> This world is base on free will.
> Any one who introduce the better idea, people will join him, despite the fact they are invaded by the Muslim and now after 1500 years those region are still living as muslim.
> Similar thing happen in Europe.
> And if the follower of Abraham PBUH do the same thing and spread the great idea given to jew by all prophets and don't keep to themselves instead they start to think they are special and keep the great idea by themselves.
> Now you are telling to people that invasion is wrong because you can not invade or if you do with the help of some one but you can not hold it and if you can not hold, its even worst.
> Remember this world has free will. if you don't spread the great idea then someone else will come and spread the great idea. People will join him and that person will rule the world or part of the world.
> In case of islam, because islam has a great idea and this Idea still spreading fast and people are joining it.
Click to expand...


At least You are sincere enough to acknowledge all those are Jewish ideas.
The problem is Muslims have turned them into an excuse for their thirst for domination over whole continents and nations.

You guys literally demand to dominate the entire middle east, while the nation who according to You should be slaves and dhimmis, have become the leading society in the entire region. Providing a standard of living  and freedom to their citizens, that no Muslim rule ever achieved in all of those 14 centuries years of invasions and defeats.

The thing You can't comprehend is why G-d keeps all His promises to the Jewish nation,
and smites all their enemies in-spite the odds. A lot of it indeed has to do with fearing to pronounce the name of the Creator unlike all others.

Do You think calling Your parent by name is respectful?


----------



## Rehmani

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know that jew have ability to change their appearance as they did in germany, hitler didn't kill six ml jew. Jew learn 4 languages/religion. And mostly live undercover 100 ml of them. A life full of paranoid-ism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please learn.
> Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
> Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God.
> If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
> That is exactly my signature comments about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually think it's a great disrespect for G-d's name, for His nation to live scattered and disrespected by others, but still that signature is utter nonsense, insult to the most basic common sense and intelligence.
> 
> Do You think it was respectful when Muslims invaded several continents,
> and forced their religion on millions of people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not jew, otherwise all jew know, why jew use the word g-d. I will tell you why? I asked to Rabbi why jew are using g-d instead of God or Ala in hebrew? He told me that to avoid the insult of "Ala" God. Now for you, this supplementary word g-d become valuable.
> Did you agree with the Roman or Persian invasion before Islam? If not, means you won't be agree with islam too.
> This world is base on free will.
> Any one who introduce the better idea, people will join him, despite the fact they are invaded by the Muslim and now after 1500 years those region are still living as muslim.
> Similar thing happen in Europe.
> And if the follower of Abraham PBUH do the same thing and spread the great idea given to jew by all prophets and don't keep to themselves instead they start to think they are special and keep the great idea by themselves.
> Now you are telling to people that invasion is wrong because you can not invade or if you do with the help of some one but you can not hold it and if you can not hold, its even worst.
> Remember this world has free will. if you don't spread the great idea then someone else will come and spread the great idea. People will join him and that person will rule the world or part of the world.
> In case of islam, because islam has a great idea and this Idea still spreading fast and people are joining it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At least You are sincere enough to acknowledge all those are Jewish ideas.
> The problem is Muslims have turned them into an excuse for their thirst for domination over whole continents and nations.
> 
> You guys literally demand to dominate the entire middle east, while the nation who according to You should be slaves and dhimmis, have become the leading society in the entire region. Providing a standard of living  and freedom to their citizens, that no Muslim rule ever achieved in all of those 14 centuries years of invasions and defeats.
> 
> The thing You can't comprehend is why G-d keeps all His promises to the Jewish nation,
> and smites all their enemies in-spite the odds. A lot of it indeed has to do with fearing to pronounce the name of the Creator unlike all others.
> 
> Do You think calling Your parent by name is respectful?
Click to expand...

Please accept the fact that you are never be in a position to establish any government in the past because you people don't beleave in God. 
Today the government you are trying to defend is not legitimate country.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dude
> Don't forget lizards!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because people just need to know...yep all those stories bout the Jews...people need to know who stands on the other side...that's REAL in hundreds of millions of ways..
> 
> And of course  Rehmani for the exemplary advocacy for Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please learn.
> Do you think? this is a respectful life. Vagrant life means keep pushing around by others as refuge, as slave or as gypsy. this is your history.
> Why it happen to jew because they refused Prophets of God.
> If jew were obedient to God then by now whole world should be follower of father Abraham PBUH.
> That is exactly my signature comments about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I actually think it's a great disrespect for G-d's name, for His nation to live scattered and disrespected by others, but still that signature is utter nonsense, insult to the most basic common sense and intelligence.
> 
> Do You think it was respectful when Muslims invaded several continents,
> and forced their religion on millions of people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are not jew, otherwise all jew know, why jew use the word g-d. I will tell you why? I asked to Rabbi why jew are using g-d instead of God or Ala in hebrew? He told me that to avoid the insult of "Ala" God. Now for you, this supplementary word g-d become valuable.
> Did you agree with the Roman or Persian invasion before Islam? If not, means you won't be agree with islam too.
> This world is base on free will.
> Any one who introduce the better idea, people will join him, despite the fact they are invaded by the Muslim and now after 1500 years those region are still living as muslim.
> Similar thing happen in Europe.
> And if the follower of Abraham PBUH do the same thing and spread the great idea given to jew by all prophets and don't keep to themselves instead they start to think they are special and keep the great idea by themselves.
> Now you are telling to people that invasion is wrong because you can not invade or if you do with the help of some one but you can not hold it and if you can not hold, its even worst.
> Remember this world has free will. if you don't spread the great idea then someone else will come and spread the great idea. People will join him and that person will rule the world or part of the world.
> In case of islam, because islam has a great idea and this Idea still spreading fast and people are joining it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At least You are sincere enough to acknowledge all those are Jewish ideas.
> The problem is Muslims have turned them into an excuse for their thirst for domination over whole continents and nations.
> 
> You guys literally demand to dominate the entire middle east, while the nation who according to You should be slaves and dhimmis, have become the leading society in the entire region. Providing a standard of living  and freedom to their citizens, that no Muslim rule ever achieved in all of those 14 centuries years of invasions and defeats.
> 
> The thing You can't comprehend is why G-d keeps all His promises to the Jewish nation,
> and smites all their enemies in-spite the odds. A lot of it indeed has to do with fearing to pronounce the name of the Creator unlike all others.
> 
> Do You think calling Your parent by name is respectful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please accept the fact that you are never be in a position to establish any government in the past because you people don't beleave in God.
> Today the government you are trying to defend is not legitimate country.
Click to expand...


Utter nonsense,
when Arabs were still drinking wine and burying their daughters alive in the desert during the Jahilyyah,
Jews have already built a thriving civilization for 2000 years prior to that.

Religions like Islam and Christianity lead people to irrational belief in G-d or Allah,
Judaism values knowledge, and leads people to knowledge of G-d and His Name,
it's really not much a religion in the way most Christians and Muslims perceive their religions.

While Christians and Muslims are taught to repeat and believe, Jews are taught to know and argue and peal each peace of information to understand the heart of the issue and how it relates within the entire body of knowledge. Everyone is commanded to study, not follow like robots and not just the elite few like in Islam and Christianity, but every kid from the youngest age starts learning to read with the first drops of honey he or she can remember, those first letters they learn are already consisting of other letters that instantly comprise entire words, showing them that knowledge itself is not shallow or mundane, therefore the results historically.

For You Mr Zaik is a doctor, but in our country he wouldn't complete the psychometry tests the universities give our 17-18 year olds just to start the study.


----------



## Sixties Fan




----------



## MartyNYC

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.


Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *





__





						Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Happy to help.


----------



## rylah

Vagabond63 said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
Click to expand...


Arabic surnames include locations.
Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.

Don't try to find explanations.
neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.

They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabic surnames include locations.
> Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.
> 
> Don't try to find explanations.
> neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
> nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.
> 
> They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
Click to expand...


Common “palestinian” surname: Bushnaq, signifying Bosnia. How come nobody is named Palestini?


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabic surnames include locations.
> Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.
> 
> Don't try to find explanations.
> neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
> nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.
> 
> They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
Click to expand...


In the aftermath of the Arab conquest of Syria, previously ruled by the Romans, they saw the Roman name palaestina which had been imposed on Jews centuries earlier and adopted the name, Arabizing it as Filastin. The name fell out of use even by Arabs, about 1,000 years ago.


----------



## rylah

MartyNYC said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabic surnames include locations.
> Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.
> 
> Don't try to find explanations.
> neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
> nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.
> 
> They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the aftermath of the Arab conquest of Syria, previously ruled by the Romans, they saw the Roman name palaestina which had been imposed on Jews centuries earlier and adopted the name, Arabizing it as Filastin. The name fell out of use even by Arabs, about 1,000 years ago.
Click to expand...


Bilad al-Sham.
But mainly Bait al-Maqdes.

Yesterday Hamas chief gave a special speech,
not once Al-Quds was used in  reference to Jerusalem,
always Bait al-Muqades an Arabic transliteration of the Hebrew "Beit Mikdash".
They say there was no Jewish temple, but call Jerusalem the "House of Temple".


----------



## Coyote

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabic surnames include locations.
> Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.
> 
> Don't try to find explanations.
> neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
> nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.
> 
> They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the aftermath of the Arab conquest of Syria, previously ruled by the Romans, they saw the Roman name palaestina which had been imposed on Jews centuries earlier and adopted the name, Arabizing it as Filastin. The name fell out of use even by Arabs, about 1,000 years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bilad al-Sham.
> But mainly Bait al-Maqdes.
> 
> Yesterday Hamas chief gave a special speech,
> not once Al-Quds was used in  referance to Jerusalem,
> always Bait al-Muqades an Arabic transliteration of "Beit Mikdash" - House of Temple in Hebrew
Click to expand...


al-Sham, “land to the left.” Bilad al-Sham signified greater Syria, including modern Lebanon.

In addition to Arabs using the Roman name palaestina, as Filastin, they used the Roman name for Jerusalem, Aelia, as Ilya.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?



Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
Click to expand...



Again.  What's the point?

Why is it so important to deny another their identity?


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
Click to expand...

Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?


Why deny posters the right to discuss anything, especially when it is an new poster?

And why this false idea of the denial of the other by both sides? One is based on facts, the other denies the existence of the other for religious reasons.

I say.....Let them eat cake.....and enjoy it.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> Why deny posters the right to discuss anything, especially when it is an new poster?
> 
> And why this false idea of the denial of the other by both sides? One is based on facts, the other denies the existence of the other for religious reasons.
> 
> I say.....Let them eat cake.....and enjoy it.
Click to expand...


Who's being denied anything?  Do you see anyone prevented?  No.

I'm just pointing out this argument goes on and on and is idiotic.  None of this denial is based on facts, people just think it is, but it's really people's opinions about the other.  Don't you ever wonder what the agenda is -  two peoples exist but for some bizarre unexplained reason (hatred maybe?) it's REALLY IMPORTANT for each to deny the other's existence.  

As long as that is the starting point...the path won't change.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
Click to expand...


That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
Click to expand...

Are you not aware how the Palestinian Arabs deny the very existence of any Jewish history on the land?

And that has been going on since the lost the war in 1948.

Let them discuss, whatever they wish to discuss.  It should not be upsetting anyone, as it is a free thread to discuss the issue freely.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Are you not aware how the Palestinian Arabs deny the very existence of any Jewish history on the land?*
> 
> And that has been going on since the lost the war in 1948.
> 
> Let them discuss, whatever they wish to discuss.  It should not be upsetting anyone, as it is a free thread to discuss the issue freely.
Click to expand...


Yup.  That's what I did not say one or the other.

And I too, am allowed to discuss this freely


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
Click to expand...


Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
For anyone looking to re-constitute their native civilization.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
Click to expand...


It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Are you not aware how the Palestinian Arabs deny the very existence of any Jewish history on the land?*
> 
> And that has been going on since the lost the war in 1948.
> 
> Let them discuss, whatever they wish to discuss.  It should not be upsetting anyone, as it is a free thread to discuss the issue freely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup.  That's what I did not say one or the other.
> 
> And I too, am allowed to discuss this freely
Click to expand...

Was that a discussion, or an attempt to make others stop discussing it?

Re read your first post.

And I do stop here, just in case you wish to continue to turn it into an issue that does not exist, which you started.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Are you not aware how the Palestinian Arabs deny the very existence of any Jewish history on the land?*
> 
> And that has been going on since the lost the war in 1948.
> 
> Let them discuss, whatever they wish to discuss.  It should not be upsetting anyone, as it is a free thread to discuss the issue freely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup.  That's what I did not say one or the other.
> 
> And I too, am allowed to discuss this freely
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Was that a discussion, or an attempt to make others stop discussing it?
> 
> Re read your first post.
> 
> And I do stop here, just in case you wish to continue to turn it into an issue that does not exist, which you started.
Click to expand...


Good grief.  It's my OPINION.  And like you, I"m entitled to express it.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
Click to expand...


Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
Click to expand...

The thread is about Who is indigenous to the Land, and not "Do either one has the right to be recognized" which is what you keep turning the issue into.

Are the Arabs ingenious to the Land of Israel/Palestine, or not?

It is not about "They are here now, so they have the right to have their new nationality recognized as indigenous to the land, as the other group is"


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The thread is about Who is indigenous to the Land, and not "Do either one has the right to be recognized" which is what you keep turning the issue into.
> 
> Are the Arabs ingenious to the Land of Israel/Palestine, or not?
> 
> It is not about "They are here now, so they have the right to have their new nationality recognized as indigenous to the land, as the other group is"
Click to expand...



What ever you say.


----------



## Sixties Fan

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
Click to expand...

Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.

One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.


----------



## rylah




----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
Click to expand...



Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
Click to expand...


Arabs are obviously indigenous to Arabia. No Arabs genuinely claim to be indigenous to “palestine.”


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are obviously indigenous to Arabia. No Arabs genuinely claim to be indigenous to “palestine.”
Click to expand...


Except that Arabization is cultural. Not all or even most “Arabs” descend from the Arabian peninsula.

However, part of Bedouin’s indiginous territory Includes part of Palestine.

why does it matter?


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are obviously indigenous to Arabia. No Arabs genuinely claim to be indigenous to “palestine.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except that Arabization is cultural. Not all or even most “Arabs” descend from the Arabian peninsula.
> 
> However, part of Bedouin’s indiginous territory Includes part of Palestine.
> 
> why does it matter?
Click to expand...


Arabs define themselves as having originated from Arab tribes in Arabia. Merely speaking Arabic doesn’t make someone an Arab.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
Click to expand...


The argument of indigenous origins is actually very simple.
No need to reserve to oversimplified strawman fallacies.

Better let's clarify 2 basic points of confusion:

1. Indigenous rights are not dealing with persons
but ancient civilizations in their specific native  place of origin.

2. Indigeneity is not based on mere presence in a land.
And it doesn't cover modern identities, which are fine on their own,
but cannot be granted indigenous status by banally appropriating identity
and folklore of every other foreign nation that passed in a given location.

The motivations behind people who argue against each group can be similar or different.
That doesn't mean one of them isn't the correct and just one to be exemplified.

Look, the history of the Jewish people is one of the longest documents of a connection of a people, civilization to its land of origin. It's pretty difficult to take seriously an attempt to argue at this, when it has already become an integral part of world heritage backed by all the archaeology and historic data that can fill museums spanning 3.5 millennia.

"Ancient Palestinian Arab civilization"...no such thing really.
Only some modern sketches on variations of absurdity.

The point is Jews and Arabs have a lot to accomplish together, a lot at stake.
But it's impossible for cousins to talk eye to eye with one playing a false identity.
Arabs playing "Palestinians" doesn't allow us to honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The argument of indigenous origins is actually very simple.
> No need to reserve to oversimplified strawman fallacies.
> 
> Better let's clarify 2 basic points of confusion:
> 
> 1. Indigenous rights are not dealing with persons
> but ancient civilizations in their specific native  place of origin.
> 
> 2. Indigeneity is not based on mere presence in a land.
> And it doesn't cover modern identities, which are fine on their own,
> and cannot be granted indigenous status by banally appropriating identity
> and folklore of every other foreign nation that passed in a given location.
> 
> The motivations behind people who argue against each group can be similar or different.
> That doesn't mean one of them isn't the correct and just one to be exemplified.
> 
> Look, the history of the Jewish people is one of the longest documents of a connection of a people, civilization to its land of origin. It's pretty difficult to take seriously an attempt argue at this, when it has already become an integral part of world heritage backed by all the archaeology and historic data that can feel museums spanning 3.5 millennia.
> 
> Ancient Palestinian Arab civilization...no such thing really.
> Only some modern sketches on variations of absurdity.
> 
> *The point is Jews and Arabs have a lot to accomplish together, a lot at stake.*
> But it's impossible for cousins to talk eye to eye with one playing a false identity.
> Arabs playing "Palestinians" doesn't allow us to honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
Click to expand...


Yes..to what I bolded.  In fact much of what you say makes a certain sense.  But I disagree with your claim of false identity.  Regardless of a history of culture...these people, who now call themselves Palestinians, have roots that go back far, further, in many cases than the Arabization of the region.  That can’t be simply discounted.  

what do you mean by: honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The argument of indigenous origins is actually very simple.
> No need to reserve to oversimplified strawman fallacies.
> 
> Better let's clarify 2 basic points of confusion:
> 
> 1. Indigenous rights are not dealing with persons
> but ancient civilizations in their specific native  place of origin.
> 
> 2. Indigeneity is not based on mere presence in a land.
> And it doesn't cover modern identities, which are fine on their own,
> and cannot be granted indigenous status by banally appropriating identity
> and folklore of every other foreign nation that passed in a given location.
> 
> The motivations behind people who argue against each group can be similar or different.
> That doesn't mean one of them isn't the correct and just one to be exemplified.
> 
> Look, the history of the Jewish people is one of the longest documents of a connection of a people, civilization to its land of origin. It's pretty difficult to take seriously an attempt argue at this, when it has already become an integral part of world heritage backed by all the archaeology and historic data that can feel museums spanning 3.5 millennia.
> 
> Ancient Palestinian Arab civilization...no such thing really.
> Only some modern sketches on variations of absurdity.
> 
> *The point is Jews and Arabs have a lot to accomplish together, a lot at stake.*
> But it's impossible for cousins to talk eye to eye with one playing a false identity.
> Arabs playing "Palestinians" doesn't allow us to honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes..to what I bolded.  In fact much of what you say makes a certain sense.  But I disagree with your claim of false identity.  Regardless of a history of culture...these people, who now call themselves Palestinians, have roots that go back far, further, in many cases than the Arabization of the region.  That can’t be simply discounted.
> 
> what do you mean by: honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
Click to expand...


That doesn't fulfill the basic criteria of a nation, let alone indigenous.

Not to mention your whole argument is based on the same logical error that would grant indigenous status to average residents of Milwaukee on mere presence and an unproven theory of a statistical possibility that someone among the residents might be a member of a foreign civilization that happened to pass by. Which as already mentioned above, doesn't suffice the basic criteria in the first place.

The need to appeal to such sketchy basis, rather shows certain level of abuse of justice to overcompensate for an apparent lack of basic material, properties to suffice the category.

That's why it's important this doesn't become a precedent.


----------



## Shusha

rylah said:


> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> For anyone looking to re-constitute their native civilization.



This.  For emphasis.

The forgery of indigeneity for political purposes is real.  And needs to be addressed for what it is -- a forgery.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.


The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.  



> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area


Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things? 

And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The argument of indigenous origins is actually very simple.
> No need to reserve to oversimplified strawman fallacies.
> 
> Better let's clarify 2 basic points of confusion:
> 
> 1. Indigenous rights are not dealing with persons
> but ancient civilizations in their specific native  place of origin.
> 
> 2. Indigeneity is not based on mere presence in a land.
> And it doesn't cover modern identities, which are fine on their own,
> but cannot be granted indigenous status by banally appropriating identity
> and folklore of every other foreign nation that passed in a given location.
> 
> The motivations behind people who argue against each group can be similar or different.
> That doesn't mean one of them isn't the correct and just one to be exemplified.
> 
> Look, the history of the Jewish people is one of the longest documents of a connection of a people, civilization to its land of origin. It's pretty difficult to take seriously an attempt to argue at this, when it has already become an integral part of world heritage backed by all the archaeology and historic data that can fill museums spanning 3.5 millennia.
> 
> "Ancient Palestinian Arab civilization"...no such thing really.
> Only some modern sketches on variations of absurdity.
> 
> The point is Jews and Arabs have a lot to accomplish together, a lot at stake.
> But it's impossible for cousins to talk eye to eye with one playing a false identity.
> Arabs playing "Palestinians" doesn't allow us to honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
Click to expand...


Israel and Arab countries are developing diplomatic relations, from Egypt and Jordan earlier, to more recently Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. The “palestinians” are outliers and are even viewed with scorn by Arabs themselves.
Abd Al-Bari Atwan: The Arab Leaders Are Praying That Israel Will Get Rid of the Palestinians Once and for All


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The argument of indigenous origins is actually very simple.
> No need to reserve to oversimplified strawman fallacies.
> 
> Better let's clarify 2 basic points of confusion:
> 
> 1. Indigenous rights are not dealing with persons
> but ancient civilizations in their specific native  place of origin.
> 
> 2. Indigeneity is not based on mere presence in a land.
> And it doesn't cover modern identities, which are fine on their own,
> and cannot be granted indigenous status by banally appropriating identity
> and folklore of every other foreign nation that passed in a given location.
> 
> The motivations behind people who argue against each group can be similar or different.
> That doesn't mean one of them isn't the correct and just one to be exemplified.
> 
> Look, the history of the Jewish people is one of the longest documents of a connection of a people, civilization to its land of origin. It's pretty difficult to take seriously an attempt argue at this, when it has already become an integral part of world heritage backed by all the archaeology and historic data that can feel museums spanning 3.5 millennia.
> 
> Ancient Palestinian Arab civilization...no such thing really.
> Only some modern sketches on variations of absurdity.
> 
> *The point is Jews and Arabs have a lot to accomplish together, a lot at stake.*
> But it's impossible for cousins to talk eye to eye with one playing a false identity.
> Arabs playing "Palestinians" doesn't allow us to honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes..to what I bolded.  In fact much of what you say makes a certain sense.  But I disagree with your claim of false identity.  Regardless of a history of culture...these people, who now call themselves Palestinians, have roots that go back far, further, in many cases than the Arabization of the region.  That can’t be simply discounted.
> 
> what do you mean by: honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't fulfill the basic criteria of a nation, let alone indigenous.
> 
> Not to mention your whole argument is based on the same logical error that would grant indigenous status to average residents of Milwaukee on mere presence and an unproven theory of a statistical possibility that someone among the residents might be a member of a foreign civilization that happened to pass by. Which as already mentioned above, doesn't suffice the basic criteria in the first place.
> 
> The need to appeal to such sketchy basis, rather shows certain level of abuse of justice to overcompensate for an apparent lack of basic material, properties to suffice the category.
> 
> That's why it's important this doesn't become a precedent.
Click to expand...


The idea of Arabs identifying by the name “palestine,” Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate for the establishment of Israeli statehood, which came from a fictional Roman name imposed on Jews, palaestina, is ridiculous.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> For anyone looking to re-constitute their native civilization.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This.  For emphasis.
> 
> The forgery of indigeneity for political purposes is real.  And needs to be addressed for what it is -- a forgery.
Click to expand...

And this forgery must also be cleared, that it only happens against the Land of the Jews, against the Jews, against Israel.

No other indigenous people on the planet are going through such forgery with any other people, no matter how long they have been on the land, calling themselves the Indigenous people of that land.

This is simply another form of denial of Jewish history and rights which has been happening since the Arabs Countries lost their last military attack on Israel in 1973.

One will not find any such claims by any Arabs, the Arab League, etc,  during that time that the Palestinian Arabs are or should be considered Indigenous to the land.

There is only the endless promise that they will make the Zionists leave, that they will win, that it is MUSLIM, not Palestinian, land.

Since 1973, historical fact, Muslims and Christians have been delegitimizing the Jews as in:  The Jews are from Europe, there is no Jewish History, the Temple Mount was never Jewish, they are the native Philistines (Who where not indigenous but of Greek Descent), etc., the inhabitants of Canaan were Arabs.....

The attempt to create forgery of the Arabs who now live in what is the Land of Israel, as being ALSO Indigenous of the Land of Israel, Canaan, is simply a continuation of that attempt to delegitimize the Jews, the Samarians, the Amorites, etc, as being the Indigenous people, the ones who were there before the Arabs ever showed up.

But, let us please note......that the only ones being dilegitimized as being Indigenous of that land.....are the Jews.

The Arabs are not the Samarians, the Amorites  or any other indigenous tribe/nation which lived on the land, who deserve to be called Indigenous.

Migrating, does not make one Indigenous of an area. This has been pointed out before.

People from Yemen moving to the area of Medina, would still be considered to be Indigenous of the area of Yemen.  It does not matter if they are Arabs or not, since it is all part of Arabia.

The same thing could be said of one tribe in Africa, Kenya, moving to another part of Africa, South Africa.  If their origins are in Kenya, they are indigenous of Kenya, no matter how many centuries and generations may now have lived in S. A. .


----------



## Sixties Fan

And more point:

No one on the Pro Israel group is denying that the Palestinians are now a people who need a State, anymore than there are any group of Jews denying that there is such a nationality now called Jordanian.  Especially as Jordan is made of newly arrived Arabs, kicked out of their lands in Arabia, the Hashemites.

The problem continues to be the Palestinian leaders specifically who have milked the idea of a nationality and a state which they want nothing at all with.

Their documents, textbooks, media, etc, focuses on lonely one thing.  Denying the Jews their identity, their history, their temples, their lands, their lives.

Until all Leaders who do not want an Israel and sovereign Jews next to them are replaced, there is going to continue to be this "education" that Palestinians have equal right to the land they invaded to begin with, never kept a hold of because of other invaders, and are intent in killing and destroying Jews and Israel because their Muslim education/ideology cannot abide by having Jews or any non Muslim have a hold on any land once conquered by Muslims.

All one has to do is study Muslim history including all the endless attacks on Jews, because of what Islam teaches about Jews.


Who is Indigenous to the land of Canaan, Israel, Palestine?

Jews, Amorites, Samrians, Hitites, etc.  Those are the native, indigenous tribes and nations of the region.

And again, nowhere else does anyone else see an endless attempt to delegitimize the indigenous people in order to take their land by taking their place.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?


And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.

Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.

Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong her? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
Click to expand...

Every point you have made is WRONG when it comes to who is Indigenous from where.

Thanks for the try to delegitimize EVERY Indigenous people on the planet just to be able to Legitimize the Arabs as if they were "Indigenous" from Palestine.

Born in one place and being Indigenous are totally different everywhere in the world.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong her? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every point you have made is WRONG when it comes to who is Indigenous from where.
> 
> Thanks for the try to delegitimize EVERY Indigenous people on the planet just to be able to Legitimize the Arabs as if they were "Indigenous" from Palestine.
> 
> Born in one place and being Indigenous are totally different everywhere in the world.
Click to expand...




Sixties Fan said:


> Every point you have made is WRONG when it comes to who is Indigenous from where.


So, who were the cave men from that place?  

This whole argument is stupid.


----------



## MartyNYC

Sixties Fan said:


> And more point:
> 
> No one on the Pro Israel group is denying that the Palestinians are now a people who need a State, anymore than there are any group of Jews denying that there is such a nationality now called Jordanian.  Especially as Jordan is made of newly arrived Arabs, kicked out of their lands in Arabia, the Hashemites.
> 
> The problem continues to be the Palestinian leaders specifically who have milked the idea of a nationality and a state which they want nothing at all with.
> 
> Their documents, textbooks, media, etc, focuses on lonely one thing.  Denying the Jews their identity, their history, their temples, their lands, their lives.
> 
> Until all Leaders who do not want an Israel and sovereign Jews next to them are replaced, there is going to continue to be this "education" that Palestinians have equal right to the land they invaded to begin with, never kept a hold of because of other invaders, and are intent in killing and destroying Jews and Israel because their Muslim education/ideology cannot abide by having Jews or any non Muslim have a hold on any land once conquered by Muslims.
> 
> All one has to do is study Muslim history including all the endless attacks on Jews, because of what Islam teaches about Jews.
> 
> 
> Who is Indigenous to the land of Canaan, Israel, Palestine?
> 
> Jews, Amorites, Samrians, Hitites, etc.  Those are the native, indigenous tribes and nations of the region.
> 
> And again, nowhere else does anyone else see an endless attempt to delegitimize the indigenous people in order to take their land by taking their place.



How come no “palestinians“ are named Palestini? Palestinians are plain Arabs, from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Arab countries. Arafat, father of palestinian nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common palestinian surnames reflect their foreign origins, such as al-Masri “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq, signifying Bosnia.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→  et al,

*BLUF:* This is called the selective application of political policy; or selective prosecution. In cases of "malfeasance," I've heard it used in terms of "vindictive application or enforcement."



EXCERPT • Sixties Fan said:


> No other indigenous people on the planet are going through such forgery with any other people, no matter how long they have been on the land, calling themselves the Indigenous people of that land.


*(COMMENT)*

This is a clear practice of discretionary application brought forward for political traction rather than one being brought as a matter of course in the normal functioning of the prosecuting or enforcement.

For instance, Russia actually did take the Crimea, and Russia did hold the Occupation while offering the Crimeans the opportunity tore integrate with Russia.  While the US and European Union saw this as unfavorable treatment of the Tartars in the Crimea, → the annexation of the Peninsula was implemented anyway.  

Annexation is a matter of political acceptance, and not really a matter of law.






Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
Click to expand...





P F Tinmore said:


> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.



This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.

Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?

My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.


----------



## MartyNYC

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
Click to expand...


Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
Click to expand...


Frankly...when people have lived there for hundreds if not *thousands* of years.  It doesn't matter - they are not "settlers" they are not "foreign" and they are not "invaders".  Every time I hear these arguments, whether it's directed at Jews or directed at Arab Palestinians - I have to ask - what is your agenda?  I have never heard anyone argue forcefully for one or the other, who doesn't think the "other" deserves fewer rights.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
Click to expand...



Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong her? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every point you have made is WRONG when it comes to who is Indigenous from where.
> 
> Thanks for the try to delegitimize EVERY Indigenous people on the planet just to be able to Legitimize the Arabs as if they were "Indigenous" from Palestine.
> 
> Born in one place and being Indigenous are totally different everywhere in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every point you have made is WRONG when it comes to who is Indigenous from where.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, who were the cave men from that place?
> 
> This whole argument is stupid.
Click to expand...



There is always going to be someone who was there before - ancient people moved around, a lot.  Cultures overran indigenous cultures.

The thing is -if a people have lived in an area a long long time, it doesn't matter.  They are NOT foreign invaders.  They are the resident population and for all practical purposes indigenous.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> For anyone looking to re-constitute their native civilization.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This.  For emphasis.
> 
> The forgery of indigeneity for political purposes is real.  And needs to be addressed for what it is -- a forgery.
Click to expand...


I disagree it is a forgery.  The Palestinians, include in their ancestry, people who have been there as long as the people who currently identify as Jewish.

That is indigenous.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Arabs are obviously indigenous to Arabia*. No Arabs genuinely claim to be indigenous to “palestine.”
Click to expand...


No.  Actually.  They are not.  "Arab" has a cultural aspect.  When they conquered or, through trade, spread their culture, a very large part of the Middle East/Africa became Arabicized without a single person descending from Arabia.

It's no different than when the English conquered large parts of the world and spread their culture.  Are all those areas English who's population descended fro England?


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
Click to expand...


You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
Click to expand...


Sometimes...I wonder.

What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?

How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is both debatable and irrelevant.  They exist, as a people now. So what is the point of denying them their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because if such forgery of indigenous identity becomes a precedent,
> it makes all indigenous rights void by definition, a great injustice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not precedent.  It's doing what is right.  Recognizing the existence and rights to two different peoples.  That's it.  To do other wise is to create a great injustice.  You can't rectify one injustice by creating another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs are a people. “Palestinians” are Arabs. Palestine was Britain‘s name for the British Mandate that became Israel. Jews were first called palestinians. There is no distinct palestinian language, religion, culture, or historic identity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Marty, save your fingers from typing, because she is always going on about a different issue than the one this thread is about.  I will do the same.
> 
> One can give all the opinions they want about the topic of the thread,  but cannot go on changing what the topic this thread is really about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sanctimonious about it.  Recognizing the existence of the other is part of the same argument otherwise you wouldn't natter on about one being an "invented people".  As I said in my initial response  - the argument on indigenous origins is debatable.  If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.  It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area prior to and since the Jewish people who've mixed it up.  The real reason most (I won't say all) people want to deny this for either Palestinians or Jews is to diminish any rights they may have to Place.  Now go ahead and pretend it's not on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Arabs are obviously indigenous to Arabia*. No Arabs genuinely claim to be indigenous to “palestine.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  Actually.  They are not.  "Arab" has a cultural aspect.  When they conquered or, through trade, spread their culture, a very large part of the Middle East/Africa became Arabicized without a single person descending from Arabia.
> 
> It's no different than when the English conquered large parts of the world and spread their culture.  Are all those areas English who's population descended fro England?
Click to expand...


Arabs themselves define Arabs as having originated from Arabia, from Arab tribes. Period. End of story.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
Click to expand...


That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
Click to expand...


You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
Click to expand...


I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
Click to expand...

 
I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
Click to expand...


How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?

Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
Click to expand...


Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous". 

Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
Click to expand...


Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".
> 
> Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?
Click to expand...


Yes....

When the former Soviet Bloc countries broke up, ethnic Russians living in some of those areas (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia etc) were at a cultural disadvantage and faced discrimination if not outright violence.  They even lost their citizenship.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".
> 
> Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes....
> 
> When the former Soviet Bloc countries broke up, ethnic Russians living in some of those areas (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia etc) were at a cultural disadvantage and faced discrimination if not outright violence.  They even lost their citizenship.
Click to expand...


Neither of us are supporting discrimination, so I think I can let that go.

Talk to me about "cultural disadvantage" and what you mean by that, especially as it relates to "greater rights".


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?
Click to expand...


No.  It didn't.  There is really very little nationalistic relationship to the ancient state of Israel, and modern ideas of national identity.  With the Jewish people it's often referred to as "zionism" and became a movement around the same time as many other subjugate peoples were also realizing theirs.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It didn't.  There is really very little nationalistic relationship to the ancient state of Israel, and modern ideas of national identity.  With the Jewish people it's often referred to as "zionism" and became a movement around the same time as many other subjugate peoples were also realizing theirs.
Click to expand...


Josephus wrote about “the Jewish nation” 2,000 years ago, in “Antiquities Of The Jews.” You’re welcome.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*
> 
> Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes....
> 
> When the former Soviet Bloc countries broke up, ethnic Russians living in some of those areas (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia etc) were at a cultural disadvantage and faced discrimination if not outright violence.  They even lost their citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither of us are supporting discrimination, so I think I can let that go.
> 
> Talk to me about "cultural disadvantage" and what you mean by that, especially as it relates to "greater rights".
Click to expand...


Let me ask you something first:  what do you mean by this?  *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It didn't.  There is really very little nationalistic relationship to the ancient state of Israel, and modern ideas of national identity.  With the Jewish people it's often referred to as "zionism" and became a movement around the same time as many other subjugate peoples were also realizing theirs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus wrote about “the Jewish nation” 2,000 years ago, in “Antiquities Of The Jews.” You’re welcome.
Click to expand...


Welcome for what?

Do you understand what nationalist movements are?


----------



## Coyote

I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).

The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.

The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.

Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.


----------



## Coyote

I post as I think....rather than in one organized fashion.  I CAN see the validity of the argument for indigenous cultural rights in terms of their rights to their heritage sites.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*
> 
> Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes....
> 
> When the former Soviet Bloc countries broke up, ethnic Russians living in some of those areas (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia etc) were at a cultural disadvantage and faced discrimination if not outright violence.  They even lost their citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither of us are supporting discrimination, so I think I can let that go.
> 
> Talk to me about "cultural disadvantage" and what you mean by that, especially as it relates to "greater rights".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me ask you something first:  what do you mean by this?  *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*
Click to expand...


"Indigenous" / = / "non-local culture but been there for a really, really long time"

So, why is the distinction important?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  *What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?*  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sometimes...I wonder.
> 
> What you call people *who's ANCESTORS have been there as long as the Jewish people?
> 
> How do they suddenly become "invaders" when their people never left the area?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I differentiate between invading cultures and individuals.  So, again, I'll ask you:  what is the purpose of acknowledgement of indigenous cultures?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not sure, to be honest.  Sometimes it seems it is used to create greater rights at the expense of other indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*
> 
> Can you give me an example, of indigenous peoples who have "greater rights" at the expense of other peoples, and what those "greater rights" look like?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes....
> 
> When the former Soviet Bloc countries broke up, ethnic Russians living in some of those areas (Ukraine, Georgia, Estonia etc) were at a cultural disadvantage and faced discrimination if not outright violence.  They even lost their citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither of us are supporting discrimination, so I think I can let that go.
> 
> Talk to me about "cultural disadvantage" and what you mean by that, especially as it relates to "greater rights".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me ask you something first:  what do you mean by this?  *Only if you intentionally misinterpret the meaning of the term "indigenous".*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Indigenous" / = / "non-local culture but been there for a really, really long time"
> 
> So, why is the distinction important?
Click to expand...


I am not convinced it is other than rights to sacred/heritage sites.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It didn't.  There is really very little nationalistic relationship to the ancient state of Israel, and modern ideas of national identity.  With the Jewish people it's often referred to as "zionism" and became a movement around the same time as many other subjugate peoples were also realizing theirs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus wrote about “the Jewish nation” 2,000 years ago, in “Antiquities Of The Jews.” You’re welcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Welcome for what?
> 
> Do you understand what nationalist movements are?
Click to expand...


You lost the debate.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of ”palestinian” nationalism, was “indigenous” to Egypt, where he was born and educated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well then, according to your logic - Jews who were born in Germany are "indigenous" to Germany where they were born and educated.  Do you see where this argument goes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You actually think Jewish nationalism started in Germany?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That isn't what I said.  Go back and reread it.  I could have easily used Russia, Poland, France, England, America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You didn’t know Jewish nationalism started in ancient Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How exactly did we get from defining who is a "foreigner" to Jewish Nationalism?
> 
> Though, if we are going to switch to that, no it did not start in ancient Israel.  The idea of a Jewish NATIONAL identity really started around the same time as other national identities - coming out of the break up of former empires.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish nationalism began in antiquity. This comes as news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It didn't.  There is really very little nationalistic relationship to the ancient state of Israel, and modern ideas of national identity.  With the Jewish people it's often referred to as "zionism" and became a movement around the same time as many other subjugate peoples were also realizing theirs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Josephus wrote about “the Jewish nation” 2,000 years ago, in “Antiquities Of The Jews.” You’re welcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Welcome for what?
> 
> Do you understand what nationalist movements are?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You lost the debate.
Click to expand...



If you are going to claim that...well...you have to show us that you "won".  The evidence is lacking.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.



Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I post as I think....rather than in one organized fashion.  I CAN see the validity of the argument for indigenous cultural rights in terms of their rights to their heritage sites.



Yes.  I agree.  And I think that is one of the most important pieces of the indigenous designation.  At the heart of it, the importance of indigeneity is the preservation of a culture.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
Click to expand...










						Arabization - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.



Yes.  And I agree with you on this point.  I don't think that Arab Palestinians should be labelled "foreign invaders", although I think its fair to note that the culture is an invading and conquesting culture, which overran the existing culture, and, if I was being honest, I believe this is largely the continued intent of a good portion of the Arab Palestinians.  

So, we are discussing, really, three different things here:

1.  Individuals (who we agree should not be called "foreign invaders")
2.  Competing indigenous and invading cultures. (As distinct from individuals).
3.  The commitment of each culture to the preservation of the other culture.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And I agree with you on this point.  I don't think that Arab Palestinians should be labelled "foreign invaders", although I think its fair to note that the culture is an invading and conquesting culture, which overran the existing culture, and, if I was being honest, I believe this is largely the continued intent of a good portion of the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> So, we are discussing, really, three different things here:
> 
> 1.  Individuals (who we agree should not be called "foreign invaders")
> 2.  Competing indigenous and invading cultures. (As distinct from individuals).
> 3.  The commitment of each culture to the preservation of the other culture.
Click to expand...


Yes, that is a good way of structuring it


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...


Wikipedia? Not very scholarly.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wikipedia? Not very scholary.
Click to expand...


They source and given you provide zero resources...you don't have much room to complain.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...


Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:

“During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

I don't believe you and I are disagreeing about individuals.  We both agree that individuals shouldn't be insulted, targeted or discriminated against.  And that people migrate.  And its fine.  

I also think we would agree that, as example, a family which immigrated from elsewhere in the 1930s (or 1890s or 1970s or 2010s) to the territory in question, which happens to be Arab is no more and no less (depending on your POV) a "foreign invader" than a Jewish family and that both should be treated the same.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
Click to expand...



I think you are more in need of help than I.


Wikipedia states:
*Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.



			http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
		

The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.









						Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
					






					teachmideast.org
				



*Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.

There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.

facts-about-arabs
"Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.

If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.

That's not believable.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
Click to expand...


Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
Click to expand...




MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
Click to expand...



Well here is what is interesting.  You only posted a tiny bit of a quote from it.  Which by the way is the same exact tiny bit of quote posted by a few others here...which makes me  wonder if you just cut and pasted from some website.  Did you actually read the book?

And, did you note the Wiki was not my only source?


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well here is what is interesting.  You only posted a tiny bit of a quote from it.  Which by the way is the same exact tiny bit of quote posted by a few others here...which makes me  wonder if you just cut and pasted from some website.  Did you actually read the book?
> 
> And, did you note the Wiki was not my only source?
Click to expand...


Page 13, “Arabs In History”: “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Shusha that the issue I have with the "indigenous" argument is this.  When it comes to Palestine/Israel - it is almost always used to some how infringe on some population (and I'm not saying that is the argument you make because you do not base rights on this designation).
> 
> The arguments from the side that claims Palestinians are the "true" indigenous people, are used to fuel the "Jews are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> The arguments from the side that claim Jews are the "true" indigenous people are used to fuel the "Palestinians are foreign invaders" claim.
> 
> Yet, I can not accept that a people who's ancestors have lived there for thousands of years are a "foreign invader" and no matter HOW you view the term it is a pejorative.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs literally are foreign invaders to Syria, as part of the Arab conquests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arabization - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me help you out. Bernard Lewis, author, “Arabs In History”:
> 
> “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are more in need of help than I.
> 
> 
> Wikipedia states:
> *Arabization* or *Arabisation* (Arabic: تعريب‎ _taʻrīb_) is growing *Arabic influence on non-Arab populations*, causing a language shift by their gradual adoption of the Arabic language and their incorporation of the culture. Generally, elements of Arabian origin were combined in various forms with elements from conquered regions and ultimately denominated "Arab". Arabization also continued in modern times, most prominently being enforced by the Arab nationalist regimes of Iraq,[1] Syria, Sudan,[2] Mauritania, Algeria[2] and Libya and adoption of Arab identity and culture by non-Arab populations.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Who_16629.html
> 
> 
> The Arabs are not a distinct ethnic group, since there are both white Arabs and black arabs. Some of the black Sudanese Arabs claim descent ln the male line from Arabs of Mohammed's time, and may well be correct in their claim. Nor is language a sufficient criterion of Arabness since there are many Arabic-speaking jews who are not normally called Arabs. The figure of a hundred million come from the populations of the states in the Arab League. For membership ln the Arab League the primary criterion appears to be language: but, despite the presence of Lebanon, which is half Christian, this tends to be coupled with the acceptance of Arab-Islamic culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim? What’s the Difference?! - TeachMideast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> teachmideast.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab* is an ethno-linguistic category, identifying people who speak the *Arabic* language as their mother tongue (or, in the case of immigrants, for example, whose parents or grandparents spoke Arabic as their native language). Arabic is a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew and Aramaic. While Arabs speak the same language, there is enormous ethnic diversity among the spoken dialects.
> 
> There are 26 countries or territories in western Asia and Africa where Arabic is the official or one of the official languages of the state: Algeria, Bahrain, Chad (with French), Comoros (with French and Shikomor),  Djibouti (with French), Egypt, Eritrea (with Tigrignan), Iraq(with Kurdish), Israel (with Hebrew), Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia (with Somali), Syria, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Western Sahara, and Yemen. Alternately, Arab typically applies to the 22 member states of the League of Arab States; these members include the above with exception of Chad, Eritrea, Israel, and the Western Sahara.
> 
> facts-about-arabs
> "Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; most are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.
> 
> If I were to believe you .... then all the people in Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United *Arab* Emirates, and Yemen are descended from Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.
> 
> That's not believable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bernard Lewis is infinitely more authoritative than Wiki.
> 
> View attachment 339747View attachment 339748
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Well here is what is interesting.  You only posted a tiny bit of a quote from it.  Which by the way is the same exact tiny bit of quote posted by a few others here...which makes me  wonder if you just cut and pasted from some website.  Did you actually read the book?
> 
> And, did you note the Wiki was not my only source?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Page 13, “Arabs In History”: “During the first period in Islamic history [622 AD] when Islam was an Arab religion and the Caliphate an Arab Kingdom, the term Arab came to be applied to those who spoke Arabic, were full members by descent of an Arab tribe, and who, either in person or through their ancestors, had originated in Arabia.”
Click to expand...


So you are referring to what "Arab" meant in 622 AD?  1400 years ago?  This would have been before the Arab conquests that mostly occurred between 632–732, after the death of Mohammed.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to believe your claims, it would be believing that every single non-Jewish Palestinian descended from Arabs in the Arabian peninsula, and that is simply not true.
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is not about physical, genetic or blood descent of individuals.  The discussion is about a collective over-taking of the indigenous population (the Jewish people) and replacing that culture with another culture(s). Thus EVERY SINGLE Arab Muslim by DEFINITION is "descended" from the Arabs who originated in other places and over-took the local, native, indigenous population.  Why?  Because the ARAB CULTURE was imported and, by one method or another, imposed on the local, native, indigenous culture (the Jewish culture). And we can test this by examining and comparing the Arab Muslim cultures to other Arab Muslim cultures and contrasting it to local, native, indigenous Hebrew, Jewish, Israeli cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It ignores the ancient history of the place and existence of many peoples in that area
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's take a look at that.  Which peoples existed in that area?  How many peoples?  Can you name them?  What names would you assign to them?  How do you differentiate this peoples from that peoples?  How do you assign 'history' to this peoples or that peoples?  What criteria are you using to determine any of these things?
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie.  What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures?  What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I'm going to add another piece to the pie. What is the POINT in trying to acknowledge indigenous cultures? What is the reason why we are trying to do it, as a global community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And an excellent point it is. Do we need to go back to the cave man? Even they would be from someplace else. People have been on the move since the beginning of time. Every "people" evolve and new people and new ideas are a part of that evolution.
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Look across America with all its different colors, languages, and religions. Can you point out someone who does not belong here? Of course not. Everyone is American.
> 
> Everyone living in, or expelled from, Palestine is Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is an argument against any sort of indigeneity.  This argument claims that there is no such thing as foreign settlers on any land.
> 
> Yet you frequently argue that Jews are "foreign settlers".  You can't have it both ways.  So which part of your argument did you want to withdraw?
> 
> My guess, since this has come up before, is that you will continue to assert that no peoples are foreign settlers, well, except Jews.  Which confirms Sixties point that the Jewish people are UNIQUELY set apart.
Click to expand...

My post was about immigration. In today's world there are virtually no countries who are 100% "indigenous." And it really doesn't matter.

However, there is a big difference between Immigrants and settlers. That difference has nothing to do with religion.


----------



## Vagabond63

rylah said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
Click to expand...


Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabic surnames include locations.
> Iraqi, Masri, Halabi, Hijazi.
> 
> Don't try to find explanations.
> neither _'Palestine' _can be pronounced
> nor _'Fillastine'_ has any actual meaning in Arabic.
> 
> They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Common “palestinian” surname: Bushnaq, signifying Bosnia. How come nobody is named Palestini?
Click to expand...

See post #2789 as it answers your question.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
Click to expand...

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Again.  What's the point?
> 
> Why is it so important to deny another their identity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point is, the “palestinian“ identity has been adopted for political, anti-Israel objectives.
Click to expand...

All "identities" have been adopted for political reasons, since the mid 19th century.


----------



## MartyNYC

Vagabond63 said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
Click to expand...


“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.


----------



## Coyote

Vagabond63 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
Click to expand...

Interesting....I did not know that.  Missing the “informative“ choice.  people were very tribal back then.


----------



## Vagabond63

Coyote said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting....I did not know that.  Missing the “informative“ choice.  people were very tribal back then.
Click to expand...

People are very "tribal" now.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?


----------



## MartyNYC

Vagabond63 said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?
Click to expand...


Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.


----------



## MartyNYC

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
Click to expand...


No place “palestine“ ever existed.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,

BLUF:  Well, that is not entirely true.  You might have to qualify that statement a bit.



MartyNYC said:


> No place “palestine“ ever existed.


*(COMMENT)*

There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:

◈   1922:  Part I • Preliminary • *Title:  Palestine Order in Council* (Paragraph 1)​◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: *A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE*”​◈   2012- UN *Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine**.*" (Formerly For:  Internal Use Only)​
I won't regurgitate what is already written.  I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.  

What I would say, is that "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine_"* is an idea*, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say:_ The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave_;" - or ⁜→* the idea* in the Israeli saying: "_To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem_."  These are ideas that spring from the heart.   Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.                     





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MartyNYC

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> BLUF:  Well, that is not entirely true.  You might have to qualify that statement a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:
> 
> ◈   1922:  Part I • Preliminary • *Title:  Palestine Order in Council* (Paragraph 1)​◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: *A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE*”​◈   2012- UN *Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine**.*" (Formerly For:  Internal Use Only)​
> I won't regurgitate what is already written.  I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.
> 
> What I would say, is that "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine_"* is an idea*, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say:_ The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave_;" - or ⁜→* the idea* in the Israeli saying: "_To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem_."  These are ideas that spring from the heart.   Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Arabs and Muslims didn’t create “palestine” It isn’t their country to be liberated.


----------



## rylah

Vagabond63 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
Click to expand...


The word 'Hebrew' is an English translation of 'Ivri',
which comes from a the name 'Eber; originally 'Ever'.

The Egyptian root of Habiru or Apiru is 'a-f-r which means dust
while the Hebrew root of Ever is 'a-v-r which means side.

To make Habiru into 'thug', 'mercenary' or 'filthy',
one has to switch to Akkadian, and translate a completely different word "SA.ZAG" (if remember correctly).That's kinda a long stretch, to start with a false assumption assumption of a Semitic word originating from a Egyptian, though using an Akkadian translation to attach a completely new meaning to a root of a Hebrew word.

Habiru or 'Apiru in Egyptian was a name for a social class, rather than a nation or a tribe,
they came from all directions and different countries, rather than as a group, which at most can suggest that the Hebrew tribes, who by that time were already known as Israel by the same Egyptians, if following the timeline of the theory which dates their emergence with the exodus of Israel from Egypt, could have been included in that class, but couldn't be what the word defines, because it doesn't refer neither to tribe, ethnicity or an organized unit moving from one place, nor does it fit the Egyptian use of the name Israel and the other side of that theory that also draws connection between the Hebrews, Habiry and the Hyksos. Long stretch as I've said, and quiet self-contradictory on the corners because of the mess trying to bridge all those back from a conclusion rather than otherwise.

The whole theory was common among previous century historians, mostly rejected today.
Mainly because of the development in the research of Hyksos and the war of AhMose.

Now, again, Your theory was to bridge between a translation of an Akkadian word that sounds nothing like the target and used interchangeably for an Egyptian word which root has no common meaning in a similar sounding Hebrew root.

Meanwhile the meaning and origin of 'Palestinian' is clear,
one doesn't have to jump between 3 different languages,
a Hebrew word that means 'invaders',
origin - Aegean and Kasluhi.

As for a meaning of Palestine in Arabic?  - ZERO.
Merely a transliteration of a foreign word, that cannot be even pronounced.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting....I did not know that.  Missing the “informative“ choice.  people were very tribal back then.
Click to expand...


I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.

Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.

Not American tribalism, neither Arab.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> what do you mean by: honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.



When news reached Ishm'ael that Avraham Avinu A"H passed away,
he came from afar to pay respect and at the entrance of the Machpelah cave,
gave way to Yitzhak as recognition of his birthright, which was his ultimate Tshuvah.

Ishm'ael is called 'Adam' as well as Israel,
meaning both have a part in unique assignment in human history,
with a choice of option each of which will eventually result in the same,
but the scenarios can be either severely destructive or unexpectedly inspiring.

Again that Desert dweller Ishm'ael decided to play a Greek sea warrior for a bit,
is not allowing for his Ishmaelite identity and choices to be expressed and valued 100%.
And hopefully, that's exactly what we are seeing today, a rush of Arabian countries detaching themselves from the 'Palestinian' pretense, to the point of being an issue of honor they no longer can associate with.

That is correction of the world.
What results in playing 'Palestinians'?
The due historic justice of the enacted invaders.

Maybe that's important, but I frankly think we both have way more interesting things to do,
and could both benefit from a communication from our more natural positions.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
Click to expand...

Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia


----------



## Vagabond63

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting....I did not know that.  Missing the “informative“ choice.  people were very tribal back then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
> Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
> In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.
> 
> Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
> with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
> Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
> sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
> And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.
> 
> Not American tribalism, neither Arab.
Click to expand...

Tribalism exists today just as in the past, from football fans to religious cults, to political parties, to name a few examples. Neotribalism - Wikipedia The concept of nation state only appeared in the mid 19th century with the emergence of Nationalism as a distinct ideology.


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.
Click to expand...

The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later. 

In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.


----------



## MartyNYC

Vagabond63 said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later.
> 
> In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.
Click to expand...


There is no evidence “the ancient Greeks” called anything “palestine.” And, last time I checked, the Greeks lived on another continent. More to the point, “palestine” does not appear in any ancient Middle East historical records. No such place existed.


----------



## MartyNYC

Vagabond63 said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


Wikipedia?


----------



## rylah

Vagabond63 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or _surnames_, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai _Al_ Balushi, Aisha _Al_ Balushi; _Al Filisṭīnī_, *related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy to help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Interesting....I did not know that.  Missing the “informative“ choice.  people were very tribal back then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
> Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
> In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.
> 
> Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
> with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
> Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
> sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
> And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.
> 
> Not American tribalism, neither Arab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tribalism exists today just as in the past, from football fans to religious cults, to political parties, to name a few examples. Neotribalism - Wikipedia The concept of nation state only appeared in the mid 19th century with the emergence of Nationalism as a distinct ideology.
Click to expand...


That's exactly what I've said,
there's much more to the topic of tribalism in the context of indigenous cultures,
than injecting the term with modern political jargon of the last century.


----------



## rylah

*Māori people and Israel*

The Māori are the indigenous people of New Zealand. 

Recently, the Māori people apologized to Israel for New Zealand's anti-Israel actions at the United Nations. They led a welcoming ceremony (Powhiri) with the message that the Jews have held a "mana whenua", meaning that the Jews are indineous to their native homeland: Israel.


----------



## MartyNYC

There never has been an actual historical place named palestine. Jews, however, are indigenous to Israel.

Pope Francis: Christianity’s Jewish origin


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> BLUF:  Well, that is not entirely true.  You might have to qualify that statement a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:
> 
> ◈   1922:  Part I • Preliminary • *Title:  Palestine Order in Council* (Paragraph 1)​◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: *A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE*”​◈   2012- UN *Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine**.*" (Formerly For:  Internal Use Only)​
> I won't regurgitate what is already written.  I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.
> 
> What I would say, is that "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine_"* is an idea*, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say:_ The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave_;" - or ⁜→* the idea* in the Israeli saying: "_To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem_."  These are ideas that spring from the heart.   Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.


Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over.  What's the point?  Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later.
> 
> In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no evidence “the ancient Greeks” called anything “palestine.” And, last time I checked, the Greeks lived on another continent. More to the point, “palestine” does not appear in any ancient Middle East historical records. No such place existed.
Click to expand...

Oh dear. So you're saying Heroditus made things up. Okaaay. Oh, BTW, check again. ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES, TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS | Facts and Details


----------



## Vagabond63

MartyNYC said:


> Vagabond63 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wikipedia?
Click to expand...

Why not? If the article is well sourced and fact checked, Wikpedia is a conventient source of information.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> BLUF:  Well, that is not entirely true.  You might have to qualify that statement a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> No place “palestine“ ever existed.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:
> 
> ◈   1922:  Part I • Preliminary • *Title:  Palestine Order in Council* (Paragraph 1)​◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: *A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE*”​◈   2012- UN *Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine**.*" (Formerly For:  Internal Use Only)​
> I won't regurgitate what is already written.  I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.
> 
> What I would say, is that "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine_"* is an idea*, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say:_ The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave_;" - or ⁜→* the idea* in the Israeli saying: "_To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem_."  These are ideas that spring from the heart.   Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
Click to expand...


The hate that initiated the Zionist uprising?
Arabs sure didn't expect to be defeated by dhimmis.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

*BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:

An Arab Palestinian based on 



RoccoR said:


> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.





P F Tinmore said:


> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?


*(COMMENT)*

 What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._" 





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Why is there a need to liberate Palestine?


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why is there a need to liberate Palestine?
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a fictional Roman name imposed on Jews’ homeland. It has since been liberated.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
Click to expand...


This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
Click to expand...


I don't see what that has to do with what I said.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
Click to expand...


The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I know the feeling.


----------



## Coyote

MartyNYC said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.
Click to expand...


Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
Click to expand...


Jewish nationalism developed in antiquity, such as reflected by the Hasmoneans, and earlier. Later, reflected by the Jewish wars against the Roman Empire in the first century.


----------



## MartyNYC

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
Click to expand...


Arabs began calling themselves palestinians mostly in the 1960s. “Palestinian Charter” was issued in 1964. Not very ancient. Jews were first called palestinians by the British. It’s a made-up Euro name.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
Click to expand...


I know what you meant, but still I think this is important:

Jewish nationalism didn't start at some point in the late 19th century,
Judaism in itself, in spite common misconception, is by definition a national identity.
And before modern Zionism, which merely became famous for being successful, there were a variety of visionary movements essentially seeking to re-establish a Jewish commonwealth.

Modern Zionism of Herzl ztz"l is a direct successor of the ancient Zionism of the prophets of Israel in the Babylonian diaspora, and the original Zionism of Mosheh Rabbenu A"H.

_"And Mosheh went out to see the work of his people,
and he saw an Egyptian man striking Dryfus..."_


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Why is there a need to liberate Palestine?



There is no such need.  The Jewish Palestinians (now Israelis) have already been liberated.  The Arab Palestinians have already been liberated in Jordan, and in Gaza.  And the matter of the West Bank is easily solved with a minimum effort of drawing borders and a peace treaty and then they too will be liberated and free to do as they please within the boundaries of their State.  

The problem is with those Arab Palestinians who define "liberation" as the destruction of the Jewish liberty.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.



Well, when we are discussing "nationalism" of either the Jewish or the Arab Palestinian variety, we are conflating a number of disparate ideas, some of which have LONG been held by the Jewish people and some of which are new possibilities, including Statehood.   

However, I tend to agree with you that Arab Palestinian national identity exists now and has to be dealt with.  We can't continue to allow people to put their fingers in their ears and scream, "But, but Palestine doesn't exist."  It doesn't exist quite yet as a State (though barring an implosion of some sort, it will inevitably achieve this), but Arab Palestinian national identity certainly does exist.  And its foolish not to acknowledge this.  


Also:  
How Arab Muslims especially and Muslims generally will ultimately solve the inherent conflict between their national identity vs. their longed-for caliphate is unknown.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when we are discussing "nationalism" of either the Jewish or the Arab Palestinian variety, we are conflating a number of disparate ideas, some of which have LONG been held by the Jewish people and some of which are new possibilities, including Statehood.
> 
> However, I tend to agree with you that Arab Palestinian national identity exists now and has to be dealt with.  We can't continue to allow people to put their fingers in their ears and scream, "But, but Palestine doesn't exist."  It doesn't exist quite yet as a State (though barring an implosion of some sort, it will inevitably achieve this), but Arab Palestinian national identity certainly does exist.  And its foolish not to acknowledge this.
> 
> 
> Also:
> How Arab Muslims especially and Muslims generally will ultimately solve the inherent conflict between their national identity vs. their longed-for caliphate is unknown.
Click to expand...


Good points all, though I think Jewishness as a national identity rather than ethnic identity, didn’t emerge until other nationalist identity movements did with the break up of empires.  The Jews by far have successfully achieved this, I think in large part to the diverse backgrounds of their population.  They were and are uniquely able to create a nation without being trapped within just a Middle East orientation.  unlike the Arab states they aren’t having to fight a modernization war with their culture.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is there a need to liberate Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such need.  The Jewish Palestinians (now Israelis) have already been liberated.  The Arab Palestinians have already been liberated in Jordan, and in Gaza.  And the matter of the West Bank is easily solved with a minimum effort of drawing borders and a peace treaty and then they too will be liberated and free to do as they please within the boundaries of their State.
> 
> *The problem is with those Arab Palestinians who define "liberation" as the destruction of the Jewish liberty.*
Click to expand...


That is a good way to put it.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * There is an enormous difference between:
> 
> An Arab Palestinian based on
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What a difference it makes when there is an alternative approach to peace other than →  "_Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could be misunderstanding something here, but I think it's a mistake to assume that all or even most Palestinian identity springs from hate and venom.  Sometimes, I think that is what the media would have us think and what they choose to report on when it comes to Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This “palestinian” leader acknowledged it‘s a bogus identity used as anti-Israel propaganda
> PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't see what that has to do with what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The “palestinian“ identity in large part was formed as a result of hostility toward British rule and Jewish immigration in the British Mandate. Arabs originally identified as Arabs or Syrians or Muslims, not as palestinians, particularly given the development of Arab nationalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know what you meant, but still I think this is important:
> 
> Jewish nationalism didn't start at some point in the late 19th century,
> Judaism in itself, in spite common misconception, is by definition a national identity.
> And before modern Zionism, which merely became famous for being successful, there were a variety of visionary movements essentially seeking to re-establish a Jewish commonwealth.
> 
> Modern Zionism of Herzl ztz"l is a direct successor of the ancient Zionism of the prophets of Israel in the Babylonian diaspora, and the original Zionism of Mosheh Rabbenu A"H.
> 
> _"And Mosheh went out to see the work of his people,
> and he saw an Egyptian man striking Dryfus..."_
Click to expand...


Maccabee revolt and Hasmonean state, s


Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which occurred around the same time as Jewish Nationalism.  The point is - however their nationalist identity was achieved - it exists now and the people, who hold it, largely descend from people who have been there for a very long time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when we are discussing "nationalism" of either the Jewish or the Arab Palestinian variety, we are conflating a number of disparate ideas, some of which have LONG been held by the Jewish people and some of which are new possibilities, including Statehood.
> 
> However, I tend to agree with you that Arab Palestinian national identity exists now and has to be dealt with.  We can't continue to allow people to put their fingers in their ears and scream, "But, but Palestine doesn't exist."  It doesn't exist quite yet as a State (though barring an implosion of some sort, it will inevitably achieve this), but Arab Palestinian national identity certainly does exist.  And its foolish not to acknowledge this.
> 
> 
> Also:
> How Arab Muslims especially and Muslims generally will ultimately solve the inherent conflict between their national identity vs. their longed-for caliphate is unknown.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good points all, though I think Jewishness as a national identity rather than ethnic identity, didn’t emerge until other nationalist identity movements did with the break up of empires.  The Jews by far have successfully achieved this, I think in large part to the diverse backgrounds of their population.  They were and are uniquely able to create a nation without being trapped within just a Middle East orientation.  unlike the Arab states they aren’t having to fight a modernization war with their culture.
Click to expand...


Ancient Jewish nationalism was solidified with the independent Jewish state of Judea under the Hasmoneans, second century BCE. The Maccabean Revolt was a rebellion against Hellenism and reaffirming Jewishness.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> ...I think Jewishness as a national identity rather than ethnic identity, didn’t emerge until other nationalist identity movements did with the break up of empires.


This is where I argue that you/we are conflating many different related but distinct ideas.  Statehood.  Nationalism.  National identity.  Ethnic identity.  Self-determination.  Reconstitution.  Independence.  Return.  



> The Jews by far have successfully achieved this, I think in large part to the diverse backgrounds of their population.


I'd argue that it was because of the homogeneity of their backgrounds despite the diversity that was forced on them. But ... shrug.  Not important as far as conversation between you and I goes.  



> They were and are uniquely able to create a nation without being trapped within just a Middle East orientation.  unlike the Arab states they aren’t having to fight a modernization war with their culture.


Agreed.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...I think Jewishness as a national identity rather than ethnic identity, didn’t emerge until other nationalist identity movements did with the break up of empires.
> 
> 
> 
> This is where I argue that you/we are conflating many different related but distinct ideas.  Statehood.  Nationalism.  National identity.  Ethnic identity.  Self-determination.  Reconstitution.  Independence.  Return.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews by far have successfully achieved this, I think in large part to the diverse backgrounds of their population.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'd argue that it was because of the homogeneity of their backgrounds despite the diversity that was forced on them. But ... shrug.  Not important as far as conversation between you and I goes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were and are uniquely able to create a nation without being trapped within just a Middle East orientation.  unlike the Arab states they aren’t having to fight a modernization war with their culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Agreed.
Click to expand...


1.  Possibly
2.  I don’t know.  I look at Israel and see similarities to countries like the US and Canada, where a gathering of multiple cultures sharing a common dream added a unique cultural perspective.  I think in Israel,  that being Jewish is the common thread uniting them in one dream, despite the diversity of backgrounds they came from, literally all over the world.  They are an old people in a new nation, without all the baggage of old nations trying to adjust. JMO


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> 2.  I don’t know.  I look at Israel and see similarities to countries like the US and Canada, where a gathering of multiple cultures sharing a common dream added a unique cultural perspective.  I think in Israel,  that being Jewish is the common thread uniting them in one dream, despite the diversity of backgrounds they came from, literally all over the world.  They are an old people in a new nation, without all the baggage of old nations trying to adjust. JMO



You are coming at it upside down and backwards. 

Israel is ONE culture (the Jewish culture).  The Jewish people are being re-integrated into that one shared culture. Diaspora backgrounds are interesting, important, diverse.  But not especially relevant to the discussion.

Likening Israel to the US and Canada supports the idea that returning Jews are no longer Jews or of the Jewish culture and are, indeed, settlers.  Just as those of European ancestry are settlers in the US and Canada. 

This is incorrect.  The Jewish people are the indigenous people.  If we are using Canada as an example, they are the Sto-lo, the Anishinaabe, the Ojibwa, the Cree, the Mi'kmaq.  The fact that these First Nations peoples have been forced by circumstance, invasion, conquest, settler colonization and exile to adopt a culture that is not their own does not make them less Sto-lo or Anishinaabe or Ojibwa. 

Just so, it is their Jewishness which creates Israel, not their diversity.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.  I don’t know.  I look at Israel and see similarities to countries like the US and Canada, where a gathering of multiple cultures sharing a common dream added a unique cultural perspective.  I think in Israel,  that being Jewish is the common thread uniting them in one dream, despite the diversity of backgrounds they came from, literally all over the world.  They are an old people in a new nation, without all the baggage of old nations trying to adjust. JMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are coming at it upside down and backwards.
> 
> Israel is ONE culture (the Jewish culture).  The Jewish people are being re-integrated into that one shared culture. Diaspora backgrounds are interesting, important, diverse.  But not especially relevant to the discussion.
> 
> Likening Israel to the US and Canada supports the idea that returning Jews are no longer Jews or of the Jewish culture and are, indeed, settlers.  Just as those of European ancestry are settlers in the US and Canada.
> 
> This is incorrect.  The Jewish people are the indigenous people.  If we are using Canada as an example, they are the Sto-lo, the Anishinaabe, the Ojibwa, the Cree, the Mi'kmaq.  The fact that these First Nations peoples have been forced by circumstance, invasion, conquest, settler colonization and exile to adopt a culture that is not their own does not make them less Sto-lo or Anishinaabe or Ojibwa.
> 
> Just so, it is their Jewishness which creates Israel, not their diversity.
Click to expand...


But I don’t think that is totally accurate and is very very dicey to discuss because it can be seen to feed into canards that Jews are not a culture or are invaders and that makes it almost a taboo.

When there is a diaspora, and a people are spread around the world, they adopt the cultures of that area while retaining greater or lesser amounts of their own down the generations.

If they return to the region of origin, they bring with them those cultures in addition to what they have of their native culture.  They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.  I don’t know.  I look at Israel and see similarities to countries like the US and Canada, where a gathering of multiple cultures sharing a common dream added a unique cultural perspective.  I think in Israel,  that being Jewish is the common thread uniting them in one dream, despite the diversity of backgrounds they came from, literally all over the world.  They are an old people in a new nation, without all the baggage of old nations trying to adjust. JMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are coming at it upside down and backwards.
> 
> Israel is ONE culture (the Jewish culture).  The Jewish people are being re-integrated into that one shared culture. Diaspora backgrounds are interesting, important, diverse.  But not especially relevant to the discussion.
> 
> Likening Israel to the US and Canada supports the idea that returning Jews are no longer Jews or of the Jewish culture and are, indeed, settlers.  Just as those of European ancestry are settlers in the US and Canada.
> 
> This is incorrect.  The Jewish people are the indigenous people.  If we are using Canada as an example, they are the Sto-lo, the Anishinaabe, the Ojibwa, the Cree, the Mi'kmaq.  The fact that these First Nations peoples have been forced by circumstance, invasion, conquest, settler colonization and exile to adopt a culture that is not their own does not make them less Sto-lo or Anishinaabe or Ojibwa.
> 
> Just so, it is their Jewishness which creates Israel, not their diversity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But I don’t think that is totally accurate and is very very dicey to discuss because it can be seen to feed into canards that Jews are not a culture or are invaders and that makes it almost a taboo.
> 
> When there is a diaspora, and a people are spread around the world, they adopt the cultures of that area while retaining greater or lesser amounts of their own down the generations.
> 
> If they return to the region of origin, they bring with them those cultures in addition to what they have of their native culture.  They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.
Click to expand...


What makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, and the world in response, never failed to remind Israel they were foreign, and couldn't assimilate even if trying very hard. 

What other culture was ever as influential and relevant, while preserving small for so long?

And by the way, what western values? Liberty?
Maybe you can tell what is quoted in the opening of the liberty bill?


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.


I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
Click to expand...


European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.

For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
Click to expand...

The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.
Click to expand...


Neither really is Jewish culture.
What was enlightenment about? Rationalism, science, liberty, humanism?

That's why I said Rambam and Ramchal.

It's common that people view Jewish culture through the prism of religions,
specifically projecting Christianity and Islam on it. Yet its the so called today's 'secular' values much cherished in the enlightened West, that were adopted from Judaism.

Who is a great teacher? One who manages to trick the ego of his pupil to think he reached the correct conclusion on his own. So that the learned material becomes really 'his own'.

So do Christians and Muslims till this day blame Jews for not proselytizing, as in to keep it for ourselves, not realizing this is exactly what happened, and that this is how its done properly.
Without conquest, inquisitions and burning at the stake.


----------



## MartyNYC

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
Click to expand...


Most Israeli Jews are indigenous to Israel and the region. The “native” people of “palestine“ were Jews, whose homeland had the fake name “palestine” imposed on it by the Romans, “only” about 2,000 years ago, in retribution for the Jewish Bar Kokhba Revolt.

BBC documentary of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. There weren’t any “palestinians“




If


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither really is Jewish culture.
> What was enlightenment about? Rationalism, science, liberty, humanism?
> 
> That's why I said Rambam and Ramchal.
> 
> It's common that people view Jewish culture through the prism of religions,
> specifically projecting Christianity and Islam on it. Yet its the so called today's 'secular' values much cherished in the enlightened West, that were adopted from Judaism.
> 
> Who is a great teacher? One who manages to trick the ego of his pupil to think he reached the correct conclusion on his own. So that the learned material becomes really 'his own'.
> 
> So do Christians and Muslims till this day blame Jews for not proselytizing, as in to keep it for ourselves, not realizing this is exactly what happened, and that this is how its done properly.
> Without conquest, inquisitions and burning at the stake.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that the Enlightenment was inspired by the Jews? In what way? They were more liberal, open for new daring ideas and debates? Considering the misfortunes of Baruch Spinoza I have some doubts.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither really is Jewish culture.
> What was enlightenment about? Rationalism, science, liberty, humanism?
> 
> That's why I said Rambam and Ramchal.
> 
> It's common that people view Jewish culture through the prism of religions,
> specifically projecting Christianity and Islam on it. Yet its the so called today's 'secular' values much cherished in the enlightened West, that were adopted from Judaism.
> 
> Who is a great teacher? One who manages to trick the ego of his pupil to think he reached the correct conclusion on his own. So that the learned material becomes really 'his own'.
> 
> So do Christians and Muslims till this day blame Jews for not proselytizing, as in to keep it for ourselves, not realizing this is exactly what happened, and that this is how its done properly.
> Without conquest, inquisitions and burning at the stake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you trying to say that the Enlightenment was inspired by the Jews? In what way? They were more liberal, open for new daring ideas and debates? Considering the misfortunes of Baruch Spinoza I have some doubts.
Click to expand...


I'm saying that the Western values associated with the Enlightenment,
was essentially a secular reformation of the Christian world, seemingly shedding religious order, by adopting a more humanist, world based practical approach to fulfilling the ideals of the Bible, based on personal and national liberty instead of dogma and centralized priesthood rule, thus aligning with a form more in line with the original Jewish vision for the world, its moral order of priority and values.

But one cannot reach that conclusion by comparing the social situation of the diaspora community in Europe by the social developments in Europe. Mainly because the social position was entirely different, all kings wanted Jewish advisors, but the communities were held on a lower social level than the rest, and to a much greater extent the story of Shabtai Zvi which had an immediate reaction stiffening especially the core of the diaspora in Europe, making them overly suspicious of anything remotely sounding new or a change, both within and outside.

In that context, and we are talking about a relatively short period of time, some 200-250 years ago, was Shpinoza, the Enlightenment, Emancipation, Liberty and what is wrongly associated with being a byproduct -  Zionism. But if examined closer, one sees that these movements all somehow held the stories of Israel as an ideal, or actual Israel's re-constitution as a naturally integral goal.

There's a reason why the US, the poster child of the Enlightenment, chose the story of Moses liberating his nation, and the 'new Jerusalem' as archetypal to their foundation.


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither really is Jewish culture.
> What was enlightenment about? Rationalism, science, liberty, humanism?
> 
> That's why I said Rambam and Ramchal.
> 
> It's common that people view Jewish culture through the prism of religions,
> specifically projecting Christianity and Islam on it. Yet its the so called today's 'secular' values much cherished in the enlightened West, that were adopted from Judaism.
> 
> Who is a great teacher? One who manages to trick the ego of his pupil to think he reached the correct conclusion on his own. So that the learned material becomes really 'his own'.
> 
> So do Christians and Muslims till this day blame Jews for not proselytizing, as in to keep it for ourselves, not realizing this is exactly what happened, and that this is how its done properly.
> Without conquest, inquisitions and burning at the stake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you trying to say that the Enlightenment was inspired by the Jews? In what way? They were more liberal, open for new daring ideas and debates? Considering the misfortunes of Baruch Spinoza I have some doubts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm saying that the Western values associated with the Enlightenment,
> was essentially a secular reformation of the Christian world, seemingly shedding religious order, by adopting a more humanist, world based practical approach to fulfilling the ideals of the Bible, based on personal and national liberty instead of dogma and centralized priesthood rule, thus aligning with a form more in line with the original Jewish vision for the world, its moral order of priority and values.
> 
> But one cannot reach that conclusion by comparing the social situation of the diaspora community in Europe by the social developments in Europe. Mainly because the social position was entirely different, all kings wanted Jewish advisors, but the communities were held on a lower social level than the rest, and to a much greater extent the story of Shabtai Zvi which had an immediate reaction stiffening especially the core of the diaspora in Europe, making them overly suspicious of anything remotely sounding new or a change, both within and outside.
> 
> In that context, and we are talking about a relatively short period of time, some 200-250 years ago, was Shpinoza, the Enlightenment, Emancipation, Liberty and what is wrongly associated with being a byproduct -  Zionism. But if examined closer, one sees that these movements all somehow held the stories of Israel as an ideal, or actual Israel's re-constitution as a naturally integral goal.
> 
> There's a reason why the US, the poster child of the Enlightenment, chose the story of Moses liberating his nation, and the 'new Jerusalem' as archetypal to their foundation.
Click to expand...

About 'new Jerusalem'. I have a somewhat strange question. Do you consider Israel to be the only 'proper' place for the Jews to live? Israel is virtually a tiny state with scarce natural resources and arable land. If the population of it will be growing then this place will become extremely 'dense'. 

Is there some other place to become the 'new Jerusalem' (or more properly the 'other Jerusalem') if this is going to happen? I don't mean just Jewish diaspora in other countries. But some place to which they bring their culture and the way of living as a statewide feature.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.



This paragraph skirts (or reeks of) some very unpleasant ideas.

It is a (far too common) sense of "Western" superiority.  It suggests that "western ideals" (without defining what is meant by that term other than that they are vaguely European) are of a higher quality than non-western ideals.  It suggests that these high quality ideals are not to be found in non-western cultures and that they not only originate in western cultures, but are exclusive to them.  It suggests that "strength" comes from taking on or adopting a colonizing or diaspora culture.

Can we decolonize this, please?  

The Jewish people who were forced into a cultural and physical Diaspora ARE the SAME people who existed pre-Diaspora.  The lived cultural experiences of the Diaspora Jewish people were colored by their pre-existing Jewish world view.  Any new ideas were processed through that Jewish world view.  That world view and the cultural expressions of that world view have survived through generations.  Have their been changes and shifts? Sure.  But those changes were not a replacement (ugh).  We didn't take out the red block and insert a blue block.  The different ideas (ideals) went into and through and around and were filtered by the Jewish world view.  You can't put things in water and have them not be wet. 

The Jewish people (or any colonized people) are not carrier pigeons of "western ideals" which are meant to be dispersed back into the places of origin for indigenous peoples.  That is the worst type of colonizing:  the colonizing of "superior" ideas.   

The Jewish people are not strengthened by their experiences of invasion, colonization, conquest, exile, diaspora, pogroms, discrimination, genocide.  Don't romantacize it.  It is loss upon loss upon loss.  And a potentiality which is entirely unknown.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This paragraph skirts (or reeks of) some very unpleasant ideas.
> 
> It is a (far too common) sense of "Western" superiority.  It suggests that "western ideals" (without defining what is meant by that term other than that they are vaguely European) are of a higher quality than non-western ideals.  It suggests that these high quality ideals are not to be found in non-western cultures and that they not only originate in western cultures, but are exclusive to them.  It suggests that "strength" comes from taking on or adopting a colonizing or diaspora culture.
> 
> Can we decolonize this, please?
> 
> The Jewish people who were forced into a cultural and physical Diaspora ARE the SAME people who existed pre-Diaspora.  The lived cultural experiences of the Diaspora Jewish people were colored by their pre-existing Jewish world view.  Any new ideas were processed through that Jewish world view.  That world view and the cultural expressions of that world view have survived through generations.  Have their been changes and shifts? Sure.  But those changes were not a replacement (ugh).  We didn't take out the red block and insert a blue block.  The different ideas (ideals) went into and through and around and were filtered by the Jewish world view.  You can't put things in water and have them not be wet.
> 
> The Jewish people (or any colonized people) are not carrier pigeons of "western ideals" which are meant to be dispersed back into the places of origin for indigenous peoples.  That is the worst type of colonizing:  the colonizing of "superior" ideas.
> 
> The Jewish people are not strengthened by their experiences of invasion, colonization, conquest, exile, diaspora, pogroms, discrimination, genocide.  Don't romantacize it.  It is loss upon loss upon loss.  And a potentiality which is entirely unknown.
Click to expand...


This would make a great discussion ...I don’t agree with you on all the negatives...but it is going to take us way off topic and isn’t even just IP.  Would you want to start a thread?


----------



## Shusha

ESay said:


> Is there some other place to become the 'new Jerusalem' (or more properly the 'other Jerusalem') if this is going to happen? I don't mean just Jewish diaspora in other countries. But some place to which they bring their culture and the way of living as a statewide feature.



There are a couple of answers I might give to this.

1. A flat out NO.  There is a very specific place in the world which, for reasons of faith, there are no other options.  Its impossible.  A place so sacred that no other place could function as a replacement. 

2. The Jewish people HAVE succeeded in bringing their culture and way of living in communities throughout the Diaspora. The Jewish people have never had the opportunity to create a State, until about a hundred years ago. 

3. The question is kinda weird (read: uniquely applied to the Jewish people). Is there some other place in the world where (insert indigenous peoples name) can go and bring their culture and way of living?  As in:  Could we move the Catalans to the Australian outback so they can have a State with their own culture?  Could we move the Ojibwa to the Amazon so they can have a State with their own culture?  Could we move the Tibetans to the Scottish highlands?  Or the Maori people to the Sahara desert?  Or maybe the native Hawaii to the Canadian Arctic?  What is the POINT of requiring an indigenous peoples to move into another territory?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> This would make a great discussion ...I don’t agree with you on all the negatives...but it is going to take us way off topic and isn’t even just IP.  Would you want to start a thread?



Seems to me that the topic of decolonization on a thread about indigeniety is exactly the right place to hold this conversation.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This would make a great discussion ...I don’t agree with you on all the negatives...but it is going to take us way off topic and isn’t even just IP.  Would you want to start a thread?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me that the topic of decolonization on a thread about indigeniety is exactly the right place to hold this conversation.
Click to expand...

Ok then.  It will take us away from just Jewish people.  I have to go take dogs out.  I will respond when I come back.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> This would make a great discussion ...I don’t agree with you on all the negatives...but it is going to take us way off topic and isn’t even just IP.  Would you want to start a thread?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me that the topic of decolonization on a thread about indigeniety is exactly the right place to hold this conversation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok then.  It will take us away from just Jewish people.  I have to go take dogs out.  I will respond when I come back.
Click to expand...


I, personally, think its good to discuss broader terms, even on IP, as a way of establishing objective criteria.  So, bring it.  Well, bring it later, after the dogs have gone out.  I wouldn't want to contribute to the delinquency of the puppies!


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> makes you think those western values weren't adopted from Judaism in the first place?
> Israel in the diaspora changed the entire world, the world in response didn't let Israel assimilate.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it would be more accurate to say that it is 'European' Enlightment gave an impulse to the 'Jewish' one than the other way around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> European enlightenment was not the same for Europeans as for Jews, for whom first and foremost it was a change in social status. For which of course, Jews were expected to give up their identity.
> 
> For Europe it was an enlightenment, but from Jewish perspective, what was in it?
> Was there anything new the Rambam and Ramchal didn't write?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Enlightenment was not about a religion. What we see today as so called civilized world was deprived from it - science, technology, social and I even say moral norms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither really is Jewish culture.
> What was enlightenment about? Rationalism, science, liberty, humanism?
> 
> That's why I said Rambam and Ramchal.
> 
> It's common that people view Jewish culture through the prism of religions,
> specifically projecting Christianity and Islam on it. Yet its the so called today's 'secular' values much cherished in the enlightened West, that were adopted from Judaism.
> 
> Who is a great teacher? One who manages to trick the ego of his pupil to think he reached the correct conclusion on his own. So that the learned material becomes really 'his own'.
> 
> So do Christians and Muslims till this day blame Jews for not proselytizing, as in to keep it for ourselves, not realizing this is exactly what happened, and that this is how its done properly.
> Without conquest, inquisitions and burning at the stake.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you trying to say that the Enlightenment was inspired by the Jews? In what way? They were more liberal, open for new daring ideas and debates? Considering the misfortunes of Baruch Spinoza I have some doubts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm saying that the Western values associated with the Enlightenment,
> was essentially a secular reformation of the Christian world, seemingly shedding religious order, by adopting a more humanist, world based practical approach to fulfilling the ideals of the Bible, based on personal and national liberty instead of dogma and centralized priesthood rule, thus aligning with a form more in line with the original Jewish vision for the world, its moral order of priority and values.
> 
> But one cannot reach that conclusion by comparing the social situation of the diaspora community in Europe by the social developments in Europe. Mainly because the social position was entirely different, all kings wanted Jewish advisors, but the communities were held on a lower social level than the rest, and to a much greater extent the story of Shabtai Zvi which had an immediate reaction stiffening especially the core of the diaspora in Europe, making them overly suspicious of anything remotely sounding new or a change, both within and outside.
> 
> In that context, and we are talking about a relatively short period of time, some 200-250 years ago, was Shpinoza, the Enlightenment, Emancipation, Liberty and what is wrongly associated with being a byproduct -  Zionism. But if examined closer, one sees that these movements all somehow held the stories of Israel as an ideal, or actual Israel's re-constitution as a naturally integral goal.
> 
> There's a reason why the US, the poster child of the Enlightenment, chose the story of Moses liberating his nation, and the 'new Jerusalem' as archetypal to their foundation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> About 'new Jerusalem'. I have a somewhat strange question. Do you consider Israel to be the only 'proper' place for the Jews to live? Israel is virtually a tiny state with scarce natural resources and arable land. If the population of it will be growing then this place will become extremely 'dense'.
> 
> Is there some other place to become the 'new Jerusalem' (or more properly the 'other Jerusalem') if this is going to happen? I don't mean just Jewish diaspora in other countries. But some place to which they bring their culture and the way of living as a statewide feature.
Click to expand...


Yes, to inherit the land, work and govern are Torah commandments.
Our sages say, that when a Jew walks 4 steps in Israel he/she fulfills the entire Torah.

Today there're 7 million Jews living in Israel. The land can easily support double that, the entire population of Jews in the world is less. With population comes not only increase in resource use, but also economy. The capacity was there when Israel relied mainly on agriculture, and it is certainly there in the modern 'innovation nation'. The land is unbelievably wide when her children are many, and unbelievably scarce and poor when they're away.

The entire male population used to pack the Temple Mount, till some were just stuck in between without touching floor, and then prostrate all together with distance between each other. How? No one knows how, but no one worried about that.

What is Jerusalem? The place from where the world was created and flooded, where Adam gave the first offering, where Abraham Avinu A"H bound Yitzhak A"H, where G-d chose to make a place of His presence in the world. That kinda isn't our choice for the location.

I think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This paragraph skirts (or reeks of) some very unpleasant ideas.
> 
> It is a (far too common) sense of "Western" superiority.  It suggests that "western ideals" (without defining what is meant by that term other than that they are vaguely European) are of a higher quality than non-western ideals.  It suggests that these high quality ideals are not to be found in non-western cultures and that they not only originate in western cultures, but are exclusive to them.  It suggests that "strength" comes from taking on or adopting a colonizing or diaspora culture.
> 
> Can we decolonize this, please?
> 
> The Jewish people who were forced into a cultural and physical Diaspora ARE the SAME people who existed pre-Diaspora.  The lived cultural experiences of the Diaspora Jewish people were colored by their pre-existing Jewish world view.  Any new ideas were processed through that Jewish world view.  That world view and the cultural expressions of that world view have survived through generations.  Have their been changes and shifts? Sure.  But those changes were not a replacement (ugh).  We didn't take out the red block and insert a blue block.  The different ideas (ideals) went into and through and around and were filtered by the Jewish world view.  You can't put things in water and have them not be wet.
> 
> The Jewish people (or any colonized people) are not carrier pigeons of "western ideals" which are meant to be dispersed back into the places of origin for indigenous peoples.  That is the worst type of colonizing:  the colonizing of "superior" ideas.
> 
> The Jewish people are not strengthened by their experiences of invasion, colonization, conquest, exile, diaspora, pogroms, discrimination, genocide.  Don't romantacize it.  It is loss upon loss upon loss.  And a potentiality which is entirely unknown.
Click to expand...


The Greek used to view wisdom as an exclusively Greek virtue, and any expression of wisdom in other nations as an expression of Greek wisdom.

When the original Septuagint translation was written for the library of Alexandria, our sages said darkness covered to the world for 3 days. It turned into a mundane Greek book stuffed on the philosophy shelve of some new age store...


----------



## Coyote

Ok, I'll respond below but first I want to make very clear what I'm NOT arguing for:

I am not arguing that Jewish is not a culture.
I am not arguing that Jews are not an indigenous people of Palestine.
I am not arguing that Jews from other parts of the world are somehow less Jewish or not really Jews.

I want to be clear about that up front.



Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are not the same people who left though and that shouldn’t be a negative but a positive and, imo, in the case of Israel, a strength because they brought a number of western ideals into their nation.  So their new nation is a combination of their Jewishness and the cultures they brought back with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This paragraph skirts (or reeks of) some very unpleasant ideas.
> 
> It is a (far too common) sense of "Western" superiority.  It suggests that "western ideals" (without defining what is meant by that term other than that they are vaguely European) are of a higher quality than non-western ideals.  It suggests that these high quality ideals are not to be found in non-western cultures and that they not only originate in western cultures, but are exclusive to them.  It suggests that "strength" comes from taking on or adopting a colonizing or diaspora culture.
> 
> Can we decolonize this, please?
> 
> The Jewish people who were forced into a cultural and physical Diaspora ARE the SAME people who existed pre-Diaspora.  The lived cultural experiences of the Diaspora Jewish people were colored by their pre-existing Jewish world view.  Any new ideas were processed through that Jewish world view.  That world view and the cultural expressions of that world view have survived through generations.  Have their been changes and shifts? Sure.  But those changes were not a replacement (ugh).  We didn't take out the red block and insert a blue block.  The different ideas (ideals) went into and through and around and were filtered by the Jewish world view.  You can't put things in water and have them not be wet.
> 
> The Jewish people (or any colonized people) are not carrier pigeons of "western ideals" which are meant to be dispersed back into the places of origin for indigenous peoples.  That is the worst type of colonizing:  the colonizing of "superior" ideas.
> The Jewish people are not strengthened by their experiences of invasion, colonization, conquest, exile, diaspora, pogroms, discrimination, genocide.
> Don't romantacize it.  It is loss upon loss upon loss.  And a potentiality which is entirely unknown.
Click to expand...



First, I reject the argument that this has to do with colonization.  I think that term gets stretched into being essentially meaningless.

Rather than suggesting strength comes from "_comes from taking on or adopting a colonizing or diaspora culture_" I would suggest looking at it in a different way.

Cultures do not exist in a vacuum nor are they static (with maybe a few exceptions such as extremely isolated cultures like in the rainforest).  Overtime, cultures take on parts of other cultures gained through trade, migrations, conquests (either of them or they of others).  

At what point do you decide it's strength or a weakness and what makes it so?

Your statement:  _The Jewish people who were forced into a cultural and physical Diaspora ARE the SAME people who existed pre-Diaspora._

I disagree.  They are not.  Those people belonged to a very ancient culture.  The people today, who returned or immigrated back (however you want to term it) are not culturally the same people.  They share the same heritage, they share aspects of a common culture, they have a shared history but they are not the same as the the culture that existed 3000 (?) years ago.  

In the most simplistic terms, I would point out attitudes towards women.  The culture then was certainly NOT enlightened in that regard it was then what is still now, much the norm in the Middle Eastern cultures (not just Islam, but the other faiths in the region other than Israel). 

So where did those ideas come from?  My argument is, in that, it came from Western ideas that separated the idea of rights from religious doctrine...in other words secularism.  That's not to say Western culture is "superior" - but, as a woman, I would rather live in that world.  And, as a corollary - religious societies/cultures trying to rationalize a non-traditional view towards women, look at their scripture and find the parts that allow for that - but they are viewing it through a modern lens and a western idea of rights that did not previously exist in those societies.  It's there, in scripture (along with other stuff that completely contradicts) - but you need a different lens to see it.  My argument is that lens comes from western thought.



Your statement:  _The Jewish people are not strengthened by their experiences of invasion, colonization, conquest, exile, diaspora, pogroms, discrimination, genocide. _ 

How do you know they are not?  It is not romanticizing it to take note of facts.  Adversity can often lead to strengths.  Adversity can help maintain cultural cohesion for example where they might otherwise simply melt into the dominant culture.  A people forbidden from owning land (farming) having to turn towards other things to make a living.  Adversity that might also have helped to create a very rich literary and educationally oriented culture.  That's not romanticizing - that's recognizing what adversity has done to shape a culture.

I would argue that as a result, Jewish culture today is very different and that should not be seen as a detriment, a slur or a negative.

When I look at Israel - I see a nation formed by immigrants from almost every part of the world returning to the land of their ancestors.  I see two strengths at play.  One, a common shared culture and heritage of being Jewish.  Two, the separate cultures they bring with them from the countries they immigrate from.  

With a common shared culture, they also shared a common dream - to create a new nation, for a people to never again be at the mercy of others, to return to the land of their ancestors, to create a Jewish nation.  Is that not correct?

But, from what I've read - I also know that there was a lot of contention, a lot of agreements and opposing factions as to exactly what form this nation would take.  What won out, initially, was something of a secular democracy that was culturally Jewish.  Is that correct?  To me that seems to say that there are multiple cultural identities at play - brought in by the many different people who came there, and that included very western ideas of separation of religion and governance.  There is the uniting theme - we are Jewish.  Jewish culture.  But with it - the Jewish Plus of every country they came from.  And isn't just that they brought that country with them but the unique Jewishness of that country.   Does that make sense or is it offensive?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Cultures do not exist in a vacuum nor are they static ...
> 
> At what point do you decide it's strength or a weakness and what makes it so?



Good question.  Since you were the one who defined the adoption of "western ideals" as a strength, why don't give this question a shot?

I'd also be curious how you separate "western ideals" and colonization.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> So where did those ideas come from?  My argument is, in that, it came from Western ideas that separated the idea of rights from religious doctrine...in other words secularism.


Really?  So the idea of "rights" arose only with the advent of secularism and Western (read: white European) ideas? I mean, its totally not possible or conceivable that the idea of "rights" was pre-existing in the world's religious faiths, right?  Preposterous, right?  Barbarians.  Primitives.  Lacking in any sort of moral compass until the Europeans enlightened them, right?

And that doesn't at all strike you as something intimately tied to the concept of colonization?



> ...but they are viewing it through a modern lens and a western idea of rights that did not previously exist in those societies. My argument is that lens comes from western thought.


The idea of rights most certainly previously existed in those societies.  We didn't need the "westerns" (read: white Europeans) to come along and introduce the idea of rights.  

In fact, it might be a fair argument that "western ideas" were the downfall of rights and the evolution of our human understanding of rights, rather than the "enlightenment".  How does the colonization of the Americas, as an example, illuminate rights and "western ideals"?


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?


That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.

I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something. 

By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.


----------



## ESay

Shusha said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there some other place to become the 'new Jerusalem' (or more properly the 'other Jerusalem') if this is going to happen? I don't mean just Jewish diaspora in other countries. But some place to which they bring their culture and the way of living as a statewide feature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are a couple of answers I might give to this.
> 
> 1. A flat out NO.  There is a very specific place in the world which, for reasons of faith, there are no other options.  Its impossible.  A place so sacred that no other place could function as a replacement.
> 
> 2. The Jewish people HAVE succeeded in bringing their culture and way of living in communities throughout the Diaspora. The Jewish people have never had the opportunity to create a State, until about a hundred years ago.
> 
> 3. The question is kinda weird (read: uniquely applied to the Jewish people). Is there some other place in the world where (insert indigenous peoples name) can go and bring their culture and way of living?  As in:  Could we move the Catalans to the Australian outback so they can have a State with their own culture?  Could we move the Ojibwa to the Amazon so they can have a State with their own culture?  Could we move the Tibetans to the Scottish highlands?  Or the Maori people to the Sahara desert?  Or maybe the native Hawaii to the Canadian Arctic?  What is the POINT of requiring an indigenous peoples to move into another territory?
Click to expand...

Mentioning other nations in this context is irrelevant. Especially Maori with Sahara or Hawaiians with Arctic. That is just childish, sorry. 

Throughout centuries the Jews lived in Central and Eastern Europe and gave significant input in economical and culture life of these lands.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
Click to expand...


Frankly, not sure I understand.

Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...

Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.

There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.


----------



## MartyNYC

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
Click to expand...


Jerusalem’s legitimate holiness is strictly in Judaism.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cultures do not exist in a vacuum nor are they static ...
> 
> At what point do you decide it's strength or a weakness and what makes it so?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good question.  Since you were the one who defined the adoption of "western ideals" as a strength, why don't give this question a shot?
> 
> I'd also be curious how you separate "western ideals" and colonization.
Click to expand...


I view "western ideals" as those ideas that came out of the enlightenment - specifically in terms of individual rights, liberty, equality, democracy, a justice system where one is tried by a jury of one's peers.  Separation of church and government, secular humanism.  Political and religious pluralism.  That is not to say it is unique to western thought, but as an entire package it is strongly identified with western thought.

I think this describes well:

_Western culture is characterized by a host of artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions; the heritage of Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups, as well as Christianity, which played an important part in the shaping of Western civilization since at least the 4th century._​​_Also contributing to Western thought, in ancient times and then in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance onwards, a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment._​​_Values of Western culture have, throughout history, been derived from political thought, widespread employment of rational argument favouring freethought, assimilation of human rights, the need for equality, and democracy._​
How do I separate it from colonization?  The two are different but one influenced the other, I won't argue that.

In the Americas, it was Manifest Destiny and yes, it led to a lot of tragedy we are still atoning for.

I do think those values are a strength - but that doesn't mean they are 100% good or have not been used for bad purposes (ie - subjugation of indigenous peoples around the world).  

Where I see strengths are:

The idea (not always followed in reality) that everyone in a society is equal in terms of rights.  That means religious, political, ideological, ethnic pluralism and gender equality.

Governance by the people through their elected representatives regardless of religion, political affiliation, ideology, ethnic background or gender.

Separation of church from state.  I know I have harped on this before in conversations.  I have never seen a state who's government and legal system is largely controlled religious doctrine, truly incorporate the values of tolerance, plurality and equality.  At best there seems a temporary tolerance, easily upset.

The treatment of women.  I'm not sure this came out of "western ideals" exactly but it came out of western countries.  The entire women's movement for equality, the right to vote, the right to independently seek employment, to govern came out of Europe/America.  I can't find any ancient societies that even come close to that.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> So where did those ideas come from?  My argument is, in that, it came from Western ideas that separated the idea of rights from religious doctrine...in other words secularism.
> 
> 
> 
> Really? * So the idea of "rights" arose only with the advent of secularism and Western (read: white European) ideas?* I mean, its totally not possible or conceivable that the idea of "rights" was pre-existing in the world's religious faiths, right?  Preposterous, right?  Barbarians.  Primitives.  Lacking in any sort of moral compass until the Europeans enlightened them, right?
> 
> And that doesn't at all strike you as something intimately tied to the concept of colonization?
Click to expand...


No, I would not say ONLY and I would not say they did not exist in religious faiths but they did not exist as a whole.

I think western culture took parts from many other sources and made something unique with it, and it is that which I see as a strength, for example, the idea that people can govern themselves.

I put this in my other response but I'll repeat it here because it shows that "western thought" comes out of many traditions:

I think this describes well:

_Western culture is characterized by a host of artistic, philosophic, literary, and legal themes and traditions; the heritage of Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Jewish, Slavic, Latin, and other ethnic and linguistic groups, as well as Christianity, which played an important part in the shaping of Western civilization since at least the 4th century.

Also contributing to Western thought, in ancient times and then in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance onwards, a tradition of rationalism in various spheres of life, developed by Hellenistic philosophy, Scholasticism, humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment.

Values of Western culture have, throughout history, been derived from political thought, widespread employment of rational argument favouring freethought, assimilation of human rights, the need for equality, and democracy._

Your statement: _Preposterous, right?  Barbarians.  Primitives.  Lacking in any sort of moral compass until the Europeans enlightened them, right?_

No.  *And you are TOTALLY mischaracterizing my words*.  I do not view cultures as superior/inferior or moral/immoral or wholly good or wholly bad.  *Is that how you view  western culture? *They each have strengths/weaknesses - but, how that is viewed depends on the people within it and no culture can be viewed independent of the environment that created it.  My main point, and how it relates to our initial discussion is that cultures don't thrive in a vacuum and the ability of a culture to utilize parts of other cultures - other ways of thinking is, in my opinion, often an advantage. It can be growth.  




> ...but they are viewing it through a modern lens and a western idea of rights that did not previously exist in those societies. My argument is that lens comes from western thought.
> 
> 
> 
> *The idea of rights most certainly previously existed in those societies.*  We didn't need the "westerns" (read: white Europeans) to come along and introduce the idea of rights.
Click to expand...


Rights existed, but it depends on the society as to who had rights and who did not.  You can't lump all non-Western cultures into one heroic monolith.  Just like western culture they had their failings, shortcomings, intolerances and cruelties.

In actual practice - where do women's rights lie in these other societies if you strip away ALL western influence?  I believe that the movements for equality for women all stem from the west.



> In fact, it might be a fair argument that "western ideas" were the downfall of rights and the evolution of our human understanding of rights, rather than the "enlightenment".
> 
> How does the colonization of the Americas, as an example, illuminate rights and "western ideals"?



Maybe, but it is also the type of argument that is impossible to solve - it's a game of "what if's".  But it is possible to look at some countries, with an ancient long standing cultures that have emerged from colonialism culturally intact or were never subject to colonialism.  What comes to mind are China and India.  

India, despite being under Britain for a time, maintained it's diverse culture.  It's urban areas urban areas are more highly educated, affluent and "westernized".  It's rural areas less so and especially for women.  Aspects that are identifiably Indian (defined as Hindu majority) and not western,  include the role of women, the treatment of widows, the value of girl children, child marriages, and the caste system.  These remain despite British colonialism and despite making the caste system illegal. 

While British colonialism did a lot of damage, it did add some positives that did not exist before- parliamentary democracy, a civil service, the end of sati.

China, was never colonized, in fact, it was itself a colonizer, and it has a very ancient and continuous culture.  Is there evidence there that the idea of individual rights, democratic governance, equality for women developed on its own?  Women's rights in China were somewhat enforced through communism.


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel. 

I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality. 

This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences. 

But of course, that is only a pure theory now.


----------



## MartyNYC

Renowned scholar of Middle East history Bernard Lewis has written in his memoir, “Notes On A Century; Reflections Of A Middle East Historian,” the history of “palestine“ as, in essence, having merely been a fictional European term for Jews’ homeland, dating back to the Roman Empire and extending to modern times. Contrary to anti-Israel propaganda, there never has been an actual place “palestine” created by Arabs, “palestinians” (Arabs), Muslims, or any Middle Eastern people...


----------



## Penelope

We know the arabs didn't create the country , the jews lived there by authority of Rome. 
Then the Muslims came and then the crusades and then the ottoman empire.








						Timeline of the name Palestine - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## MartyNYC

Penelope said:


> We know the arabs didn't create the country , the jews lived there by authority of Rome.
> Then the Muslims came and then the crusades and then the ottoman empire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timeline of the name Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Romans were military occupiers of Jews’ homeland, which Romans called Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Jews’ ancient homeland Judea with Jerusalem its Capital...


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?        
⁜→  MartyNYC,, Hollie, et al,

It is all good background information but hardly addresses the implication being made that the Arab Palestinians have some special and enforceable right to "take" sovereignty over the territory.



MartyNYC said:


> Romans were military occupiers of Jews’ homeland, which Romans called Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Jews’ ancient homeland Judea with Jerusalem its Capital...


*(COMMENT)*

Nothing changes the fact that since the time of the Ottoman Empire, the contemporary Arab Palestinians can hardly identify any territory for which they actually maintained exclusive authority to govern itself.  In fact, the Arab Higher Committee rejected the opportunities to establish self-governing institutions.

Like I said, history is all well and good.  But it does not answer they basic claims the Arab Palestinians make.





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MartyNYC

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC,, Hollie, et al,
> 
> It is all good background information but hardly addresses the implication being made that the Arab Palestinians have some special and enforceable right to "take" sovereignty over the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romans were military occupiers of Jews’ homeland, which Romans called Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Jews’ ancient homeland Judea with Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Nothing changes the fact that since the time of the Ottoman Empire, the contemporary Arab Palestinians can hardly identify any territory for which they actually maintained exclusive authority to govern itself.  In fact, the Arab Higher Committee rejected the opportunities to establish self-governing institutions.
> 
> Like I said, history is all well and good.  But it does not answer they basic claims the Arab Palestinians make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire, nor were there any people “palestinians.” Palestine was Britain’s name for the British Mandate, created after WW1 in the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Jews and other inhabitants of the Mandate were called palestinians by the British.


----------



## P F Tinmore

MartyNYC said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC,, Hollie, et al,
> 
> It is all good background information but hardly addresses the implication being made that the Arab Palestinians have some special and enforceable right to "take" sovereignty over the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romans were military occupiers of Jews’ homeland, which Romans called Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Jews’ ancient homeland Judea with Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Nothing changes the fact that since the time of the Ottoman Empire, the contemporary Arab Palestinians can hardly identify any territory for which they actually maintained exclusive authority to govern itself.  In fact, the Arab Higher Committee rejected the opportunities to establish self-governing institutions.
> 
> Like I said, history is all well and good.  But it does not answer they basic claims the Arab Palestinians make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire, nor were there any people “palestinians.” Palestine was Britain’s name for the British Mandate, created after WW1 in the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Jews and other inhabitants of the Mandate were called palestinians by the British.
Click to expand...

Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?        
⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,

*BLUF:*  Yes, I agree on your contention about the contemporary usage of the name "Palestine."  I have supplied Maps showing the designations of the Ottoman Empire used.  I have shown the designation of "Palestine" as the name in the Order in Council.  I have even supplied the Memo from the UN Legal Affairs office on the update on the name usage.  

For some pro-Arab Palestinians, nothing presented can change their mind.  



MartyNYC said:


> There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire, nor were there any people “palestinians.” Palestine was Britain’s name for the British Mandate, created after WW1 in the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Jews and other inhabitants of the Mandate were called palestinians by the British.


*(COMMENT)*

What is important is that there are some people → that append some significance, relative to sovereignty, in the usage of the name.  And that is the true flaw.





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?       
⁜→  P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

This is just too screwed-up to straighten-out.



P F Tinmore said:


> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.


*(COMMENT)*

This is too twisted to acknowledge.





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,
> 
> This is just too screwed-up to straighten-out.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is too twisted to acknowledge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Go ahead and refute those facts.

I'll wait.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,
> 
> This is just too screwed-up to straighten-out.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is too twisted to acknowledge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Go ahead and refute those facts.
> 
> I'll wait.
Click to expand...

As is the usual case, you're retreating to a version of your silly "the Treaty of Lausanne invented the country of Pal'istan". That never happened.


----------



## MartyNYC

“Palestine” has been a European term, fr


Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,
> 
> This is just too screwed-up to straighten-out.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is too twisted to acknowledge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Go ahead and refute those facts.
> 
> I'll wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As is the usual case, you're retreating to a version of your silly "the Treaty of Lausanne invented the country of Pal'istan". That never happened.
Click to expand...


“Palestine” is a European term, from the Roman Latin term imposed on Jews, “palaestina.” When the League of Nations, at the San Remo Conference, issued “mandates” for France and Britain to manage territory captured in WW1 from the Ottoman Empire, France created Syria and Lebanon, and Britain created Iraq and Jordan, and created “Palestine” by segmenting it from Syria, which led to Israeli statehood.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?       
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't see any clear cut question or statement of facts to refute.



P F Tinmore said:


> Go ahead and refute those facts.
> 
> I'll wait.


*(COMMENT)*

You'll want a long time →  until I see what it is you are trying to stand-up as a fact _(or set of facts)_...






Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I don't see any clear cut question or statement of facts to refute.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Go ahead and refute those facts.
> 
> I'll wait.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You'll want a long time →  until I see what it is you are trying to stand-up as a fact _(or set of facts)_...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

My post.



P F Tinmore said:


> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.


What about it do you refute?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?       
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,

There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).



P F Tinmore said:


> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.





P F Tinmore said:


> What about it do you refute?


*(COMMENT)*

Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.

*(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*

The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.

Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.

IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.  

"This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.

Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.


Could you elaborate on how Israel got legal title to Palestinian land?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.


I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could you elaborate on how Israel got legal title to Palestinian land?
Click to expand...

It has been explained to you literally dozens of times that Palestinians never had sovereignty over any lands. 

Why not supply a number to identify how many more times that needs to be explained to you.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?       
⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,



P F Tinmore said:


> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.


*(COMMENT)*

I don't know about those of you who live outside reality.

The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, west of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, as well as the Dead Sea, has (currently) - area demarcations that include:

◈  Gaza Strip​✦  Safe Passage Routes​✦  Maritime Activity Zone​✦   Maritime Trafic Blockade​◈  Jerusalem​✦  East​✦  West​◈  West Bank​✦  Area "A"​✦  Area "B"​✦  Area "C"​
If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.



P F Tinmore said:


> Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.


*(COMMENT)*

Jordan has a Treaty with Israel.  Without prejudice to the status of the West Bank, the border between the two countries encapsulates the West Bank.  



P F Tinmore said:


> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.


*(COMMENT)*

See the answer to the first issue here.






Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MartyNYC

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could you elaborate on how Israel got legal title to Palestinian land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It has been explained to you literally dozens of times that Palestinians never had sovereignty over any lands.
> 
> Why not supply a number to identify how many more times that needs to be explained to you.
Click to expand...


Palestine was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, which led to Israeli statehood, from a Roman name imposed on Jews, palaestina. Roman palaestina referred to Jews’ Philistine enemies who were related to Greeks. Jews were called “palestinians“ in the British Mandate.

Prior to the British Mandate, there wasn’t any place “palestine” for 400 years of the Ottoman Empire.

There never has been a place “palestine“ founded by a people “palestinians.“


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
Click to expand...





Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> There have been many Treaties and Agreements after The Great War (WWI).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about it do you refute?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Even the  International Criminal Court (ICC) cannot, at this time, answer that question.  And obviously, it is not an easy question to answer.  The Arab Palestinians have not yet offered a reply to the ICC on the question.
> 
> *(DIRECTLY TO THE QUESTION OF DEMARCATION)*
> 
> The boundary demarcations that exist today, pertaining to the immediately adjacent areas to Israel, are established by either effective control or sovereign control.  Israel has made it abundantly clear what territory they hold under their sovereign control and what areas they maintain _(_*Article 42*_ and _*Article 43*_ Hague Regulation of 1907)_ under effective control for the purposes of safety, security, law, and order necessary to hold the regional security together.
> 
> Most of the Treaties, Conventions, and Agreement that "directly" related to the Demarcations in the immediate area that was formerly held in abeyance under the Order in Council for Palestine have lapsed, terminated and replaced, or overtaken by events.
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.  For instance, the "administrative boundary" between Israel to the West and Jordan to the East follows the middle of the main course of the flow of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers and the Center of the Dead Sea.
> 
> "This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of that territory.”  Yet both Israel and Jordan recognize the international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate.  In 1988, when the Hashemite Kingdom abandon the West Bank, there was no Arab Palestinian independence over the territory.
> 
> Even to this day, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is unsure of the status of the Oslo Agreements between Palestine and Israel.   That means the status of the Oslo Agreements has been unknow for some period of time in the past.  When did the Oslo Accords end, if indeed they ended at all?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> IF you hold onto the very last signed agreements, THEN neither the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, or Jerusalem are under the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians; except as may be granted by Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could you elaborate on how Israel got legal title to Palestinian land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It has been explained to you literally dozens of times that Palestinians never had sovereignty over any lands.
> 
> Why not supply a number to identify how many more times that needs to be explained to you.
Click to expand...


Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. There is no “palestinian“ language, religion, culture, or historical identity.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know about those of you who live outside reality.
> 
> The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, west of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, as well as the Dead Sea, has (currently) - area demarcations that include:
> 
> ◈  Gaza Strip​✦  Safe Passage Routes​✦  Maritime Activity Zone​✦   Maritime Trafic Blockade​◈  Jerusalem​✦  East​✦  West​◈  West Bank​✦  Area "A"​✦  Area "B"​✦  Area "C"​
> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Jordan has a Treaty with Israel.  Without prejudice to the status of the West Bank, the border between the two countries encapsulates the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See the answer to the first issue here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.


Not complicated, just irrelevant. None of that has anything to do with borders. This doesn't have anything to do with my post.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know about those of you who live outside reality.
> 
> The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, west of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, as well as the Dead Sea, has (currently) - area demarcations that include:
> 
> ◈  Gaza Strip​✦  Safe Passage Routes​✦  Maritime Activity Zone​✦   Maritime Trafic Blockade​◈  Jerusalem​✦  East​✦  West​◈  West Bank​✦  Area "A"​✦  Area "B"​✦  Area "C"​
> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Jordan has a Treaty with Israel.  Without prejudice to the status of the West Bank, the border between the two countries encapsulates the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See the answer to the first issue here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not complicated, just irrelevant. None of that has anything to do with borders. This doesn't have anything to do with my post.
Click to expand...


Britain established borders of “palestine“ in the British Mandate, named “palestine” by Britain, which ceased to exist with Israeli statehood. “Palestinian Charter” gives authority to Britain for borders.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Could you elaborate on how Israel got legal title to Palestinian land?



You are asking the wrong question (again).  You are confusing land and title to land with sovereignty (again).  The title to land can change hands with sales agreements, and the sovereignty to specific land can change hands with treaties (as long as there is another sovereign to treat with).

The right question is, therefore, "How did Israel (read: the Jewish people, as a people with rights to self-determination) obtain sovereignty over the territory labelled and demarcated as "Palestine" in the post-WWI documents?"  

Here's the answer:
1. The Jewish people were recognized as having an existing, valid claim to sovereignty in the Jewish homeland.
2. The Jewish people, following the conventions of the Montivideo Convention, fulfilled the criteria for sovereignty.
3. The Jewish people's government established, actual, concrete control over the territory.  

That's it.  Job done.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.



Patently incorrect.  The two sovereigns who have the say in borders between Israel and Jordan are ... wait for ti ... Israel and Jordan.  There are no others sovereigns at the moment.  So no one else has a say.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.



This is both true and not true.  True the territory we are discussing (actually Israel) has never been partitioned in the meaning of creating international borders between sovereigns.  HOWEVER, Israel (call it Palestine if it makes you happy) has several boundary or demarcation lines which represent different areas governed by various different treaties.  There ARE demarcation lines.  They aren't international boundaries.  Because there are not (yet) two sovereigns within the territory.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
Click to expand...


Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.

This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.

But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.

To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.

And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,

And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC,, Hollie, et al,
> 
> It is all good background information but hardly addresses the implication being made that the Arab Palestinians have some special and enforceable right to "take" sovereignty over the territory.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romans were military occupiers of Jews’ homeland, which Romans called Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Jews’ ancient homeland Judea with Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Nothing changes the fact that since the time of the Ottoman Empire, the contemporary Arab Palestinians can hardly identify any territory for which they actually maintained exclusive authority to govern itself.  In fact, the Arab Higher Committee rejected the opportunities to establish self-governing institutions.
> 
> Like I said, history is all well and good.  But it does not answer they basic claims the Arab Palestinians make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire, nor were there any people “palestinians.” Palestine was Britain’s name for the British Mandate, created after WW1 in the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Jews and other inhabitants of the Mandate were called palestinians by the British.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course none of that matters. International borders were defined by post WWI treaties. Those who lived inside those borders belonged there. Those who did not did not.
Click to expand...


Of course, once lie is exposed you sing "none of that matters"...
But you still spread this lie knowingly and cover it with another.

The land allotted for Jewish re-constitution belongs to the entire Jewish community,
that living inside the borders and in diaspora. These are the treaties that became international law.


----------



## rylah

*Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*

Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
the international definition of indigenous rights.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> The treatment of women.  I'm not sure this came out of "western ideals" exactly but it came out of western countries.  The entire women's movement for equality, the right to vote, the right to independently seek employment, to govern came out of Europe/America.  I can't find any ancient societies that even come close to that.



Interesting, I've just Rambam's ruling to allow a woman teach in an academy where her husband studied, as post factum, after she's been already working there for years in his absence. Not sure this was in a western country or product of the Enlightenment.

And not exactly equality, as in women being valued like men,
but that didn't refrain Wuhsha from becoming a banker, or Rashi's daughter from wearing Tefilin, ruling and advising on Halachic questions and teaching as other women in Jewish history, along female prophets and judges. I'm not saying the Enlightenment didn't influence the Jewish people, I'm just saying that it had more of its own cultural origins,that allowed a woman become a state leader, prior to US (arguably the poster-child of enlightenment), rather than ideals of western modernism.


----------



## MartyNYC

MartyNYC said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't know about those of you who live outside reality.
> 
> The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, west of the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, as well as the Dead Sea, has (currently) - area demarcations that include:
> 
> ◈  Gaza Strip​✦  Safe Passage Routes​✦  Maritime Activity Zone​✦   Maritime Trafic Blockade​◈  Jerusalem​✦  East​✦  West​◈  West Bank​✦  Area "A"​✦  Area "B"​✦  Area "C"​
> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you keep mentioning Jordan. Jordan is a foreign country. It has no say about Palestinian land or borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Jordan has a Treaty with Israel.  Without prejudice to the status of the West Bank, the border between the two countries encapsulates the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why they should be confused. Palestine has never been partitioned. You would think they would know that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See the answer to the first issue here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I'm getting too complicated for you, just let me know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not complicated, just irrelevant. None of that has anything to do with borders. This doesn't have anything to do with my post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Britain established borders of “palestine“ in the British Mandate, named “palestine” by Britain, which ceased to exist with Israeli statehood. “Palestinian Charter” gives authority to Britain for borders.
> 
> View attachment 343680
Click to expand...


As prominent Arab historian George Antonius notes in his classic book, ”Arab Awakening,” palestine was merely the name of the British Mandate, split off from what Arabs historically viewed as Syria or Sham in Arabic...


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
> I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.
> 
> This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.
> 
> But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
> That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.
> 
> To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
> In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.
> 
> And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,
> 
> And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.
Click to expand...

I know that relations between the Ukrainians and Jews weren't cloudless, to put it mildly. So, I expected this sort of an answer. Thanks, anyway. 

About Zelensky and your anxiety. You know, Poroshenko and Yatseniuk were also listed as Jews by some people. So, when Zelensky got the post nothing changed in this regard, actually. 

I was very surprised to know that you lived in Ukraine. Two years is sufficient term to get some knowledge of the country and its society. Where did you live (if it isn't too personal question for you)?


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
> I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.
> 
> This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.
> 
> But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
> That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.
> 
> To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
> In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.
> 
> And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,
> 
> And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know that relations between the Ukrainians and Jews weren't cloudless, to put it mildly. So, I expected this sort of an answer. Thanks, anyway.
> 
> About Zelensky and your anxiety. You know, Poroshenko and Yatseniuk were also listed as Jews by some people. So, when Zelensky got the post nothing changed in this regard, actually.
> 
> I was very surprised to know that you lived in Ukraine. Two years is sufficient term to get some knowledge of the country and its society. Where did you live (if it isn't too personal question for you)?
Click to expand...


This puts in some perspective I guess, thanks.

Never actually aimed to understand the politics of the country, beyond a single thing when it was clear they're going to split it. And yes during that trip I tried to more understand the culture, rather than specifically politics, see how the Jewish community lives. I was mainly in Kiev, while my cousin in the west, near the border with Poland, forgot the name of the town. We also traveled to he eastern separatist side to meet some folks in Donetsk and another town in the coal mine region.

Again I don't pretend to understand, but my impression overall was that You folks have Your own thing, but also a nation in the Slav civilization, like one of the main tribe, like the Belarus, and to extent like Israel the Arabs, and essentially the whole internal conflict, beyond all external influence was basically a natural post-Soviet identity crisis at the break of a new millennia.

What did You prefer at the time, the EU or Eurasia?


----------



## rylah

rylah said:


> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.



P F Tinmore you found something funny
in the international definition of indigenous rights?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
Click to expand...

It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
Click to expand...


Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
Yeah that's a smart argument...


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
> Yeah that's a smart argument...
> Go prove that none sense.
Click to expand...


Judea was the Roman form of Judah. Roman historian Tacitus acknowledged Judea as land of the Jews, with Jerusalem their Capital.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
> Yeah that's a smart argument...
Click to expand...



BBC documentary: Jews’ rebellion in Judea (“land of the Jews”) against occupying Roman Empire about 2,000 years ago..,


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
Click to expand...


In other words, you have no idea what "indigenous" actually means.  Or, more correctly, you are willfully misrepresenting the idea so as to specifically exclude Jews.  

The criteria for indigeneity:

Coalescence of a cultural group
Ability to declare indigenous status
Maintaining a distinct culture
Having a unique sociocultural form
Having a desire to reproduce the culture

Note:  there is nothing there about blood markers or "ancestry".


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
> I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.
> 
> This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.
> 
> But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
> That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.
> 
> To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
> In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.
> 
> And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,
> 
> And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know that relations between the Ukrainians and Jews weren't cloudless, to put it mildly. So, I expected this sort of an answer. Thanks, anyway.
> 
> About Zelensky and your anxiety. You know, Poroshenko and Yatseniuk were also listed as Jews by some people. So, when Zelensky got the post nothing changed in this regard, actually.
> 
> I was very surprised to know that you lived in Ukraine. Two years is sufficient term to get some knowledge of the country and its society. Where did you live (if it isn't too personal question for you)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This puts in some perspective I guess, thanks.
> 
> Never actually aimed to understand the politics of the country, beyond a single thing when it was clear they're going to split it. And yes during that trip I tried to more understand the culture, rather than specifically politics, see how the Jewish community lives. I was mainly in Kiev, while my cousin in the west, near the border with Poland, forgot the name of the town. We also traveled to he eastern separatist side to meet some folks in Donetsk and another town in the coal mine region.
> 
> Again I don't pretend to understand, but my impression overall was that You folks have Your own thing, but also a nation in the Slav civilization, like one of the main tribe, like the Belarus, and to extent like Israel the Arabs, and essentially the whole internal conflict, beyond all external influence was basically a natural post-Soviet identity crisis at the break of a new millennia.
> 
> What did You prefer at the time, the EU or Eurasia?
Click to expand...

The EU of course. I am not a great fan of it and don't think Ukraine will join to it in the near future (if ever). But obviously, the political system it endorses is much more preferable for me than that  of Eurasia's model.


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
> I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.
> 
> This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.
> 
> But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
> That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.
> 
> To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
> In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.
> 
> And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,
> 
> And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know that relations between the Ukrainians and Jews weren't cloudless, to put it mildly. So, I expected this sort of an answer. Thanks, anyway.
> 
> About Zelensky and your anxiety. You know, Poroshenko and Yatseniuk were also listed as Jews by some people. So, when Zelensky got the post nothing changed in this regard, actually.
> 
> I was very surprised to know that you lived in Ukraine. Two years is sufficient term to get some knowledge of the country and its society. Where did you live (if it isn't too personal question for you)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This puts in some perspective I guess, thanks.
> 
> Never actually aimed to understand the politics of the country, beyond a single thing when it was clear they're going to split it. And yes during that trip I tried to more understand the culture, rather than specifically politics, see how the Jewish community lives. I was mainly in Kiev, while my cousin in the west, near the border with Poland, forgot the name of the town. We also traveled to he eastern separatist side to meet some folks in Donetsk and another town in the coal mine region.
> 
> Again I don't pretend to understand, but my impression overall was that You folks have Your own thing, but also a nation in the Slav civilization, like one of the main tribe, like the Belarus, and to extent like Israel the Arabs, and essentially the whole internal conflict, beyond all external influence was basically a natural post-Soviet identity crisis at the break of a new millennia.
> 
> What did You prefer at the time, the EU or Eurasia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The EU of course. I am not a great fan of it and don't think Ukraine will join to it in the near future (if ever). But obviously, the political system it endorses is much more preferable for me than that  of Eurasia's model.
Click to expand...


San Tzu says that when in disadvantage and having no options to maneuver,
best is to hold at what there is, hold the position.

When returning home I've met a Jewish professor in the plane, he was going to visit his father in Israel, and himself built a career writing and teaching math around the world while living in Donetsk, but at the time having to move to Moscow and work low wage. He  essentially told me that the country had everything to stand on its own and prosper, an especially fertile soil, which became apparent the more I traveled, lots of talent and intellect. And that essentially he was planning and hoping to return to work in his local university.

I didn't understand then nor really now, but found the people being overall open and not shy or pretentiously polite, which was comforting, in a way resembling middle eastern mentality.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
> Yeah that's a smart argument...
Click to expand...

That's not what I said.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
> Yeah that's a smart argument...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not what I said.
Click to expand...


Neither has anything to do with the topic of discussion.
As already explained indigenous rights are not defined by personal ancestry, or land holding.
Rather a collective right to re-constitution of a distinct  civilization in the land of its origin.

Otherwise an average American could claim the status over any indigenous tribe that fled to exile on the other side of the continent. Simply for holding the land and being a majority.


----------



## rylah

*Ryan Bellerose on Why Jews Are Indigenous to Israel*

Ryan Bellerose, indigenous rights activist, on what it means to be indigenous,
as the Jews are to the land of Israel.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel?*
> 
> Dr Nan Greer, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Redlands explains
> the international definition of indigenous rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore you found something funny
> in the international definition of indigenous rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just seems funny that people claim to be indigenous when they have no ancestors from that place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jewish civilization has no ancestry in Judea?
> Yeah that's a smart argument...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not what I said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither has anything to do with the topic of discussion.
> As already explained indigenous rights are not defined by personal ancestry, or land holding.
> Rather a collective right to re-constitution of a distinct  civilization in the land of its origin.
> 
> Otherwise an average American could claim the status over any indigenous tribe that fled to exile on the other side of the continent. Simply for holding the land and being a majority.
Click to expand...


Palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews, referring to Jews’ Philistine foes, who were Greek. Unless “palestinians” are Jews, they’re not indigenous.


----------



## ESay

rylah said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> think history has shown that lesson well, numerous times and especially recently. Some who were drawn by the Emancipation and a dream of equality through assimilation in Germany, tried to declare literally just what You've proposed. Which would be a healthy philosophical question for all nations, if they can build their own Jerusalem in their countries, but for Jews it's kinda like inviting problem, don't You think?
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I was talking not about living in some place as a 'closed' national and religious minority, but importing with themselves their culture and governance. Not assimilate Jews into some other culture but on the contrary, 'assimilate' this culture into Jewish.
> 
> I am not arguing about uniqueness of Jerusalem for the Jews. And not advocating it to be 'carried out' to some other place or be replaced by something.
> 
> By new Jerusalem I mean another country (in addition to Israel) being organized as a mainly Jewish state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, not sure I understand.
> 
> Let me give personal example - my family on my father's side 22 generations returned from today's Iraq, but in the family tradition it's emphasized that they actually never left because their village was inside the promised border. Some managed to stay in today's Syria, some in Lebanon. Some others in Yemen who were exiled long before us, upon hearing of Shabtay Zvi sold their entire community property, wore Shabbat cloths and prepared to be lifted to Israel...
> 
> Let's put aside the 'religion talk' and look from a cultural, even legal perspective - there's no such cultural archetype, or legal mechanism. Jewish law itself is attached to a defined boundary. If nations would want to become subjects of Israeli rule, this can be done in a parliamentary monarchy, but there's a big question whether Jewish law that applies to the land of Israel can be applied there, i.e. if Jews can fulfill basic agricultural commandments and include it into the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, from which essentially stem the whole practical basis of the law, the essence of the Jewish archetypal connection to a specific land and her natural cycles.
> 
> There's no cultural archetype or mechanism, to expand cultural boundaries,
> beyond land where Torah law doesn't apply fully to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, I can't articulate my idea properly, because I myself have only a vague vision of it. You maybe have a question of how this even came to my mind. I will explain. I live in a country where there are some amount of people who believe in a conspiracy that tells about a desire of the Jews to create in this country a second Israel.
> 
> I don't particularly take this into consideration seriously, but once I thought - well, maybe this isn't a bad idea as a whole. We as a nation aren't capable of creating and governing a prosperous state. And inviting 'overseas' rulers who once had connections to this land may help to resolve this. And this rulers shouldn't be enclosed community which live in a parallel reality.
> 
> This once happened in the history of our land, btw, and it had very good consequences.
> 
> But of course, that is only a pure theory now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow, so many conflicting thoughts about this.
> I actually lived in Your country for 2 years, when my cousin went to manage a factory opening, but never heard about this specific conspiracy being circulated in public. Such are commonly brought up as a blood libel, it's totally counter intuitive that someone perceives it positively.
> 
> This is essentially a messianic thought, and let me clarify. maybe that helps with what is vague. When I say 'messianic thought', I don't mean a vision of Israel ruling the world, rather _"and the families of the land will be blessed in You"_, which practically means advice. The Jewish vision of a corrected world is one where the families of nations are each expressing their own self, rather than canceling their historic and indigenous sovereignty, to align with a post-conflict reality in a world in which the knowledge of G-d covers it like water the oceans.
> 
> But frankly, recently that I saw Zelensky being put as president, raised all sorts alarms with me, mainly the well-being of the remnant diaspora in such an environment, after the televised opposition arrests by the Bandera gang, now they put a Jewish comedian on top..
> That certainly serves these kind of conspiracies in the public, and exactly the expression of what I was alarmed about.
> 
> To sum it up - any nation can strive to build her own 'new Jerusalem', but this can only be achieved by acknowledging Jerusalem of the G-d of Israel. And that is not a vision of Jewish rule over foreign lands, rather of in-gathering of diaspora and advice as a sovereign nation to sovereign nations. Each nation with their 'new Jerusalem' and Israel as a nation of priests in their Jerusalem as allotted by the G-d of Israel.
> In Halachic terms, we cannot serve at Your altars and temples, or build ours in foreign lands, but we are obligated, if You ask, to teach and assist in giving and offering, and even serve Your offerings in Jerusalem, if it is for the G-d of Israel.
> 
> And then Zelensky could be at most an emissary...but who knows, if Jerenovsky 'my father was a lawyer' says there's a conspiracy to make Ukraine a new Jerusalem, then it must be speaking at least to some in the diaspora, I already mentioned, this happened in a very likely environment, only without Zelensky, but very recently,
> 
> And that's why promotion and encouragement of the repatriation to Israel, from Your country is of top national priority, as opposed to what populist conspiracies say. The history of Odessa and Kiev will always remain Jewish, but so will also the latest burning of the people in the municipality centers. Many, if not most Soviet immigrants, when brought in private conversations are opposed to cooperation with Kiev.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know that relations between the Ukrainians and Jews weren't cloudless, to put it mildly. So, I expected this sort of an answer. Thanks, anyway.
> 
> About Zelensky and your anxiety. You know, Poroshenko and Yatseniuk were also listed as Jews by some people. So, when Zelensky got the post nothing changed in this regard, actually.
> 
> I was very surprised to know that you lived in Ukraine. Two years is sufficient term to get some knowledge of the country and its society. Where did you live (if it isn't too personal question for you)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This puts in some perspective I guess, thanks.
> 
> Never actually aimed to understand the politics of the country, beyond a single thing when it was clear they're going to split it. And yes during that trip I tried to more understand the culture, rather than specifically politics, see how the Jewish community lives. I was mainly in Kiev, while my cousin in the west, near the border with Poland, forgot the name of the town. We also traveled to he eastern separatist side to meet some folks in Donetsk and another town in the coal mine region.
> 
> Again I don't pretend to understand, but my impression overall was that You folks have Your own thing, but also a nation in the Slav civilization, like one of the main tribe, like the Belarus, and to extent like Israel the Arabs, and essentially the whole internal conflict, beyond all external influence was basically a natural post-Soviet identity crisis at the break of a new millennia.
> 
> What did You prefer at the time, the EU or Eurasia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The EU of course. I am not a great fan of it and don't think Ukraine will join to it in the near future (if ever). But obviously, the political system it endorses is much more preferable for me than that  of Eurasia's model.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> San Tzu says that when in disadvantage and having no options to maneuver,
> best is to hold at what there is, hold the position.
> 
> When returning home I've met a Jewish professor in the plane, he was going to visit his father in Israel, and himself built a career writing and teaching math around the world while living in Donetsk, but at the time having to move to Moscow and work low wage. He  essentially told me that the country had everything to stand on its own and prosper, an especially fertile soil, which became apparent the more I traveled, lots of talent and intellect. And that essentially he was planning and hoping to return to work in his local university.
> 
> I didn't understand then nor really now, but found the people being overall open and not shy or pretentiously polite, which was comforting, in a way resembling middle eastern mentality.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you tried to say exactly quoting San Tzu. 

Yes, the country has or had everything to become a prosperous state - fertile land, good geography, developed infrastructure and educated population. But the latter two advantages have been lost. We virtually became a nation of roustabouts. 

You know, there was time when I was younger, when I also thought as many people here that the core reason of that is our corrupted so called elites. But now after 'growing up' and working in various fields I blame our mentality for all misfortunes. 

Of course, there are talented people here. But they seek to realize themselves somewhere abroad, especially young generation. And I in no way blame them.


----------



## LA RAM FAN

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.


Excellent stuff


----------



## P F Tinmore

LA RAM FAN said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
Click to expand...

The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.

The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.

The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.

Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
Click to expand...


“Palestine” was a fictional Roman name for ancient Israel, referring to Jews’ “Philistine“ foes who were Greek. Later, Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate that became the modern state of Israel. There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire. Jews were called “palestinians” by the British. “Palestine“ & “palestinian” are made-up European names.

Never in history has there been any place “palestine” founded by any “palestinian” people.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
Click to expand...



BBC documentary: Jews’ rebellion in Judea (“land of the Jews”) against occupying Roman Empire about 2,000 years ago. There weren’t any “palestinians“—No such people existed.


----------



## P F Tinmore

MartyNYC said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was a fictional Roman name for ancient Israel, referring to Jews’ “Philistine“ foes who were Greek. Later, Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate that became the modern state of Israel. There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire. Jews were called “palestinians” by the British. “Palestine“ & “palestinian” are made-up European names.
> 
> Never in history has there been any place “palestine” founded by any “palestinian” people.
> 
> 
> View attachment 344921
Click to expand...

OK, so?

What did that have to do with my post?


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “Palestine” was a fictional Roman name for ancient Israel, referring to Jews’ “Philistine“ foes who were Greek. Later, Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate that became the modern state of Israel. There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire. Jews were called “palestinians” by the British. “Palestine“ & “palestinian” are made-up European names.
> 
> Never in history has there been any place “palestine” founded by any “palestinian” people.
> 
> 
> View attachment 344921
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so?
> 
> What did that have to do with my post?
Click to expand...


Jews are the indigenous people, bright eyes. Since antiquity.

British Museum: Ancient Jewish revolts in Judea against Roman Empire, 1st century


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
Click to expand...


Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.

Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.

Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.

Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.

Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...


----------



## rylah




----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
Click to expand...

Sorry you did not understand my post.

Nice rant though.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
Click to expand...


No I actually get your cognitive dissonance.

From one side of the mouth you argue against rights for indigenous nations,
while at the same time claim they apply to a political fiction invented in the mid 60's.


----------



## rylah

*Jews as an Indigenous People*

Eric George debunks common myths that deny the Jewish connection to the land of Israel. He explains why the re-establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 was a case of an ancient indigenous people returning to their ancestral lands, with the revival of an ancient language, and the restoration of self-determination.


----------



## Tom Paine 1949

Long live Canaan and Baal!
Bring back Carthage General Hannibal!
Palestinians are the “Ten Lost Tribes of Israel”!
Maybe nine ... the Mormons are the tenth!

/s


----------



## rylah

Tom Paine 1949 said:


> Long live Canaan and Baal!
> Bring back Carthage General Hannibal!
> Palestinians are the “Ten Lost Tribes of Israel”!
> Maybe nine ... the Mormons are the tenth!
> 
> /s



Yeah sure,
in the meantime so-called Palestinians can't even pronounce _'Palestine'_,
without learning a foreign language:


Q. By the way, if a community in Tunis fits the definition of an indigenous nation,
and is willing to preserve that civilization and re-constitute their sovereignty,
why shouldn't they have that right?


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
Click to expand...


Palestine was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, which led to Israeli statehood. Arabs identifying by a European imperialist, colonialist name that ceased to exist in 1948–Not very authentic.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I actually get your cognitive dissonance.
> 
> From one side of the mouth you argue against rights for indigenous nations,
> while at the same time claim they apply to a political fiction invented in the mid 60's.
Click to expand...


Syria’s Hafiz al-Asad admonished Arafat that there were no such “palestinians”...


----------



## MartyNYC

MartyNYC said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, which led to Israeli statehood. Arabs identifying by a European imperialist, colonialist name that ceased to exist in 1948–Not very authentic.
Click to expand...



*Translating Late Ottoman Modernity in Palestine: Debates on Ethno ...*
View attachment 345479


MartyNYC said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, which led to Israeli statehood. Arabs identifying by a European imperialist, colonialist name that ceased to exist in 1948–Not very authentic.
Click to expand...


As prominent Arab historian George Antonius notes in his famous book, “The Arab Awakening,” palestine was merely Britain’s name for the British Mandate, split from Syria, which led to Israeli statehood. Arabs identifying as palestinians is not very authentic...


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I actually get your cognitive dissonance.
> 
> From one side of the mouth you argue against rights for indigenous nations,
> while at the same time claim they apply to a political fiction invented in the mid 60's.
Click to expand...

I will discuss what I said. I will not discuss what you think I said.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I actually get your cognitive dissonance.
> 
> From one side of the mouth you argue against rights for indigenous nations,
> while at the same time claim they apply to a political fiction invented in the mid 60's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will discuss what I said. I will not discuss what you think I said.
Click to expand...


What Syria’s Hafiz al-Asad said to Arafat was “palestinian” is a bogus identity.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
Click to expand...

The geographic area called Palestine used to belong to the Ottoman Empire which exercised sovereign control of the territory. The Arabs-Moslems you call “Pal’istanians” never had sovereign control of the territory and still don’t.


----------



## MartyNYC

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The geographic area called Palestine used to belong to the Ottoman Empire which exercised sovereign control of the territory. The Arabs-Moslems you call “Pal’istanians” never had sovereign control of the territory and still don’t.
Click to expand...


There was no place “palestine” in the Ottoman Empire....


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LA RAM FAN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has been attacked, conquered, and occupied many times. It was also a center for trade. Caravans went through to Asia, Africa, and Europe. Many people came and went.
> 
> In the middle of all this there was a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. Palestine was a multi racial, multi ethnic, multi cultural, multi religious place where there was little animosity between peoples.
> 
> These are the People who became Palestinians when Palestine was released from Turkish rule after WWI.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent stuff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The whole indigenous argument is stupid and cannot be resolved. Do we know who descended from the caveman? There is no way to know and it really doesn't matter.
> 
> The real criteria is who belongs in the land. If you boil down international law there is one basic fact. The people and the land are "married." The land belongs to its people and the people cannot be removed from their land.
> 
> The Palestinians (the people who lived in the territory that became Palestine in 1924) had lived there, uncontested, for hundreds of years. Most of the cities, towns, and villages in Palestine predate the Ottoman Empire.
> 
> Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and the Palestinians belong in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Basically you're saying that indigenous peoples don't exist and have no rights,
> and that land and its history belong exclusively to those who managed to hold possession of it beginning at some point in modernity.
> 
> Yet, you forget that the same international law you pretend to cite,
> also made a significant legal precedent in human history that allows indigenous nations to specifically re-constitute their sovereignty in their indigenous lands, the root of their civilization.
> 
> Of course you'd call this stupid, how otherwise, all you have is a modern fiction,
> loosely based on merely appropriating a foreign name of a location and its history,
> because no Palestinian civilization or sovereignty ever existed to be re-constituted first place.
> 
> Call it stupid but indigenous status rights are anchored not only in abstract concept of international law, but as well exercised in practical sovereignty.
> 
> Meanwhile Palestine serves cookies in the embassy of Narnia...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry you did not understand my post.
> 
> Nice rant though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I actually get your cognitive dissonance.
> 
> From one side of the mouth you argue against rights for indigenous nations,
> while at the same time claim they apply to a political fiction invented in the mid 60's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I will discuss what I said. I will not discuss what you think I said.
Click to expand...


Do try to make sense already,
it's been several pages, and you still struggle
to convey anything remotely coherent on the subject.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jonathan Cook wrote in The Electronic Intifada that Israel is systematically “Hebraizing” Arab city names in order to erase an Arab connection to the land, and accused Israel of turning al-Quds into Yerushalayim, al-Nasra into Natzrat, and Jaffa into Yafo. In doing so, the article assumes that the Palestinian connection to the land is longer than that of the Jews.

But do the facts support these claims that Palestinians are the original inhabitants of the land?

Linguistic analysis provides insight into this central question. In the 2nd millennium BCE, the inhabitants of Canaan, what is modern-day Israel, all spoke a language called Proto-Canaanite. Over time, their language underwent a phonetic shift known as the Canaanite Shift, which was characterized by a transition from an ā vowel to an o vowel. All the languages that descended from this Proto-Canaanite language had this o vowel in place of the ā, while the other Semitic languages from outside the region of Canaan kept the original ā.

The effect of the shift is still noticeable today. For example, the word for peace in Hebrew is Shalom, demonstrating the vowel shift, whereas Arabic keeps the ā vowel in Salām: Hebrew’s vowel shift indicates it was historically spoken in Canaan, while Arabic’s lack of the vowel shift suggests it developed outside of Canaan.

The Electronic Intifada article claims that the Arabic name of Yafa is the original term for the place, but as the true indigenous people would have used the vowel-shifted name of Yafo, as Hebrew does, the truth is laid bare: Arabic doesn’t fulfill the criteria to be a native language to Israel. The linguistic patterns of Arabic are consistent with the historical context –– Palestinians are Arabs, who are indigenous to the Arabian peninsula, but their indigenous claims do not extend to Israel.

(full article online)









						A tale of two countries: The politics of indigeneity in Israel
					

From the blog of Ilan Eisenberg at The Times of Israel




					blogs.timesofisrael.com


----------



## MartyNYC

In the 19th century, many foreigners migrated to “palestine” from Egypt, Syria, Algeria, even as far away as from Bosnia and the Caucusus. Today, common “palestinian“ surnames are al-Masri “the Egyptian,” Maghrebi (North Africa) and Bushnaq, signifying Bosnia—Bosnians aren’t even Arabs. ⤵


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Palestine Bulletin, the precursor to the Palestine Post/Jerusalem Post, used to have a column where they would translate Arab articles.

After the British White Paper of 1930, Jews demonstrated and rallied against the reduction of immigration that would be allowed. In this context, Arab newspapers responded with direct incitement against Jews. (They weren’t woke enough in those days to say “Zionists.”)

Felesteen, published on June 5, 1930:

(full article online)









						Some Arab incitement from 90 years ago
					

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.




					elderofziyon.blogspot.com


----------



## MartyNYC

Indigenous “palestinians”? Let’s see: Common “palestinian” surnames are Masri (Egypt), Iraqi, Shami (Syria), Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnak (Bosnia)...

No, they’re not indigenous!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Since there are no Canaanites or Jebusites or Nabatean peoples around, that means that Jews are the earliest extant inhabitants of Israel. And the Romans, Byzantines, and Muslims who invaded and settled there hundreds or thousands of years later were the colonialists. 

While Jewish traditions have changed since then, Jewish laws and customs have remained remarkably stable - prayer in synagogue, regular Torah readings, eating kosher, wearing tefillin, putting up mezuzot, mikveh, holiday observances such as sukkah and matzoh, circumcision. And a large number of Jewish laws are dependent specifically on the land of Israel, such as the sabbatical year and terumat hamaaser. 

Jews have kept their traditions over 2000 years at least as much as today's native Americans have kept theirs since the 17th century. 

Labendz, however, apparently believes that Jews returning to Zion are the colonialists (or perhaps "settler colonialists.") Even more bizarrely, he thinks that somehow Jews are indigenous to the shtetl and Jewish ghettoes of Europe. 

Noting the actual history of Jews and Judah in the Middle East and how they have kept their emotional and religious ties to the Land for 2000 years is, somehow, “verging on antisemitism.” According to modern intellectual bigots, Ashkenaz Jews should embrace the continent that has a history of demeaning them, oppressing them, "otherizing" them and sometimes murdering them as their homeland. The implication is that this is where they belong, in permanent diaspora, as a permanent minority, and any desire they have for self-determination is racist. (This is also Judith Butler's position.) 

(full article online)









						Latest loony Left lunacy: It is antisemitic to call Jews indigenous to Israel
					

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.




					elderofziyon.blogspot.com


----------



## MartyNYC

Jews have one of the longest histories, perhaps the longest history, as a distinct people with a continuous identity, expressed in language, religion, genealogy, and culture.


----------



## MartyNYC

Indigenous palestinians? How come nobody is named Palestini?


----------



## MartyNYC

The numerous surnames of so-called palestinians reflect their origins and it‘s noteworthy that in numerous cases their origins are not palestine: From Masri, signifying Egypt, to Iraqi to Shami, signifying Syria. The list goes on. Among my favorite palestinian surnames is Bushnak, designating Bosnia—Bosnians are not even Arabs! Conspicuously, nobody is named Palestini to indicate an origin in palestine...


----------



## MartyNYC

Israel or Palestine? What do the ancient sources say?


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben

The 'Ancients' should have done us all a huge favor and thrown them in the Med.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

The easiest way to keep everything in perspective is to remember that there is a group of people who have identified as Jewish for over 3000 years and another group that identifies themselves as "Palestinian" for only a little over 50.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Dogmaphobe said:


> identified as Jewish for over 3000 years and another group that identifies themselves as "Palestinian" for only a little over 50.


History says otherwise---
You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?

*Palestine*
Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter

Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.

Joel 3:2 - 3:5
Joel Chapter 3
4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?

Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)

(2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"

(Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.

(comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"

Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*








						Judea - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
*Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)

Palestine usually refers to:
Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East

*State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
*Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
Historical political entities
Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
*Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
*Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
*Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
*Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration


			https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine\
		


What really is in question the the so called land of Israel; because Israel was a person, not a place
You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?

*Palestine*
Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.

Joel 3:2 - 3:5
Joel Chapter 3
4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?

Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
(2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
(Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
(comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*








						Judea - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
*Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)

*Palestine usually refers to:*
Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East

*State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
*Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:

Historical political entities

Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
*Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
*Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
*Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
*Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
*Palestine - Wikipedia*
Israel did not exist until 1947AD because before that date Israel was a person not a place
(Genesis 32:28 KJV) _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Iacob, but Israel: *for as a prince hast thou power with God, and with men, and hast preuailed.
-_View attachment 359698


----------



## Dogmaphobe

watchingfromafar said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> identified as Jewish for over 3000 years and another group that identifies themselves as "Palestinian" for only a little over 50.
> 
> 
> 
> History says otherwise---
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> 
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> 
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> 
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> 
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> 
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> Palestine usually refers to:
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> Historical political entities
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine\
> 
> 
> 
> What really is in question the the so called land of Israel; because Israel was a person, not a place
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> *Palestine usually refers to:*
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> 
> Historical political entities
> 
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> *Palestine - Wikipedia*
> Israel did not exist until 1947AD because before that date Israel was a person not a place
> (Genesis 32:28 KJV) _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Iacob, but Israel: *for as a prince hast thou power with God, and with men, and hast preuailed.
> -_
Click to expand...

Based upon the posts of yours I have read in the past I know you to be an antisemite and not at all bright.

 You are referring to a land designation and not a people.   Like DUH.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> identified as Jewish for over 3000 years and another group that identifies themselves as "Palestinian" for only a little over 50.
> 
> 
> 
> History says otherwise---
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> 
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> 
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> 
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> 
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> 
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> Palestine usually refers to:
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> Historical political entities
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine\
> 
> 
> 
> What really is in question the the so called land of Israel; because Israel was a person, not a place
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> *Palestine usually refers to:*
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> 
> Historical political entities
> 
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> *Palestine - Wikipedia*
> Israel did not exist until 1947AD because before that date Israel was a person not a place
> (Genesis 32:28 KJV) _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Iacob, but Israel: *for as a prince hast thou power with God, and with men, and hast preuailed.
> -_View attachment 359698
Click to expand...


The name palestine is an English word based on a Greek/Latin word palaestina referring to Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. It does not appear in the Hebrew Bible, New Testament, nor even in the Koran...


----------



## watchingfromafar

Dogmaphobe said:


> Based upon the posts of yours I have read in the past I know you to be an antisemite and not at all bright.


Oh my sweet plump dumpling, I provided evidence unreputable evidence that the land of Palestine did indeed exist & I have also pointed out that there never was a land called “Israel” prior to 1947ad

If you believe calling me an anti-Semite proves your point you are clearly WRONG

Next oh wise one

-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> identified as Jewish for over 3000 years and another group that identifies themselves as "Palestinian" for only a little over 50.
> 
> 
> 
> History says otherwise---
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> 
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> 
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> 
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> 
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> 
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> Palestine usually refers to:
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> Historical political entities
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine\
> 
> 
> 
> What really is in question the the so called land of Israel; because Israel was a person, not a place
> You have this backwards, and I do not know why-?
> 
> *Palestine*
> Joel 3:4 | Read whole chapter
> Yea and what haue ye to do with me, O Tyre and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render mee a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I returne your recompense vpon your owne head.
> 
> Joel 3:2 - 3:5
> Joel Chapter 3
> 4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of *Palestine*? will ye render me a recompence?
> 
> Originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan "inhabited by the *Philistines *(Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel" "3:4)
> (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). It has fittingly been designated "the least" "of all lands." Western *Palestine*, on the south of Gaza, is only" about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead "Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20" miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan. "*Palestine*, "set in the midst"
> (Ezra 1:1-4). "In the year B.C. 68, *Palestine* was reduced by Pompey the Great "to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and" massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants.
> (comp. John 2:20) The whole territory of" "*Palestine*, including the portions alloted to the trans-Jordan" "tribes, extended to about eleven thousand square miles. Recent"
> Judea or Judæa (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the mountainous southern part of the region of *Palestine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judea - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look up *Palestine* in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
> *Borders of Mandatory Palestine*
> Historical boundaries of Roman Syria Palaestina, where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine *Palaestina* Prima (later Jund Filastin) and Palaestina Secunda (later Jund al-Urdunn), as well as Palaestina Salutaris (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)
> 
> *Palestine usually refers to:*
> Palestine (region), a geographical and historical region in the Middle East
> 
> *State of Palestine*, a modern de jure sovereign state in the Middle East recognized by 136 UN members and with non-member observer state status in the United Nations
> *Palestine*, Palaestina, or Filastin may also refer to:
> 
> Historical political entities
> 
> Syria *Palaestina* or Roman *Palestine*, a Roman province (135–390 CE), a province of the Roman Empire following merger of renamed Iudaea with Roman Syria
> *Palaestina* Prima, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the Galilee and northern Jordan Valley
> *Palaestina* Secunda, a Byzantine province in the Levant from 390 to c. 636, comprising the shoreline and hills of the Southern Levant (Judea and Samaria)
> *Palaestina* Salutaris alias Palestina Tertia, a Byzantine province established in the 6th century, covering the Negev and Transjordan
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem or *Palestine* (1872–1917), an Ottoman district that encompassed Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Hebron, Bethlehem and Beersheba
> *Mandatory Palestine (1920–1948),* a geopolitical entity under British administration
> *Palestine - Wikipedia*
> Israel did not exist until 1947AD because before that date Israel was a person not a place
> (Genesis 32:28 KJV) _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Iacob, but Israel: *for as a prince hast thou power with God, and with men, and hast preuailed.
> -_View attachment 359698
Click to expand...


Palestine does not appear in the Bible, neither Old nor New Testaments...


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based upon the posts of yours I have read in the past I know you to be an antisemite and not at all bright.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my sweet plump dumpling, I provided evidence unreputable evidence that the land of Palestine did indeed exist & I have also pointed out that there never was a land called “Israel” prior to 1947ad
> 
> If you believe calling me an anti-Semite proves your point you are clearly WRONG
> 
> Next oh wise one
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Do you see palestine or Israel here, bright eyes? ⤵️


----------



## Dogmaphobe

watchingfromafar said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based upon the posts of yours I have read in the past I know you to be an antisemite and not at all bright.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my sweet plump dumpling, I provided evidence unreputable evidence that the land of Palestine did indeed exist & I have also pointed out that there never was a land called “Israel” prior to 1947ad
> 
> If you believe calling me an anti-Semite proves your point you are clearly WRONG
> 
> Next oh wise one
> 
> -
Click to expand...

  I said PEOPLE, dumb shit.


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> It does not appear in the Hebrew Bible, New Testament, nor even in the Koran...


Since you brought up Ezekiel I can add this--
*Ezekiel 21 King James Version (KJV)*

21 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

2 Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and drop thy word toward the holy places, and prophesy against the land of Israel,

3 *And say to the land of Israel, Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I am against thee, and will draw forth my sword out of his sheath, and will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked.*

4 Seeing then that I will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall my sword go forth out of his sheath against all flesh from the south to the north:

12 *Cry and howl, son of man: for it shall be upon my people, it shall be upon all the princes of Israel: terrors by reason of the sword shall be upon my people: smite therefore upon thy thigh.*

13 Because it is a trial, and what if the sword contemn even the rod? it shall be no more, saith the Lord God.

17 I will also smite mine hands together, and I will cause my fury to rest: I the Lord have said it.

18 The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying,

19 Also, thou son of man, appoint thee two ways, that the sword of the king of Babylon may come: both twain shall come forth out of one land: and choose thou a place, choose it at the head of the way to the city.

20 *Appoint a way, that the sword may come to Rabbath of the Ammonites, and to Judah in Jerusalem the defenced.*

21 For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made his arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in the liver.

22 At his right hand was the divination for Jerusalem, to appoint captains, to open the mouth in the slaughter, to lift up the voice with shouting, to appoint battering rams against the gates, to cast a mount, and to build a fort.

*Ezekiel:*

24 *Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are discovered, so that in all your doings your sins do appear; because, I say, that ye are come to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand.*

25 *And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end,*

26 Thus saith the Lord God; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.

27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.

28 And thou, son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God concerning the Ammonites, and concerning their reproach; even say thou, The sword, the sword is drawn: for the slaughter it is furbished, to consume because of the glittering:

29 Whiles they see vanity unto thee, whiles they divine a lie unto thee, to bring thee upon the necks of them that are slain, of the wicked, whose day is come, when their iniquity shall have an end.

30 *Shall I cause it to return into his sheath? I will judge thee in the place where thou wast created, in the land of thy nativity.*

31 And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I will blow against thee in the fire of my wrath, and deliver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skilful to destroy.

32 *Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the Lord have spoken it.*


----------



## watchingfromafar

******The Truth Will Set You Free******​*Judea or Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the *mountainous southern part of the region of Palestine*.
Judea - Wikipedia
-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not appear in the Hebrew Bible, New Testament, nor even in the Koran...
> 
> 
> 
> Since you brought up Ezekiel I can add this--
> *Ezekiel 21 King James Version (KJV)*
> 
> 21 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
> 
> 2 Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and drop thy word toward the holy places, and prophesy against the land of Israel,
> 
> 3 *And say to the land of Israel, Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I am against thee, and will draw forth my sword out of his sheath, and will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked.*
> 
> 4 Seeing then that I will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall my sword go forth out of his sheath against all flesh from the south to the north:
> 
> 12 *Cry and howl, son of man: for it shall be upon my people, it shall be upon all the princes of Israel: terrors by reason of the sword shall be upon my people: smite therefore upon thy thigh.*
> 
> 13 Because it is a trial, and what if the sword contemn even the rod? it shall be no more, saith the Lord God.
> 
> 17 I will also smite mine hands together, and I will cause my fury to rest: I the Lord have said it.
> 
> 18 The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying,
> 
> 19 Also, thou son of man, appoint thee two ways, that the sword of the king of Babylon may come: both twain shall come forth out of one land: and choose thou a place, choose it at the head of the way to the city.
> 
> 20 *Appoint a way, that the sword may come to Rabbath of the Ammonites, and to Judah in Jerusalem the defenced.*
> 
> 21 For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made his arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in the liver.
> 
> 22 At his right hand was the divination for Jerusalem, to appoint captains, to open the mouth in the slaughter, to lift up the voice with shouting, to appoint battering rams against the gates, to cast a mount, and to build a fort.
> 
> *Ezekiel:*
> 
> 24 *Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are discovered, so that in all your doings your sins do appear; because, I say, that ye are come to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand.*
> 
> 25 *And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end,*
> 
> 26 Thus saith the Lord God; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high.
> 
> 27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.
> 
> 28 And thou, son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God concerning the Ammonites, and concerning their reproach; even say thou, The sword, the sword is drawn: for the slaughter it is furbished, to consume because of the glittering:
> 
> 29 Whiles they see vanity unto thee, whiles they divine a lie unto thee, to bring thee upon the necks of them that are slain, of the wicked, whose day is come, when their iniquity shall have an end.
> 
> 30 *Shall I cause it to return into his sheath? I will judge thee in the place where thou wast created, in the land of thy nativity.*
> 
> 31 And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I will blow against thee in the fire of my wrath, and deliver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skilful to destroy.
> 
> 32 *Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the Lord have spoken it.*
Click to expand...


You evidently have a learning disability. The name Palestine does not appear in the Hebrew Bible. It’s an English word.

The King James Bible mistranslated the name Philistia, which has been corrected in the New King James Bible and all other English translations. ⤵


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> ******The Truth Will Set You Free******​*Judea or Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard Yəhuda, Tiberian Yəhûḏāh, Greek: Ἰουδαία, Ioudaía; Latin: Iūdaea, Arabic: يهودا‎, Yahudia) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the *mountainous southern part of the region of Palestine*.
> Judea - Wikipedia
> -



Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews.⤵️


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Food for thought, hope this does not give you indigestion hehe

Palestine history of

Syria Palaestina* (Latin: [ˈsʏ.ri.a pa.ɫ̪ae̯sˈt̪iː.na]; Koinē Greek: Συρία ἡ Παλαιστίνη, romanized: Syría hē Palaistínē, Koine Greek: [syˈri.a (h)e̝ pa.lɛsˈt̪i.ne̝]) was a Roman province between 135 AD and about 390.[1] It was established by the merger of Roman Syria and Roman Judaea, following the suppression of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 AD. Shortly after 193, the northern regions were split off as Syria Coele in the north and Phoenice in the south, and the province *Syria Palaestina* was reduced to Judea. The earliest numismatic evidence for the name Syria Palaestina comes from the period of emperor Marcus Aurelius[citation needed], although the Classical Greek version of name has been recorded in usage since at least the 5th century BC.
Syria Palaestina - Wikipedia

*Palæstina Prima or Palaestina* I was a Byzantine province from 390,[1] until the 7th century. It was lost to the Sassanid Empire in 614, but was re-annexed in 628, before its final loss during the Muslim conquest of Syria in 636.
Palaestina Prima - Wikipedia

*Palaestina Salutaris or Palaestina* Tertia was a Byzantine (Eastern Roman) province, which covered the area of the Negev (or Edom), Sinai (except the north western coast) and south-west of Transjordan, south of the Dead Sea. The province, a part of the Diocese of the East, was split from Arabia Petraea during the reforms of Diocletian in c.300 CE,[1] and existed until the Muslim Arab conquests of the 7th century.
Palaestina Salutaris - Wikipedia

The Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem (Ottoman Turkish: مُتَصَرِّف قدسی مُتَصَرِّفلغ‎, Kudüs-i Şerif Mutasarrıflığı; Arabic: متصرفية القدس الشريف‎, Mutaṣarrifiat al-quds aš-šarīf), also known as the Sanjak of Jerusalem, was an Ottoman district with special administrative status established in 1872.[3][4][5] The district encompassed Jerusalem as well as Bethlehem, Hebron, Jaffa, Gaza and Beersheba.[6] During the late Ottoman period, the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, together with the Sanjak of Nablus and Sanjak of Akka (Acre), formed the region that was *commonly referred to as "Palestine".[*3][nb 1] It was the 7th most heavily populated region of the Ottoman Empire's 36 provinces.[7]
Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem - Wikipedia

*Palestine*, area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
Palestine | History, People, & Religion


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> *Food for thought, hope this does not give you indigestion hehe
> 
> Palestine history of
> 
> Syria Palaestina* (Latin: [ˈsʏ.ri.a pa.ɫ̪ae̯sˈt̪iː.na]; Koinē Greek: Συρία ἡ Παλαιστίνη, romanized: Syría hē Palaistínē, Koine Greek: [syˈri.a (h)e̝ pa.lɛsˈt̪i.ne̝]) was a Roman province between 135 AD and about 390.[1] It was established by the merger of Roman Syria and Roman Judaea, following the suppression of the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 AD. Shortly after 193, the northern regions were split off as Syria Coele in the north and Phoenice in the south, and the province *Syria Palaestina* was reduced to Judea. The earliest numismatic evidence for the name Syria Palaestina comes from the period of emperor Marcus Aurelius[citation needed], although the Classical Greek version of name has been recorded in usage since at least the 5th century BC.
> Syria Palaestina - Wikipedia
> 
> *Palæstina Prima or Palaestina* I was a Byzantine province from 390,[1] until the 7th century. It was lost to the Sassanid Empire in 614, but was re-annexed in 628, before its final loss during the Muslim conquest of Syria in 636.
> Palaestina Prima - Wikipedia
> 
> *Palaestina Salutaris or Palaestina* Tertia was a Byzantine (Eastern Roman) province, which covered the area of the Negev (or Edom), Sinai (except the north western coast) and south-west of Transjordan, south of the Dead Sea. The province, a part of the Diocese of the East, was split from Arabia Petraea during the reforms of Diocletian in c.300 CE,[1] and existed until the Muslim Arab conquests of the 7th century.
> Palaestina Salutaris - Wikipedia
> 
> The Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem (Ottoman Turkish: مُتَصَرِّف قدسی مُتَصَرِّفلغ‎, Kudüs-i Şerif Mutasarrıflığı; Arabic: متصرفية القدس الشريف‎, Mutaṣarrifiat al-quds aš-šarīf), also known as the Sanjak of Jerusalem, was an Ottoman district with special administrative status established in 1872.[3][4][5] The district encompassed Jerusalem as well as Bethlehem, Hebron, Jaffa, Gaza and Beersheba.[6] During the late Ottoman period, the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, together with the Sanjak of Nablus and Sanjak of Akka (Acre), formed the region that was *commonly referred to as "Palestine".[*3][nb 1] It was the 7th most heavily populated region of the Ottoman Empire's 36 provinces.[7]
> Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem - Wikipedia
> 
> *Palestine*, area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (the area west of the Jordan River).
> Palestine | History, People, & Religion



Palestine: English word from a Greek/Latin word referring to Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Palestine does not appear in the Bible nor even in the Koran.⤵️


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews


You can claim “Judea” is the same as Israel if this helps you sleep at night, for I would not wish nightmares disturbing your sleep but the truth is the truth.

I would like to skip all this gibberish concerning the land now called Israel and jump to the here and now. The land of Israel does exist today. Biblically speaking God did choose the Jews as His children and God said He could cherish them over all others but He attached some conditions to maintain His loyalties.

*The Israelis’ have broken those conditions and they will be punished for it.*

The only way the Israeli’s can regain God’s trust and love is to *“repent”, admit their transgressions and ask for His forgiveness;* once done I am sure He will forgive them.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. and if not Gods last prophesy will come true.

King James Bible
*Ezekiel 21:32*
Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it*.

-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> You can claim “Judea” is the same as Israel if this helps you sleep at night, for I would not wish nightmares disturbing your sleep but the truth is the truth.
> 
> I would like to skip all this gibberish concerning the land now called Israel and jump to the here and now. The land of Israel does exist today. Biblically speaking God did choose the Jews as His children and God said He could cherish them over all others but He attached some conditions to maintain His loyalties.
> 
> *The Israelis’ have broken those conditions and they will be punished for it.*
> 
> The only way the Israeli’s can regain God’s trust and love is to *“repent”, admit their transgressions and ask for His forgiveness;* once done I am sure He will forgive them.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. and if not Gods last prophesy will come true.
> 
> King James Bible
> *Ezekiel 21:32*
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it*.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Judea, land of the Jews, with Jewish Jerusalem its Capital. Palestine never existed.⤵️


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> You can claim “Judea” is the same as Israel if this helps you sleep at night, for I would not wish nightmares disturbing your sleep but the truth is the truth.
> 
> I would like to skip all this gibberish concerning the land now called Israel and jump to the here and now. The land of Israel does exist today. Biblically speaking God did choose the Jews as His children and God said He could cherish them over all others but He attached some conditions to maintain His loyalties.
> 
> *The Israelis’ have broken those conditions and they will be punished for it.*
> 
> The only way the Israeli’s can regain God’s trust and love is to *“repent”, admit their transgressions and ask for His forgiveness;* once done I am sure He will forgive them.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. and if not Gods last prophesy will come true.
> 
> King James Bible
> *Ezekiel 21:32*
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it*.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Didn't take very many posts for your antisemitism to show, now, did it?


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> You evidently have a learning disability. The name Palestine does not appear in the Hebrew Bible. It’s an English word.


You can access ancient maps of Palestine, I have even provided one.
You cannot find an ancient map of Israel because the land of Israel did not exist. The myth has been busted
The Jews never had a "nation",

more food for thought-- The Jews of old were shepherds
,BTW: Joseph was an Israelite

(Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto* Joseph*, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_

(Gen 41:40 KJV) *Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.*

(Gen 41:42 KJV) *And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;*

Joseph who is now the de facto ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelites who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.

(Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the *famine was in the land of Canaan*._

(Gen 42:25 KJV) *Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks*_ with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

(Gen 45:20 KJV) _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._

(Gen 45:21 KJV) *And the children of Israel did so:*_ and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._

(Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, *and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_

(Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_

(Gen 47:5 KJV) _And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_

(Gen 47:6 KJV) *The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell*_; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._

(Gen 47:11 KJV) _And *Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.*_

The Moses breaks one of his own commandments and MURDERS a man the the street

_And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: *and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, *and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow? 

Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well._

This marked the great EXODUS
because Moses murders
a fellow Jew in cold blood​
*NOTE:* The Israelite's pack up everything and move to Egypt leaving everything behind and live in Egypt for 400+ years never calling the place they left behind “Israel”


----------



## watchingfromafar

Shusha said:


> Didn't take very many posts for your antisemitism to show, now, did it?


If you non't like what is in the Bible or history books so be it; as if I cared -


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> You evidently have a learning disability. The name Palestine does not appear in the Hebrew Bible. It’s an English word.
> 
> 
> 
> You can access ancient maps of Palestine, I have even provided one.
> You cannot find an ancient map of Israel because the land of Israel did not exist. The myth has been busted
> The Jews never had a "nation",
> 
> more food for thought-- The Jews of old were shepherds
> ,BTW: Joseph was an Israelite
> 
> (Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto* Joseph*, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
> 
> (Gen 41:40 KJV) *Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.*
> 
> (Gen 41:42 KJV) *And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;*
> 
> Joseph who is now the de facto ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelites who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.
> 
> (Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the *famine was in the land of Canaan*._
> 
> (Gen 42:25 KJV) *Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks*_ with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_
> 
> (Gen 45:20 KJV) _Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours._
> 
> (Gen 45:21 KJV) *And the children of Israel did so:*_ and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._
> 
> (Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, *and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
> 
> (Gen 47:5 KJV) _And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
> 
> (Gen 47:6 KJV) *The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell*_; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._
> 
> (Gen 47:11 KJV) _And *Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.*_
> 
> The Moses breaks one of his own commandments and MURDERS a man the the street
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: *and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew*, one of his brothers. And he looked this way and that way, *and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian*, and hid him in the sand. And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?
> 
> Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well._
> 
> This marked the great EXODUS
> because Moses murders
> a fellow Jew in cold blood​
> *NOTE:* The Israelite's pack up everything and move to Egypt leaving everything behind and live in Egypt for 400+ years never calling the place they left behind “Israel”
Click to expand...


Maps are European, bright eyes. Palestine is a European name. D’oh!


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't take very many posts for your antisemitism to show, now, did it?
> 
> 
> 
> If you non't like what is in the Bible or history books so be it; as if I cared -
Click to expand...


Israel is in the Bible, even in the Koran. Palestine is not.


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Maps are European, bright eyes. Palestine is a European name. D’oh!


Da.,.,Da.,.,poor Da.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. still no ancient maps of "Israel"
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Israel is in the Bible, even in the Koran. Palestine is not.



Oh wise one, show me the verses in the Bible where it refers to a nation called "Israel"--?
waiting.,,.waiting.,.,.waiting, please marty do da doodle de for me
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Judea* or *Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard _Yəhuda_, Tiberian _Yəhûḏāh_, Greek: Ἰουδαία, _Ioudaía_; Latin: _Iūdaea_, Arabic: يهودا‎, _Yahudia_) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the *mountainous southern part of the region of **Palestine*. The name originates from the Hebrew name "Yehudah", a son of the Jewish patriarch Jacob/Israel, and Yehudah's progeny forming the biblical Israelite tribe of Judah (Yehudah) and later the associated Kingdom of Judah, which the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia dates from 934 until 586 BCE.[2] The name of the region continued to be incorporated through the Babylonian conquest, Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods as Yehud, Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Judea, and consequently Herodian Judea and Roman Judea, respectively.

*Palestine* (Arabic: فلسطين‎ _Filasṭīn_, _Falasṭīn_, _Filisṭīn_; Greek: Παλαιστίνη, _Palaistinē_; Latin: _Palaestina_; Hebrew: פלשתינה‎ *Palestina*) is a geographic region in Western Asia usually *considered to include **Israel**, the **West Bank**, the **Gaza Strip**, and in some definitions, some parts of western **Jordan**.*

The name was used by ancient Greek writers, and it was later used for the Roman province Syria Palaestina, the Byzantine Palaestina Prima, and the Islamic provincial district of Jund Filastin. The region comprises most of the territory claimed for the biblical regions known as the Land of Israel (Hebrew: ארץ־ישראל‎ _Eretz-Yisra'el_), the Holy Land or Promised Land. Historically, it has been known as the southern portion of wider regional designations such as Canaan, Syria, ash-Sham, and the Levant.
Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
BTW: you can click on the word "Palestine" above to learn the truth
-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maps are European, bright eyes. Palestine is a European name. D’oh!
> 
> 
> 
> Da.,.,Da.,.,poor Da.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. still no ancient maps of "Israel"
> -
Click to expand...


Maps are modern creations, bright eyes. Israel and Judea appear in ancient sources. Palestine does not.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> *Judea* or *Judæa* (/dʒuːˈdiːə/;[1] from Hebrew: יהודה‎, Standard _Yəhuda_, Tiberian _Yəhûḏāh_, Greek: Ἰουδαία, _Ioudaía_; Latin: _Iūdaea_, Arabic: يهودا‎, _Yahudia_) is the ancient Hebrew and Israelite biblical, the exonymic Roman/English, and the modern-day name of the *mountainous southern part of the region of **Palestine*. The name originates from the Hebrew name "Yehudah", a son of the Jewish patriarch Jacob/Israel, and Yehudah's progeny forming the biblical Israelite tribe of Judah (Yehudah) and later the associated Kingdom of Judah, which the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia dates from 934 until 586 BCE.[2] The name of the region continued to be incorporated through the Babylonian conquest, Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman periods as Yehud, Yehud Medinata, Hasmonean Judea, and consequently Herodian Judea and Roman Judea, respectively.
> 
> *Palestine* (Arabic: فلسطين‎ _Filasṭīn_, _Falasṭīn_, _Filisṭīn_; Greek: Παλαιστίνη, _Palaistinē_; Latin: _Palaestina_; Hebrew: פלשתינה‎ *Palestina*) is a geographic region in Western Asia usually *considered to include **Israel**, the **West Bank**, the **Gaza Strip**, and in some definitions, some parts of western **Jordan**.*
> 
> The name was used by ancient Greek writers, and it was later used for the Roman province Syria Palaestina, the Byzantine Palaestina Prima, and the Islamic provincial district of Jund Filastin. The region comprises most of the territory claimed for the biblical regions known as the Land of Israel (Hebrew: ארץ־ישראל‎ _Eretz-Yisra'el_), the Holy Land or Promised Land. Historically, it has been known as the southern portion of wider regional designations such as Canaan, Syria, ash-Sham, and the Levant.
> Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
> BTW: you can click on the word "Palestine" above to learn the truth
> -



Palestine: English name from Greek/Latin name for Philistines who were Greek. Palestine never existed...


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Maps are modern creations, bright eyes. Israel and Judea appear in ancient sources. Palestine does not.


You can repeat the same lie over and over and still its just a lie.
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Palestine: English name from Greek/Latin name for Philistines who were Greek. Palestine never existed...



You can make the text as large as you want and still its just a bigger lie. Bernard's fiction is no different but I does make for a great comic book tail. 

You anti-Christian buffoon
-


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> You can claim “Judea” is the same as Israel if this helps you sleep at night, for I would not wish nightmares disturbing your sleep but the truth is the truth.
> 
> I would like to skip all this gibberish concerning the land now called Israel and jump to the here and now. The land of Israel does exist today. Biblically speaking God did choose the Jews as His children and God said He could cherish them over all others but He attached some conditions to maintain His loyalties.
> 
> *The Israelis’ have broken those conditions and they will be punished for it.*
> 
> The only way the Israeli’s can regain God’s trust and love is to *“repent”, admit their transgressions and ask for His forgiveness;* once done I am sure He will forgive them.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. and if not Gods last prophesy will come true.
> 
> King James Bible
> *Ezekiel 21:32*
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it*.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


This church buffonery again?

Dude you have no idea what you're quoting,
because the verse is describing the demise of Israel's enemies:

_"And you, son of man, prophesy and say; So said the Lord God *concerning the children of Ammon* and concerning their blasphemy, and you shall say; A sword, a drawn sword, furbished for slaughter, to consume in order to glitter. "_


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> *there never was a land called “Israel” prior to 1947ad*
> 
> -





watchingfromafar said:


> 3 *And say to the land of Israel, Thus saith the Lord; *



Feel especially smart yet?


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> *NOTE:* The Israelite's pack up everything and move to Egypt leaving everything behind and live in Egypt for 400+ years never calling the place they left behind “Isra


My bet is there wasnt a land called Israel at that time. It became their land after Moses led them there after 40 years' wandering from Egypt. 



watchingfromafar said:


> This marked the great EXODUS
> because Moses murders
> a fellow Jew in cold blood



Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?


----------



## watchingfromafar

*The Last Nail In the Zion Coffin*​*Ezekiel*
_1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 
2 Son of man, set thy face toward Jerusalem, and drop thy word toward the holy places, *and prophesy against the land of Israel*, 
3 *And say to the land of Israel, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I am against thee*, and will draw forth my sword out of his sheath, and will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked. 
4 Seeing then that I will cut off from thee the righteous and the wicked, therefore shall my sword go forth out of his sheath against all flesh from the south to the north: 
7 And it shall be, when they say unto thee, Wherefore sighest thou? that thou shalt answer, For the tidings; because it cometh: and every heart shall melt, and all hands shall be feeble, and every spirit shall faint, and all knees shall be weak as water: behold, it cometh, and shall be brought to pass, saith the Lord GOD.
9 Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus saith the LORD; Say, A sword, a sword is sharpened, and also furbished:
12 *Cry and howl, son of man: for it shall be upon my people, it shall be upon all the princes of Israel: terrors by reason of the sword shall be upon my people*: smite therefore upon thy thigh. 
13 Because it is a trial, and what if the sword contemn even the rod? it shall be no more, saith the Lord GOD.
17 *I will also smite mine hands together, and I will cause my fury to rest: I the LORD have said it.*
20 Appoint a way, that the sword may come to Rabbath of the Ammonites, and to Judah in Jerusalem the defenced. 
24 *Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are discovered, so that in all your doings your sins do appear*; because, I say, that ye are come to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand. 
25 *And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come*, when iniquity shall have an end, 
27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.
-_


----------



## watchingfromafar

ESay said:


> Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?


Interpret the following as you see it--

_And it came to pass in those days*, when Moses was grown*, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: and *he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brothers*. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man,* he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. *And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, *Why smite you your fellow?*

Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well. Moses and all the others flee Egypt and are scattered throughout the land._
Exodus 2:11 One day, after Moses had grown up, he went out to his own people and observed their hard labor. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people.

-


----------



## watchingfromafar

ESay said:


> Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?



Yes it does. Moses murders a man the the street for no good reason; period.




__





						Love the Stranger as thyself
					





					www.universalknowledge.net
				



-


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?
> 
> 
> 
> Interpret the following as you see it--
> 
> _And it came to pass in those days*, when Moses was grown*, that he went out to his brothers, and looked on their burdens: and *he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brothers*. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man,* he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. *And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, *Why smite you your fellow?*
> 
> Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelled in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well. Moses and all the others flee Egypt and are scattered throughout the land._
> Exodus 2:11 One day, after Moses had grown up, he went out to his own people and observed their hard labor. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people.
> 
> -
Click to expand...

Moses killed an Egyptian when he saw the Egyptian beat a Herbew man. 

Later, he saw two Hebrews argue with each other and he tried to calm them, and one of the Hebrews said - Are you going to kill me as you did the Egyptian? 

And Moses decided to hide away because it became known and the Pharaoh sought to punish him.


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it does. Moses murders a man the the street for no good reason; period.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love the Stranger as thyself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.universalknowledge.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
Click to expand...

So? What it has to do with the land of Israel?


----------



## rylah

ESay said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> *NOTE:* The Israelite's pack up everything and move to Egypt leaving everything behind and live in Egypt for 400+ years never calling the place they left behind “Isra
> 
> 
> 
> My bet is there wasnt a land called Israel at that time. It became their land after Moses led them there after 40 years' wandering from Egypt.
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> This marked the great EXODUS
> because Moses murders
> a fellow Jew in cold blood
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't your own quite say that he killed an Egyptian?
Click to expand...


Before the children of Israel returned,
it was called the land of the Hebrews.

_"For I was stolen from the land of the Hebrews..." Beresheet 40_


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey ”genius”: Romans, and ancient Greeks, called Israel “Judea,” signifying land of the Jews
> 
> 
> 
> You can claim “Judea” is the same as Israel if this helps you sleep at night, for I would not wish nightmares disturbing your sleep but the truth is the truth.
> 
> I would like to skip all this gibberish concerning the land now called Israel and jump to the here and now. The land of Israel does exist today. Biblically speaking God did choose the Jews as His children and God said He could cherish them over all others but He attached some conditions to maintain His loyalties.
> 
> *The Israelis’ have broken those conditions and they will be punished for it.*
> 
> The only way the Israeli’s can regain God’s trust and love is to *“repent”, admit their transgressions and ask for His forgiveness;* once done I am sure He will forgive them.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. and if not Gods last prophesy will come true.
> 
> King James Bible
> *Ezekiel 21:32*
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it*.
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Judea was Israel. Jesus was born in Judea and is called King of Israel in the NT. No mention of “palestine“ cuz no such place existed. Now, you can sleep well...


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine: English name from Greek/Latin name for Philistines who were Greek. Palestine never existed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can make the text as large as you want and still its just a bigger lie. Bernard's fiction is no different but I does make for a great comic book tail.
> 
> You anti-Christian buffoon
> -
Click to expand...


Princeton University: “Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s leading authorities on the Middle East, has been awarded the National Humanities Medal. Bernard Lewis is an exceptional scholar. The world has benefited enormously from the insight of his scholarship.”


----------



## MartyNYC

MartyNYC said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine: English name from Greek/Latin name for Philistines who were Greek. Palestine never existed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can make the text as large as you want and still its just a bigger lie. Bernard's fiction is no different but I does make for a great comic book tail.
> 
> You anti-Christian buffoon
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Princeton University: “Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s leading authorities on the Middle East, has been awarded the National Humanities Medal. Bernard Lewis is an exceptional scholar. The world has benefited enormously from the insight of his scholarship.”
> 
> View attachment 359983
Click to expand...



National Endowment for the Humanities: “Bernard Lewis, famed scholar of the Middle East, 1990 Jefferson Lecturer, and 2006 National Humanities Medalist. As a humanist he had few peers; as a scholar of the Middle East his contributions were foundational.”

Statement from National Endowment for the Humanities on the Death of Bernard Lewis


----------



## MartyNYC

MartyNYC said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine: English name from Greek/Latin name for Philistines who were Greek. Palestine never existed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can make the text as large as you want and still its just a bigger lie. Bernard's fiction is no different but I does make for a great comic book tail.
> 
> You anti-Christian buffoon
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Princeton University: “Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s leading authorities on the Middle East, has been awarded the National Humanities Medal. Bernard Lewis is an exceptional scholar. The world has benefited enormously from the insight of his scholarship.”
> 
> View attachment 359983
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> National Endowment for the Humanities: “Bernard Lewis, famed scholar of the Middle East, 1990 Jefferson Lecturer, and 2006 National Humanities Medalist. As a humanist he had few peers; as a scholar of the Middle East his contributions were foundational.”
> 
> Statement from National Endowment for the Humanities on the Death of Bernard Lewis
Click to expand...


Bernard Lewis: Ancient palestine never existed...


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maps are European, bright eyes. Palestine is a European name. D’oh!
> 
> 
> 
> Da.,.,Da.,.,poor Da.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,. still no ancient maps of "Israel"
> -
Click to expand...


There are no ancient maps of the Middle East. Ancient archaeology: Louvre Museum, The Mesha Stele features the earliest written occurence of the world of Israel & the Kingdom of Israel...”  The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> There are no ancient maps of the Middle East. Ancient archaeology: Louvre Museum, The Mesha Stele features the earliest written occurence of the world of Israel & the Kingdom of Israel...”



As they say in trash land; rubbish
I have said this before & I will say it again; 
[1] Israel was a person, not a place
[2] The Jews were shepherds in the open grass lands
[3] the earliest written occurrence  of the Israelite's is recorded in the Bible, not Meswha Stele's biased account
-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are no ancient maps of the Middle East. Ancient archaeology: Louvre Museum, The Mesha Stele features the earliest written occurence of the world of Israel & the Kingdom of Israel...”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As they say in trash land; rubbish
> I have said this before & I will say it again;
> [1] Israel was a person, not a place
> [2] The Jews were shepherds in the open grass lands
> [3] the earliest written occurrence  of the Israelite's is recorded in the Bible, not Meswha Stele's biased account
> -
Click to expand...


You’re not very good at this. Land of Israel...


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are no ancient maps of the Middle East. Ancient archaeology: Louvre Museum, The Mesha Stele features the earliest written occurence of the world of Israel & the Kingdom of Israel...”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As they say in trash land; rubbish
> I have said this before & I will say it again;
> [1] Israel was a person, not a place
> [2] The Jews were shepherds in the open grass lands
> [3] the earliest written occurrence  of the Israelite's is recorded in the Bible, not Meswha Stele's biased account
> -
Click to expand...


Palestine never existed.

Ancient Kingdom Of Israel verified by archaeology...


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> You’re not very good at this. Land of Israel...


Marty, I’m beginning to understand you; you should try reading the Bible instead of what your handlers feed you.

You talked about Joseph as if you knew him but you don’t have a clue.

(Gen 41:39 KJV) *And Pharaoh said unto Joseph*_, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
(Gen 41:40 KJV) *Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.*
(Gen 41:42 KJV) _And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;_
(Gen 41:44 KJV) *And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.*
Gen 41:46 KJV) _And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh King of Egypt. And *Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt*._

Joseph who is now the ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelite's who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.

(Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan._
(Gen 42:25 KJV) _Then *Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:*_
(Gen 45:20 KJV) *Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.*

See above, they abandon the land of Canaan and move to Egypt

(Gen 45:21 KJV) *And the children of Israel did so*_: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._
(Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, *My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_
(Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation?* And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
(Gen 47:5 KJV) *And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph*_, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
(Gen 47:6 KJV) *The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.*
(Gen 47:11 KJV) *And Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.

Marty,*_ learn before you speak, _
*-*


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not very good at this. Land of Israel...
> 
> 
> 
> Marty, I’m beginning to understand you; you should try reading the Bible instead of what your handlers feed you.
> 
> You talked about Joseph as if you knew him but you don’t have a clue.
> 
> (Gen 41:39 KJV) *And Pharaoh said unto Joseph*_, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_
> (Gen 41:40 KJV) *Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.*
> (Gen 41:42 KJV) _And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;_
> (Gen 41:44 KJV) *And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.*
> Gen 41:46 KJV) _And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh King of Egypt. And *Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt*._
> 
> Joseph who is now the ruler over all of Egypt saves the Israelite's who are experiencing a great famine and moves them to Egypt and gives them power over all the agriculture lands. Clearly they were not slaves as some would have believed.
> 
> (Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan._
> (Gen 42:25 KJV) _Then *Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:*_
> (Gen 45:20 KJV) *Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.*
> 
> See above, they abandon the land of Canaan and move to Egypt
> 
> (Gen 45:21 KJV) *And the children of Israel did so*_: and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._
> (Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, *My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation?* And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*_
> (Gen 47:5 KJV) *And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph*_, saying, Thy father [ISRAEL] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
> (Gen 47:6 KJV) *The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.*
> (Gen 47:11 KJV) *And Joseph placed his father [ISRAEL] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.
> 
> Marty,*_ learn before you speak, _
> *-*
Click to expand...


Anyone see palestine here or land of Israel? ⤵


----------



## Sixties Fan

A lot of people argue about what “indigenous” means, and even the UN says there is no standard definition. It seems that too often the people defining the term are more interested in the color of the skin of the people claiming indigeneity than the actual circumstances.

But these same people are often the ones who want to downplay the very real Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. They don’t want to hear that Jews pray to have Jerusalem rebuilt three times a day (not just the Passover Seder’s “next year in Jerusalem!”) They don’t want to hear about the undeniable fact that during the 2000 years of Jewish exile, practically no country that hosted the Jews ever considered them to be truly equal citizens. Everyone throughout history knew that their home was in Israel, and if you look at old books the words “Hebrew” and “Israelite” are used as often as the word “Jew,” emphasizing the Jewish nation in exile.

In exile from where? Everyone knows the answer.

Jews have maintained psychological and physical ties to Israel ever since the current diaspora began. They have no other homeland.

And the current three week period where we mourn the destruction of the two Temples is all the proof you need that Jews have only had one real home.

If that isn’t the definition of indigenous, then you are twisting the word specifically to exclude Jews.









						Indigenous
					

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.




					elderofziyon.blogspot.com


----------



## MartyNYC

Sixties Fan said:


> A lot of people argue about what “indigenous” means, and even the UN says there is no standard definition. It seems that too often the people defining the term are more interested in the color of the skin of the people claiming indigeneity than the actual circumstances.
> 
> But these same people are often the ones who want to downplay the very real Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. They don’t want to hear that Jews pray to have Jerusalem rebuilt three times a day (not just the Passover Seder’s “next year in Jerusalem!”) They don’t want to hear about the undeniable fact that during the 2000 years of Jewish exile, practically no country that hosted the Jews ever considered them to be truly equal citizens. Everyone throughout history knew that their home was in Israel, and if you look at old books the words “Hebrew” and “Israelite” are used as often as the word “Jew,” emphasizing the Jewish nation in exile.
> 
> In exile from where? Everyone knows the answer.
> 
> Jews have maintained psychological and physical ties to Israel ever since the current diaspora began. They have no other homeland.
> 
> And the current three week period where we mourn the destruction of the two Temples is all the proof you need that Jews have only had one real home.
> 
> If that isn’t the definition of indigenous, then you are twisting the word specifically to exclude Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous
> 
> 
> Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elderofziyon.blogspot.com



This is not indigenous...


----------



## watchingfromafar

ESay said:


> So? What it has to do with the land of Israel?


If you don't read the link you just remain as ignorant as before.
And as the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

And down the toilet da dump goes


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> So? What it has to do with the land of Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't read the link you just remain as ignorant as before.
> And as the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink
> -
Click to expand...

Well, okay. I have read your link. And I seem to understand now what you tried to say by it. That the Jews are not indigenous people to the land and don't have a right to claim it. Right?


----------



## watchingfromafar

ESay said:


> Well, okay. I have read your link. And I seem to understand now what you tried to say by it. That the Jews are not indigenous people to the land and don't have a right to claim it. Right?


The Old Testament clearly lays out the relationship between the Israelite's and God. The Lord did choose the Israelite's as His chosen people while at the same time He set conditions on them. If they chose to abide by His commandments, they would be fruitful and multiple exceedingly.

The path they took and the outcome of these actions is coming to fruition as we speak. But that is not the point of this thread. This thread is about who is indigenous to the region.

The Israelite's abandon Canaan and move to Egypt leaving everything behind. Since they abandoned their homeland (Canaan) and moved to Egypt I do not believe they have any rightful claim to the land today.
-


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, okay. I have read your link. And I seem to understand now what you tried to say by it. That the Jews are not indigenous people to the land and don't have a right to claim it. Right?
> 
> 
> 
> The Old Testament clearly lays out the relationship between the Israelite's and God. The Lord did choose the Israelite's as His chosen people while at the same time He set conditions on them. If they chose to abide by His commandments, they would be fruitful and multiple exceedingly.
> 
> The path they took and the outcome of these actions is coming to fruition as we speak. But that is not the point of this thread. This thread is about who is indigenous to the region.
> 
> The Israelite's abandon Canaan and move to Egypt leaving everything behind. Since they abandoned their homeland (Canaan) and moved to Egypt I do not believe they have any rightful claim to the land today.
> -
Click to expand...


G-d's covenant is eternal no matter what Israel do,
we will be redeemed, for the sake of His Name.

The conditions are on how we will experience it collectively,
not on the covenant itself, that is eternal.

The Israelites didn't abandon Canaan,
Israel A"H was supposed to be sent in chains as a slave to Egypt,
G-d turned everything that Israel A"H was received with royal accommodations.

But of course you never read the entire book.


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, okay. I have read your link. And I seem to understand now what you tried to say by it. That the Jews are not indigenous people to the land and don't have a right to claim it. Right?
> 
> 
> 
> The Old Testament clearly lays out the relationship between the Israelite's and God. The Lord did choose the Israelite's as His chosen people while at the same time He set conditions on them. If they chose to abide by His commandments, they would be fruitful and multiple exceedingly.
> 
> The path they took and the outcome of these actions is coming to fruition as we speak. But that is not the point of this thread. This thread is about who is indigenous to the region.
> 
> The Israelite's abandon Canaan and move to Egypt leaving everything behind. Since they abandoned their homeland (Canaan) and moved to Egypt I do not believe they have any rightful claim to the land today.
> -
Click to expand...

Well, first af all, I want to admit that my comprehension of the OT is quite low, because I began to read it not so much time ago and my knowledge of it is quite scarce yet.

As far as I understand, you mentioned the time of Joseph, right? Then, first af all, my understanding is the term 'their land' can be applied with some conditions. Land of Hebrews is more about describing the land where they lived, with some other people, rather than about possession. People of that time there were nomads and didn't have established states.

This land became really the land of Israel when the Jews conquered it and established their state there after Moses.


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> G-d's covenant is eternal no matter what Israel do,


No matter "what" Israel does defies the covenant. Trump claims he can shoot and kill a stranger in the street and no be punished for it, it seems you are just as ignorant.


rylah said:


> we will be redeemed, for the sake of His Name,


To say you will be redeemed means they/you did a wrong and He will look the other way. That my sweet plump dumpling is NOT God’s way but the devil’s mind set instead.


rylah said:


> The conditions are on how we will experience it collectively,


*Ezekiel 21:32*
Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.*


rylah said:


> not on the covenant itself, that is eternal.


The Israelites are not gods, they are not eternal. They lived and continue to live based on lies, and racism and for this He will punish them for it. Your kind is being judged as we speak and your punishment will occur in my lifetime; this I can assure you.


rylah said:


> The Israelites didn't abandon Canaan


Yes they did and you cannot prove otherwise


rylah said:


> Israel A"H was supposed to be sent in chains as a slave to Egypt,


_(Gen 47:1 KJV) *Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*
(Gen 47:3 KJV) And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*
(Gen 47:5 KJV) And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:
(Gen 47:6 KJV) The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.
(Gen 47:11 KJV) And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded._

*Chains?* "_gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land" _



rylah said:


> G-d turned everything that Israel A"H was received with royal accommodations.


Prove it or stop lying


rylah said:


> But of course you never read the entire book.


 I have read it; you my sweet plump dumpling should read it too
-


----------



## Taz

Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.


----------



## watchingfromafar

ESay said:


> This land became really the land of Israel when the Jews conquered it and established their state there after Moses.


You are relying on folklore to justify your position.

*Definition of folklore*
1: traditional customs, tales, sayings, dances, or art forms preserved among a people

*The Jews of old had no army, they were shepherds.*

_(Gen 47:1 KJV) *Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*

(Gen 47:3 KJV) And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.
-*_


----------



## ESay

watchingfromafar said:


> ESay said:
> 
> 
> 
> This land became really the land of Israel when the Jews conquered it and established their state there after Moses.
> 
> 
> 
> You are relying on folklore to justify your position.
> 
> *Definition of folklore*
> 1: traditional customs, tales, sayings, dances, or art forms preserved among a people
> 
> *The Jews of old had no army, they were shepherds.*
> 
> _(Gen 47:1 KJV) *Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*
> 
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.
> -*_
Click to expand...

You can call it folklore, I am okay with that. You can propose some other source.

Yes, they came to Egypt as shepherds. But if you read the Numbers, you will see that they were organized by Moses as a large military unit. The tribes had their own places when the Jews stayed on some place or walking; all men from 20 years old were counted etc.


----------



## MartyNYC

Taz said:


> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.



Palestine was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, which became Israel.


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> G-d's covenant is eternal no matter what Israel do,
> 
> 
> 
> No matter "what" Israel does defies the covenant. Trump claims he can shoot and kill a stranger in the street and no be punished for it, it seems you are just as ignorant.
Click to expand...

It's grotesque how you'll loose all integrity just like that, by the first sentence.



watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> we will be redeemed, for the sake of His Name,
> 
> 
> 
> To say you will be redeemed means they/you did a wrong and He will look the other way. That my sweet plump dumpling is NOT God’s way but the devil’s mind set instead.
Click to expand...

Regardless of right and wrong redemption is a function of being Adam,
it's not looking the other way, rather that G-d has His plans,
and because G-d chose to carry His Name in Israel.



watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The conditions are on how we will experience it collectively,
> 
> 
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32*
> Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered: for I the LORD have spoken it.*
Click to expand...


Yeah, this verse is talking about Ammonites,
the enemies of Israel.

All Israel's enemies end up in the dust bin of history.



watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> not on the covenant itself, that is eternal.
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelites are not gods, they are not eternal. They lived and continue to live based on lies, and racism and for this He will punish them for it. Your kind is being judged as we speak and your punishment will occur in my lifetime; this I can assure you.
Click to expand...


Actually Israel is eternal as the laws of the earth and heavens, and beyond:

_"For the mountains shall depart and the hills totter, but My kindness shall not depart from you, neither shall the covenant of My peace totter," says the Lord, Who has compassion on you. "_
_Yeshayahu 54_​


watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelites didn't abandon Canaan
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they did and you cannot prove otherwise
Click to expand...

It wasn't abandonment,
everything was a according to the eternal covenant:

_And He said to Abram, "You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years. _
_Beresheet 15_​


watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel A"H was supposed to be sent in chains as a slave to Egypt,
> 
> 
> 
> _(Gen 47:1 KJV) *Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*
> (Gen 47:3 KJV) And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, What is your occupation? And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.*
> (Gen 47:5 KJV) And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:
> (Gen 47:6 KJV) The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle.
> (Gen 47:11 KJV) And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded._
> 
> *Chains?* "_gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land" _
Click to expand...


See above, and following :



And Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Tell your brothers, 'Do this load up your beasts and go, enter the land of Canaan.18And take your father and your households and come to me, and I will give you the best of the land of Egypt, and [you will] eat the fat of the land.'19And you [Joseph] have been commanded [to tell them], 'Do this: take yourselves wagons from the land of Egypt for your young children and for your wives, and you shall carry your father and come.20And let your eye not be concerned about your utensils, for the best of all the land of Egypt is yours.' "21And the sons of Israel did so, and Joseph gave them wagons by Pharaoh's orders, and he gave them provisions for the way.22He gave them all, to each one [several] changes of clothes, and to Benjamin he gave three hundred [pieces of] silver and five changes of clothes.23And to his father he sent the following: ten he donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt, and ten she donkeys carrying grain, bread, and [other] food, for his father for the way.
Beresheet 45​


watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> G-d turned everything that Israel A"H was received with royal accommodations.
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it or stop lying
Click to expand...


The Bein HaBeyarim covenant set the seed of Avraham Avinu A"H to be enslaved by Egypt.
Instead of abandoning Canaan, Israel Avinu A"H was carried on with treasures from Pharaoh, instead of as a slave, as was intended, and given the best of land, while famine in Egypt stopped.

G-d eventually turned the tragedy of Yosef A"H into a blessing.
So until the fathers of the tribes passed, Israel were not enslaved.



watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> But of course you never read the entire book.
> 
> 
> 
> I have read it; you my sweet plump dumpling should read it too
> -
Click to expand...


All that chest thumping is 100%,
maybe work on reading comprehension.


----------



## rylah

Taz said:


> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.



Really, every one born in America is a Native American?


----------



## Shusha

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
Click to expand...


Again, this simply conflates territory with peoples as though they were the same thing.  They are not. 

"Native Americans" may be citizens of the United States of America, but they do not refer to themselves, their people nor their traditional lands with terminology of the invader/colonizer like "America".  In both Canada and the US, indigenous and aboriginal peoples are increasingly rejecting such terminology in favour of their own self-description.  They self-identify using their own language and traditions.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
Click to expand...


Everyone born in British Mandatory Palestine was British.


----------



## Shusha

MartyNYC said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everyone born in British Mandatory Palestine was British.
Click to expand...


This is incorrect.


----------



## Taz

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
Click to expand...

That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...


----------



## MartyNYC

Taz said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
Click to expand...


Show me a history of the country of palestine.


----------



## Taz

MartyNYC said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me a history of the country of palestine.
Click to expand...

Ya sure, hang on, I’ll get it ready.


----------



## rylah

Taz said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
Click to expand...


Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.

In spite of your claim,
majority of the people born in those countries,
are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
Click to expand...


If people born in palestine are natives, how come nobody is named Palestini?


----------



## Shusha

Taz said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
Click to expand...


If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?


----------



## rylah

MartyNYC said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If people born in palestine are natives, how come nobody is named Palestini?
> 
> View attachment 362596
Click to expand...

Most common Israeli surnames are -  Peretz, Mizrahi, Cohen, Levy, Avraham and Dahan etc.

Some Israeli Jews have surnames like the ones on Your list: Halebi, Tarablusi or Alfasi...

They do indicate location of diaspora, as much as with many of the East European diaspora,
but what sets the native tribes of those places from the native tribes of Judea, Israel,
is that Judeans carrying these surnames kept their distinct native culture,
to preserve their civilization and re-constitute it in later generations.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If people born in palestine are natives, how come nobody is named Palestini?
> 
> View attachment 362596
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most common Israeli surnames are -  Peretz, Mizrahi, Cohen, Levy, Avraham and Dahan etc.
> 
> Some Israeli Jews have surnames like the ones on Your list: Halebi, Tarablusi or Alfasi...
> 
> They do indicate location of diaspora, as much as with many of the East European diaspora,
> but what sets the native tribes of those places from the native tribes of Judea, Israel,
> is that Judeans carrying these surnames kept their distinct native culture,
> to preserve their civilization and re-constitute it in later generations.
Click to expand...


I know numerous Israelis with the surname Israeli. How come there is no record of even 1 person named Palestini?


----------



## rylah

MartyNYC said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If people born in palestine are natives, how come nobody is named Palestini?
> 
> View attachment 362596
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most common Israeli surnames are -  Peretz, Mizrahi, Cohen, Levy, Avraham and Dahan etc.
> 
> Some Israeli Jews have surnames like the ones on Your list: Halebi, Tarablusi or Alfasi...
> 
> They do indicate location of diaspora, as much as with many of the East European diaspora,
> but what sets the native tribes of those places from the native tribes of Judea, Israel,
> is that Judeans carrying these surnames kept their distinct native culture,
> to preserve their civilization and re-constitute it in later generations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know numerous Israelis with the surname Israeli. How come there is no record of even 1 person named Palestini?
Click to expand...


Because the word_ 'Palestine' _has no meaning in Arabic.


----------



## MartyNYC

rylah said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If people born in palestine are natives, how come nobody is named Palestini?
> 
> View attachment 362596
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most common Israeli surnames are -  Peretz, Mizrahi, Cohen, Levy, Avraham and Dahan etc.
> 
> Some Israeli Jews have surnames like the ones on Your list: Halebi, Tarablusi or Alfasi...
> 
> They do indicate location of diaspora, as much as with many of the East European diaspora,
> but what sets the native tribes of those places from the native tribes of Judea, Israel,
> is that Judeans carrying these surnames kept their distinct native culture,
> to preserve their civilization and re-constitute it in later generations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know numerous Israelis with the surname Israeli. How come there is no record of even 1 person named Palestini?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because the word_ 'Palestine' _has no meaning in Arabic.
Click to expand...


Arabs call it Filastin, which isn’t an actual Arabic name—Filastin was the Arab version of Roman Palaestina adopted by Arabs after the Arab conquest of Syria which had been under Roman/Byzantine rule. Roman Palaestina was imposed on Jews centuries earlier.


----------



## Taz

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population,
> Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.
> 
> In spite of your claim,
> majority of the people born in those countries,
> are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
Click to expand...

They absolutely are natives. I'm a native American, born there, even though I'm a White guy, I'm still native to America.

And remember, the Indians walked over from Asia during the last ice age, so by your definition, they aren't natives either.


----------



## Taz

Shusha said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?
Click to expand...

You're both. But if Catalonia separates, then the newborn will be natives of Catalonia. The rest were still born in Spain.


----------



## Shusha

Taz said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're both. But if Catalonia separates, then the newborn will be natives of Catalonia. The rest were still born in Spain.
Click to expand...


See?  Already its not so very simple as you stated in your first post.  

You were deliberately conflating a people with a nationality (State) in your opening post above.  Since there is no nationality of Palestinian, as you've demonstrated above concerning Catalans, there can be no natives of Palestine, just as there can be no natives of Catalonia.  Unless and until Palestine (and Catalonia) separates from existing States and becomes its own separate nationality, all children are natives to the State they are born in.  

Thus, your opening post contradicts your clarifying statement.  

Now, Israel IS a State.  So, while stating "anyone born in Palestine is a native of Palestine" is inconsistent with your clarifying claim, a corrected statement might read: anyone born in Israel is a native of Israel.  And that would be consistent with your initial post. 

We have two additional confounding factors.  

If someone is of Catalan descent but is born in Spain is she native of Catalonia or of Spain?  You can answer that from the perspective of both pre- and post- separation.  If someone is of Catalan descent and is born on territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?  If someone is of Spanish descent and is born in territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?


----------



## MartyNYC

Taz said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're both. But if Catalonia separates, then the newborn will be natives of Catalonia. The rest were still born in Spain.
Click to expand...


Since Jews were born in “Palestine,” they were Palestinians as are their descendants Palestinians.


----------



## Taz

Shusha said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're both. But if Catalonia separates, then the newborn will be natives of Catalonia. The rest were still born in Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See?  Already its not so very simple as you stated in your first post.
> 
> You were deliberately conflating a people with a nationality (State) in your opening post above.  Since there is no nationality of Palestinian, as you've demonstrated above concerning Catalans, there can be no natives of Palestine, just as there can be no natives of Catalonia.  Unless and until Palestine (and Catalonia) separates from existing States and becomes its own separate nationality, all children are natives to the State they are born in.
> 
> Thus, your opening post contradicts your clarifying statement.
> 
> Now, Israel IS a State.  So, while stating "anyone born in Palestine is a native of Palestine" is inconsistent with your clarifying claim, a corrected statement might read: anyone born in Israel is a native of Israel.  And that would be consistent with your initial post.
> 
> We have two additional confounding factors.
> 
> If someone is of Catalan descent but is born in Spain is she native of Catalonia or of Spain?  You can answer that from the perspective of both pre- and post- separation.  If someone is of Catalan descent and is born on territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?  If someone is of Spanish descent and is born in territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?
Click to expand...

Palestine is simply an area, like North America. You can be native to North America.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?        
⁜→  Taz, rylah, et al,

*BLUF: * I think that there is confusion in the usage.  And the misuse.
             (Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law)

◈  There is the "nationality principle (of jurisdiction)." *(Page 406)*​​◈  There are "native communities." *(Page 406)* (Native communities (Indian Tribes) are different from Indigenous communities. All tribal or native communities are Indigenous Communities, but not all Indigenous Communities are tribal or native communities.​​◈  There is a definition for the Right of Indigenous Peoples.* (Page 277)*​
And then there is the Concise Oxford American Dictionary

*◈   Na-tive A-mer-i-can n.* a member of any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. *(Page 589)*​​*◈   Na-tive /' nativ/ n.* a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not; *(Page 589)*​​


Taz said:


> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.





rylah said:


> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?





Taz said:


> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...





rylah said:


> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population, Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.  In spite of your claim, majority of the people born in those countries, are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.





Taz said:


> They absolutely are natives. I'm a native American, born there, even though I'm a White guy, I'm still native to America.
> 
> And remember, the Indians walked over from Asia during the last ice age, so by your definition, they aren't natives either.


*(COMMENT)*

Our friend "rylah" is correct in terms of the general understanding of the applied term.  "Taz" is not quite as correct.  There is a difference in the meaning of "Native to America" and "Native American."  In fluent American English, the terms "Native Americans," and "American Indians," are nearly equivalent.  I am a 2d Generation American or U.S. citizenship born in the territory of the United States.  We do not use the term "Native American" except when referring to American Indians.  However, those born in the US can (awkwardly) be referred to as indigenous Americans.

*


Most Respectfully,
R

native communities* ‘It is clear that some indigenous communities were regarded not only as legal occupants of their territory but as fully sovereign States in international law.  Although some writers required a certain degree of “civilization” as a prerequisite for statehood, it had long been established that the only necessary precondition was a degree of governmental authority sufficient for the general maintenance of order, and subsequent practice was not sufficiently consistent or coherent to change that position. … This did not necessarily mean that same rules were applied to or by such States as were by European States between themselves. But that is to be explained not by any distinction between “civilized” and “barbarous” States but because many of those rules were what would now be called regional customs rather than general international law’:

*nationality principle (of jurisdiction)* According to the Harvard Research Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime ( 1935 ), ‘A State has jurisdiction with respect to an crime committed outside its territory (a) by a natural person who was a national of that State when the crime was committed or who is a national of that State when prosecuted or punished; or (b) by a corporation or other juristic person which had the national character of that State when the crime was committed.

*indigenous peoples, right of* After a protracted period of negotiation, on 7 September 2007 , the General Assembly adopted (as Res. 61/295) the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which accords rights to indigenous peoples, without defining the term. These rights include self-determination (art. 3; see also arts. 26 and 27), though this might amount to no more than autonomy (art. 4); the maintenance and strengthening of their distinct political, economic, social, and cultural characteristics, as well as their legal systems, while retaining their right to full participation in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the State (art. 5); freedom from discrimination (arts. 2 and 9);


----------



## Shusha

In Canada, the preferred terminology is First Nations, Inuit and Metis.  But that is shifting into terminology of individual nations according to how they self-identify.  Such as the Musquem, the Matsqui First Nation, the Squamish Nation, etc.


----------



## MartyNYC

Taz said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are born in Catalonia are you a native of Spain or Catalonia?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're both. But if Catalonia separates, then the newborn will be natives of Catalonia. The rest were still born in Spain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See?  Already its not so very simple as you stated in your first post.
> 
> You were deliberately conflating a people with a nationality (State) in your opening post above.  Since there is no nationality of Palestinian, as you've demonstrated above concerning Catalans, there can be no natives of Palestine, just as there can be no natives of Catalonia.  Unless and until Palestine (and Catalonia) separates from existing States and becomes its own separate nationality, all children are natives to the State they are born in.
> 
> Thus, your opening post contradicts your clarifying statement.
> 
> Now, Israel IS a State.  So, while stating "anyone born in Palestine is a native of Palestine" is inconsistent with your clarifying claim, a corrected statement might read: anyone born in Israel is a native of Israel.  And that would be consistent with your initial post.
> 
> We have two additional confounding factors.
> 
> If someone is of Catalan descent but is born in Spain is she native of Catalonia or of Spain?  You can answer that from the perspective of both pre- and post- separation.  If someone is of Catalan descent and is born on territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?  If someone is of Spanish descent and is born in territory claimed by Catalonia, over which Spain does NOT exert sovereignty, but prior to Catalonia separating and becoming a State, is she a native of Catalonia or of Spain?  Or would she be stateless?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine is simply an area, like North America. You can be native to North America.
Click to expand...


Who founded the area of palestine?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?        
⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,

This is a trick question.



MartyNYC said:


> Who founded the area of palestine?


*(COMMENT)*

There is evidence that there have been people in the Mount Carmel _(Southern Levant)_ Region for more than 90K years back to the Stone Age. There are archeological finds showing the Mousterian culture active across most of the Middle East North Africa territories, before the great Empires.  (Neanderthalic Activity)

I have no idea who the first ruler was that began to map out the regions and give them names.  But certainly, back before the ancient languages faded away, no one knows what the words sounded like.






​
*


 Most Respectfully,
 R*


----------



## MartyNYC

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> This is a trick question.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who founded the area of palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is evidence that there have been people in the Mount Carmel _(Southern Levant)_ Region for more than 90K years back to the Stone Age. There are archeological finds showing the Mousterian culture active across most of the Middle East North Africa territories, before the great Empires.  (Neanderthalic Activity)
> 
> I have no idea who the first ruler was that began to map out the regions and give them names.  But certainly, back before the ancient languages faded away, no one knows what the words sounded like.
> 
> View attachment 362917View attachment 362918​
> *
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R*
Click to expand...


Palestine, originally a Greek name, originally referred to a narrow sliver of the Mediterranean coast inhabited by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. However, Philistines didn‘t name anything Palestine. In fact, Philistines didn’t name themselves Philistines...


----------



## esalla

MartyNYC said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> This is a trick question.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who founded the area of palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is evidence that there have been people in the Mount Carmel _(Southern Levant)_ Region for more than 90K years back to the Stone Age. There are archeological finds showing the Mousterian culture active across most of the Middle East North Africa territories, before the great Empires.  (Neanderthalic Activity)
> 
> I have no idea who the first ruler was that began to map out the regions and give them names.  But certainly, back before the ancient languages faded away, no one knows what the words sounded like.
> 
> View attachment 362917View attachment 362918​
> *
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, originally a Greek name, originally referred to a narrow sliver of the Mediterranean coast inhabited by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. However, Philistines didn‘t name anything Palestine. In fact, Philistines didn’t name themselves Philistines...
> 
> View attachment 362939
Click to expand...

What is a palestine?


----------



## MartyNYC

esalla said:


> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  MartyNYC, et al,
> 
> This is a trick question.
> 
> 
> 
> MartyNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who founded the area of palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is evidence that there have been people in the Mount Carmel _(Southern Levant)_ Region for more than 90K years back to the Stone Age. There are archeological finds showing the Mousterian culture active across most of the Middle East North Africa territories, before the great Empires.  (Neanderthalic Activity)
> 
> I have no idea who the first ruler was that began to map out the regions and give them names.  But certainly, back before the ancient languages faded away, no one knows what the words sounded like.
> 
> View attachment 362917View attachment 362918​
> *
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine, originally a Greek name, originally referred to a narrow sliver of the Mediterranean coast inhabited by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. However, Philistines didn‘t name anything Palestine. In fact, Philistines didn’t name themselves Philistines...
> 
> View attachment 362939
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is a palestine?
Click to expand...


Palestine is a Greek pirate.


----------



## Taz

RoccoR said:


> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Taz, rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * I think that there is confusion in the usage.  And the misuse.
> (Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law)
> 
> ◈  There is the "nationality principle (of jurisdiction)." *(Page 406)*​​◈  There are "native communities." *(Page 406)* (Native communities (Indian Tribes) are different from Indigenous communities. All tribal or native communities are Indigenous Communities, but not all Indigenous Communities are tribal or native communities.​​◈  There is a definition for the Right of Indigenous Peoples.* (Page 277)*​
> And then there is the Concise Oxford American Dictionary
> 
> *◈   Na-tive A-mer-i-can n.* a member of any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. *(Page 589)*​​*◈   Na-tive /' nativ/ n.* a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not; *(Page 589)*​​
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population, Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.  In spite of your claim, majority of the people born in those countries, are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> They absolutely are natives. I'm a native American, born there, even though I'm a White guy, I'm still native to America.
> 
> And remember, the Indians walked over from Asia during the last ice age, so by your definition, they aren't natives either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Our friend "rylah" is correct in terms of the general understanding of the applied term.  "Taz" is not quite as correct.  There is a difference in the meaning of "Native to America" and "Native American."  In fluent American English, the terms "Native Americans," and "American Indians," are nearly equivalent.  I am a 2d Generation American or U.S. citizenship born in the territory of the United States.  We do not use the term "Native American" except when referring to American Indians.  However, those born in the US can (awkwardly) be referred to as indigenous Americans.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> native communities* ‘It is clear that some indigenous communities were regarded not only as legal occupants of their territory but as fully sovereign States in international law.  Although some writers required a certain degree of “civilization” as a prerequisite for statehood, it had long been established that the only necessary precondition was a degree of governmental authority sufficient for the general maintenance of order, and subsequent practice was not sufficiently consistent or coherent to change that position. … This did not necessarily mean that same rules were applied to or by such States as were by European States between themselves. But that is to be explained not by any distinction between “civilized” and “barbarous” States but because many of those rules were what would now be called regional customs rather than general international law’:
> 
> *nationality principle (of jurisdiction)* According to the Harvard Research Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime ( 1935 ), ‘A State has jurisdiction with respect to an crime committed outside its territory (a) by a natural person who was a national of that State when the crime was committed or who is a national of that State when prosecuted or punished; or (b) by a corporation or other juristic person which had the national character of that State when the crime was committed.
> 
> *indigenous peoples, right of* After a protracted period of negotiation, on 7 September 2007 , the General Assembly adopted (as Res. 61/295) the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which accords rights to indigenous peoples, without defining the term. These rights include self-determination (art. 3; see also arts. 26 and 27), though this might amount to no more than autonomy (art. 4); the maintenance and strengthening of their distinct political, economic, social, and cultural characteristics, as well as their legal systems, while retaining their right to full participation in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the State (art. 5); freedom from discrimination (arts. 2 and 9);
Click to expand...

Bite me. Anyone born in Canada is a native Canadian.

Indians aren’t even native to the Americas, they came over from Europe during the last ice age.


----------



## MartyNYC

Taz said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?
> ⁜→  Taz, rylah, et al,
> 
> *BLUF: * I think that there is confusion in the usage.  And the misuse.
> (Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law)
> 
> ◈  There is the "nationality principle (of jurisdiction)." *(Page 406)*​​◈  There are "native communities." *(Page 406)* (Native communities (Indian Tribes) are different from Indigenous communities. All tribal or native communities are Indigenous Communities, but not all Indigenous Communities are tribal or native communities.​​◈  There is a definition for the Right of Indigenous Peoples.* (Page 277)*​
> And then there is the Concise Oxford American Dictionary
> 
> *◈   Na-tive A-mer-i-can n.* a member of any of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. *(Page 589)*​​*◈   Na-tive /' nativ/ n.* a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not; *(Page 589)*​​
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone born in Palestine is native to Palestine. See how that works? Very simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really, every one born in America is a Native American?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s right. I’m born in America and that makes me a native  American. If you’re born in Germany, you’re a native German. ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually Native Americans are only 1.6% of the US population, Native Canadians are about 4.5% of Canada population.  In spite of your claim, majority of the people born in those countries, are specifically not defined as natives, or actually belong to any of the native tribes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taz said:
> 
> 
> 
> They absolutely are natives. I'm a native American, born there, even though I'm a White guy, I'm still native to America.
> 
> And remember, the Indians walked over from Asia during the last ice age, so by your definition, they aren't natives either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Our friend "rylah" is correct in terms of the general understanding of the applied term.  "Taz" is not quite as correct.  There is a difference in the meaning of "Native to America" and "Native American."  In fluent American English, the terms "Native Americans," and "American Indians," are nearly equivalent.  I am a 2d Generation American or U.S. citizenship born in the territory of the United States.  We do not use the term "Native American" except when referring to American Indians.  However, those born in the US can (awkwardly) be referred to as indigenous Americans.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> native communities* ‘It is clear that some indigenous communities were regarded not only as legal occupants of their territory but as fully sovereign States in international law.  Although some writers required a certain degree of “civilization” as a prerequisite for statehood, it had long been established that the only necessary precondition was a degree of governmental authority sufficient for the general maintenance of order, and subsequent practice was not sufficiently consistent or coherent to change that position. … This did not necessarily mean that same rules were applied to or by such States as were by European States between themselves. But that is to be explained not by any distinction between “civilized” and “barbarous” States but because many of those rules were what would now be called regional customs rather than general international law’:
> 
> *nationality principle (of jurisdiction)* According to the Harvard Research Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime ( 1935 ), ‘A State has jurisdiction with respect to an crime committed outside its territory (a) by a natural person who was a national of that State when the crime was committed or who is a national of that State when prosecuted or punished; or (b) by a corporation or other juristic person which had the national character of that State when the crime was committed.
> 
> *indigenous peoples, right of* After a protracted period of negotiation, on 7 September 2007 , the General Assembly adopted (as Res. 61/295) the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which accords rights to indigenous peoples, without defining the term. These rights include self-determination (art. 3; see also arts. 26 and 27), though this might amount to no more than autonomy (art. 4); the maintenance and strengthening of their distinct political, economic, social, and cultural characteristics, as well as their legal systems, while retaining their right to full participation in the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the State (art. 5); freedom from discrimination (arts. 2 and 9);
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bite me. Anyone born in Canada is a native Canadian.
> 
> Indians aren’t even native to the Americas, they came over from Europe during the last ice age.
Click to expand...


Since palestine was originally named for Philistine pirates from the Greek world, does that mean palestinians are descended from Greek pirates?


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> rather that G-d has His plans,
> and because G-d chose to carry His Name in Israel.



God is all powerful and if He wanted to He could snap his fingers together and all would be as He wishes it to be, but He didn't and won't because He left it up to the Israelite's to choose what to do instead. God doesn't want puppets on a string He wants followers who obey His commandments, follow His instructions and if they comply they will multiply and prosper; if not they will not.
They are not------
*..According to a 2002 study by the **Jewish Agency**, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
Jewish population by country - Wikipedia

bye.,.,.bye..,.bye.,.,.,gone.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,., to never be seen again
-


----------



## MartyNYC

Palestine never existed.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Taz said:


> Bite me. Anyone born in Canada is a native Canadian.



The Jews lived in Egypt longer than any other place. In the beginning they had no homeland and were shepherds on the open plain.


----------



## watchingfromafar

(Gen 41:39 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:_

(Gen 41:40 KJV) _Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou._

(Gen 41:42 KJV) _And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;_

(Gen 41:44 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt._

Gen 41:46 KJV) _And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh King of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt._


----------



## watchingfromafar

(Gen 42:5 KJV) _And the sons of *Israel *came to buy corn among those that came: for the famine was in the land of Canaan._

(Gen 42:25 KJV) _Then Joseph commanded to fill their sacks with corn, and to restore every man's money into his sack, and to give them provision for the way:_

(Gen 45:20 KJV) _*Also regard not your stuff; for the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.*_

See above, they abandon the land of Canaan and move to Egypt

(Gen 45:21 KJV) _*And the children of Israel did so:* and Joseph gave them wagons, according to the commandment of Pharaoh, and gave them provision for the way._

(Gen 47:1 KJV) _Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, *My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen.*_

(Gen 47:3 KJV) _And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation? *And they said unto Pharaoh, *Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers.
-*_


----------



## watchingfromafar

I can settle this once and for all. There is a grave yard where all the great Jewish leaders were buried, and that burial place is NOT in the land they falsely call “Israel”.

Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,

Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and *bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried*." "I will do as you say," he said. ;

Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*

Genesis 50:10 And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:

Genesis 50:13 For his sons *carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan*, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.

Genesis 50:14 *After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father. *
the truth will set you free
-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> I can settle this once and for all. There is a grave yard where all the great Jewish leaders were buried, and that burial place is NOT in the land they falsely call “Israel”.
> 
> Genesis 25:9 His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,
> 
> Genesis 47:30 but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and *bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried*." "I will do as you say," he said. ;
> 
> Genesis 49:31 *There Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried, there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried, and there I buried Leah.*
> 
> Genesis 50:10 And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:
> 
> Genesis 50:13 For his sons *carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan*, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a burying place of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre.
> 
> Genesis 50:14 *After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father. *
> the truth will set you free
> -



 Never been any palestinians.


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> rather that G-d has His plans,
> and because G-d chose to carry His Name in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God is all powerful and if He wanted to He could snap his fingers together and all would be as He wishes it to be, but He didn't and won't because He left it up to the Israelite's to choose what to do instead. God doesn't want puppets on a string He wants followers who obey His commandments, follow His instructions and if they comply they will multiply and prosper; if not they will not.
> They are not------
> *..According to a 2002 study by the **Jewish Agency**, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."*
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> bye.,.,.bye..,.bye.,.,.,gone.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,., to never be seen again
> -
Click to expand...


How did you say _"multiply and prosper"_?









						Israeli fertility rate highest in OECD
					






					en.globes.co.il
				




Exactly, the land knows her true children.


----------



## Sixties Fan

*In conclusion*

Prof. Efraim Karsh features a report by the British Peel Commission (Palestine Betrayed, 2010): “during 1922-1931, the increase of Arab population in Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem was 86%, 62% and 37% respectively.”

As a result of the 1880-1947 waves of Arab immigration, the Arab population of Jaffa, Haifa and Ramla grew 17, 12 and 5 times respectively.

Thus, contrary to Palestinian claims, Arab residents west of the Jordan River (Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel) are not descendants of the Canaanites, but of Arab migrants.

Moreover, in defiance of a myth advanced by the Palestinian Authority, Palestine has not been Arab/Moslem from time immemorial.

In fact, since the Greek Empire era (5th century BCE), the term Palestine (Palaistine) referred to the Land of Israel, directly linked to the People of Israel.

(full article online)









						Palestinian false claim of continuity
					

contrary to Palestinian claims and myths, Palestine has not been Arab from time immemorial




					en.mida.org.il


----------



## Mindful

It was Arab/Muslim invaders who came to the Land of Israel as an ascendant imperialist force in the decade after the Prophet Muhammad’s death and laid the groundwork for the colonization of this land by a long string of Muslim empires up to the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI. During this lengthy era, the non-Jewish and non-Christian residents of the land identified themselves as Muslims—not as Arabs, and certainly not as Palestinians—until WWI, when the idea of Arab nationalism gathered steam with the help of British imperialism.

One need only look at common family names among the Palestinians to see their colonialist origins: Hijazi, from the Hijaz in the Arabian Peninsula, from which the original invaders came; Bosniak, from Bosnia; Turk, from Turkey; Halabi, from Syria; Hindi, from India; Yemeni, from Yemen; Masarwa/Masri, from Egypt; Mughrabi, from the Maghreb, and so on.

The northern Samarian mountains are strewn with thousands of relics of winepresses and of terraces that served as vineyards for the Jewish and Samaritan residents of the region. As the Muslim population took over, the wine industry collapsed and was replaced by olive and carob cultivation.

The land speaks Hebrew. The names of the communities have a linguistic meaning in Hebrew: Jaffa = yafeh (beautiful), Haifa = hofa shel ihr (shore of a city), Shikmona = shkamim (sycamores), Nazareth = notzeret/shomeret(guardian), Beit Guvrin = ihr hag’varim/hat’kifim (city of the strong), and so on. When the Arabs conquered these places, they pronounced the names in their own way, distorting them and changing their meaning: thus Shfaram (meaning “a people whose luck has improved”) became Shfa’amr, Ganim became Jenin, Bitra became Barta’a, Ashdod became Isdud, Tur Karem (meaning “mountain of the vineyards”) became Tulkarem, and Jordan became Urdan—names with no linguistic meaning in Arabic.









						The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not Palestinian
					

The claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself)




					besacenter.org


----------



## Mindful

Ancient synagogue in Gamla in the Golan Heights, built during the Second Temple period in the first century CE, (photo via Wikimedia Commons.)


----------



## Lee Edwin

First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached...


----------



## danielpalos

...anyone born in historic Palestine?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?



No such place.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe that?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
Click to expand...


Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
Click to expand...

And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
Click to expand...


There never was a historic entity palestine.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
Click to expand...

Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
Click to expand...


Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
Click to expand...

Historic Palestine is the region in that area.


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
Click to expand...


There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
Click to expand...

A name doesn't mean anything.

Does US history start before 1776 when there was no US?


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
Click to expand...

The Romans administered the region as a public office.


----------



## Sixties Fan

The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.

Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?

Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?

Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?

Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?

Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans administered the region as a public office.
Click to expand...


Last time I checked, Rome was in Europe.


----------



## Lee Edwin

P F Tinmore said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A name doesn't mean anything.
> 
> Does US history start before 1776 when there was no US?
Click to expand...


Only historically legitimate names of the country for the last 3,000 years have been Israel or Judah, both pertaining to Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans administered the region as a public office.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Rome was in Europe.
Click to expand...

This discussion was had with Daniel Papos many ages ago.  It will go nowhere.  Feel free to post to anything more recent. The same goes to Tinmore.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Sixties Fan said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans administered the region as a public office.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Rome was in Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This discussion was had with Daniel Papos many ages ago.  It will go nowhere.  Feel free to post to anything more recent. The same goes to Tinmore.
Click to expand...

intelligent people have a natural curiosity to know whether or not something is true. Daniel and Tinmore do not.

Neither feels the least bit of embarrassment over it, either.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans administered the region as a public office.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Rome was in Europe.
Click to expand...

Reality still exists.  Why do you need, right wing fantasy?  Europeans are in the new world and history has been both erased and created.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A name doesn't mean anything.
> 
> Does US history start before 1776 when there was no US?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only historically legitimate names of the country for the last 3,000 years have been Israel or Judah, both pertaining to Jews.
Click to expand...

Were the Samaritans not in the region of historic Palestine?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.


Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.

Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited. 

Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
Click to expand...

It's comically tragic that you refer to something you call "natives of Palestine" when you earlier identify the area as being "conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history".

As Arabs have been among the conquerors/invaders/occupiers, how, exactly, do they magically become the "natives of Palestine"? Have you forgotten that the land area you serially misidentify as your imagined "country of Pally'land" (_Where Dreams Come True_), was, for more than eight centuries, a Sanjak, (an administrative division of the Ottoman Empire), and never controlled or held as sovereign by any group called “Palestinian Arabs”?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you believe that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine is a generic European name, not Middle Eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And, how is that relevant in modern post Palestinian Mandate times?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never was a historic entity palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe not in right wing fantasy, but the more objective world, there is and was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arabs “historically” viewed the whole country as Syria, Sham in Arabic. For them, there was no such thing as a country palestine. Arabs adopting the name palestine, from the British, is recent, although they mispronounce it as falestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Historic Palestine is the region in that area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There never has been an entity palestine founded by Middle Eastern people, or even named by Middle Eastern people. It’s a fictional European name.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A name doesn't mean anything.
> 
> Does US history start before 1776 when there was no US?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only historically legitimate names of the country for the last 3,000 years have been Israel or Judah, both pertaining to Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Were the Samaritans not in the region of historic Palestine?
Click to expand...


Israel. There wasn’t any place palestine.


----------



## Lee Edwin

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
Click to expand...


Hebrews and Jews are synonymous. Duh!


----------



## Lee Edwin

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
Click to expand...


No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.

First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
Click to expand...

You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.


----------



## Lee Edwin

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's comically tragic that you refer to something you call "natives of Palestine" when you earlier identify the area as being "conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history".
> 
> As Arabs have been among the conquerors/invaders/occupiers, how, exactly, do they magically become the "natives of Palestine"? Have you forgotten that the land area you serially misidentify as your imagined "country of Pally'land" (_Where Dreams Come True_), was, for more than eight centuries, a Sanjak, (an administrative division of the Ottoman Empire), and never controlled or held as sovereign by any group called “Palestinian Arabs”?
Click to expand...


There never was an ancient entity in the Middle East named palestine—It’s an English word of Europeans. The country originally was named Canaan and after destroyed it became Israel...


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
Click to expand...


Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
Click to expand...

The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.

What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
Click to expand...


Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?
Click to expand...

So were the Canaanites, Israelites, and the Philistines.









						History of Palestine - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So were the Canaanites, Israelites, and the Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...


Philistines were European and became extinct. Canaanites became extinct. Israelites/Jews are the only survivors.


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So were the Canaanites, Israelites, and the Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...


Palestine never existed.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So were the Canaanites, Israelites, and the Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
Click to expand...

Where did the Philistines come from?


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The discussion is as to WHO is Indigenous to the area of Ancient Canaan/Israel/Judea/Palestine.  Which people, culture have had a defined history shared with any and all who passed by that area.
> 
> Do Arabs have a history shared by all who passed by that area going back 2 to 3,000 years or more in that area?  Or does the Arab, and then Palestinian history begin in the 7th century AC?
> 
> Or do Jews have their history shared with other peoples who passed the area for at least 3000 years or more?
> 
> Was the area known as Historical Israel, Judea, before it the area was changed by the Romans to Syria Palestine in the 1st Century or not?
> 
> Were both people, Jewish and Arab, cultures dealing with each other 2000 to 3000 years ago? Or when did their involvement with each other start, and after which century?
> 
> Please, do not confuse Indigenous with being born at a certain place AFTER one had moved there.  Only the First Nations of the Americas are the Indigenous people of the places where they settled and stayed and were found by the Europeans who only came after 1492.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting thoughts. However, I think it is a mistake to think that there are only Arabs and Jews. The territory was already populated when the Hebrews came up from Egypt and was still populated after (most of) the Jews left.
> 
> Palestine has been conquered/invaded/occupied many times over its history. Normally the leaders are removed and everyone else stays to be exploited.
> 
> Many people have come and gone. However, there is a core group of people who stayed and put down roots. They are the ones who built the cities and a functioning society. They are the natives of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No place palestine ever existed. It’s an English word coined by Europeans.
> 
> First century Jewish city in Israel and synagogue, including menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, believed to be where Jesus preached
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You make it seem like the Europeans had no influence in the area.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, Europe was on another continent than the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Romans were still there for hundreds of years and reorganized the area.
> 
> What is your opinion of city-States in the region of historic Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews were there long before Romans who were military invaders and occupiers. This is news to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So were the Canaanites, Israelites, and the Philistines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where did the Philistines come from?
Click to expand...


Southern Europe/Aegean region.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> No such place.


*Lee Edwin*, you must have missed your geography class or at least you got an *"F"

Palestine, recognized officially as the State of Palestine by the United Nations*_ and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah. Wikipedia
Population: 4.569 million_
State of Palestine - Wikipedia

_Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين‎ Filasṭīn), recognized officially as the State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank .,., and Gaza Strip .,.,.,.with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah.* The entirety of territory claimed by the State of Palestine has been occupied since 1948*_
*The State of Palestine is recognized by 138 UN members and since 2012 *
State of Palestine - Wikipedia
*Mandatory Palestine established 1920 *in the region of Palestine under the terms of the League of Nations *Mandate for Palestine.*
Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
_This article presents a list of notable historical references to the name *Palestine *as a place name in the Middle East throughout the history of the region, including its cognates such as *"Filastin"* and *"Palaestina."*
The term "Peleset" (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in five inscriptions referring to a neighboring people or land starting from *circa 1150 BC* during the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt. The first known mention is at the Medinet Habu temple which refers to the Peleset among those who fought against Egypt during Ramesses III's reign, and the *last known is 300 years later on Padiiset's Statue*. The Assyrians called the same region "Palashtu/Palastu" or "Pilistu," beginning with Adad-nirari III in the_ _Nimrud Slab in c*. 800 BC* through to an Esarhaddon treaty more than a century later. Neither the Egyptian nor the Assyrian sources provided clear regional boundaries for the term._
Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia

*Lee Edwin, *I tried to find an historical reference to *"Israel"* and found nothing, nada, zip.

But I did find references to a man named *"Israel"* who turns out to *a real looserrrrr, a lying retard with warts.*





The maps above shows the brutal conquest of Palestine by the child murdering Isratlitiees
-


----------



## danielpalos

Economic levantar for the Levant!


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> No such place.
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, you must have missed your geography class or at least you got an *"F"
> 
> Palestine, recognized officially as the State of Palestine by the United Nations*_ and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah. Wikipedia
> Population: 4.569 million_
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> _Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين‎ Filasṭīn), recognized officially as the State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank .,., and Gaza Strip .,.,.,.with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah.* The entirety of territory claimed by the State of Palestine has been occupied since 1948*_
> *The State of Palestine is recognized by 138 UN members and since 2012 *
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> *Mandatory Palestine established 1920 *in the region of Palestine under the terms of the League of Nations *Mandate for Palestine.*
> Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
> _This article presents a list of notable historical references to the name *Palestine *as a place name in the Middle East throughout the history of the region, including its cognates such as *"Filastin"* and *"Palaestina."*
> The term "Peleset" (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in five inscriptions referring to a neighboring people or land starting from *circa 1150 BC* during the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt. The first known mention is at the Medinet Habu temple which refers to the Peleset among those who fought against Egypt during Ramesses III's reign, and the *last known is 300 years later on Padiiset's Statue*. The Assyrians called the same region "Palashtu/Palastu" or "Pilistu," beginning with Adad-nirari III in the_ _Nimrud Slab in c*. 800 BC* through to an Esarhaddon treaty more than a century later. Neither the Egyptian nor the Assyrian sources provided clear regional boundaries for the term._
> Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia
> 
> *Lee Edwin, *I tried to find an historical reference to *"Israel"* and found nothing, nada, zip.
> 
> Boy I did find references to a man named "Israel" who turns out to a real looserrrrr, a lying retard with warts.
> View attachment 430779
> 
> The maps above shows the brutal conquest of Palestine by the child murdering Isratlitiees
> -
Click to expand...


Hey, “genius”: Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of Palestine, an English word originating as a Roman Latin word Palaestina. You couldn‘t figure this out?


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> No such place.
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, you must have missed your geography class or at least you got an *"F"
> 
> Palestine, recognized officially as the State of Palestine by the United Nations*_ and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah. Wikipedia
> Population: 4.569 million_
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> _Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين‎ Filasṭīn), recognized officially as the State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank .,., and Gaza Strip .,.,.,.with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah.* The entirety of territory claimed by the State of Palestine has been occupied since 1948*_
> *The State of Palestine is recognized by 138 UN members and since 2012 *
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> *Mandatory Palestine established 1920 *in the region of Palestine under the terms of the League of Nations *Mandate for Palestine.*
> Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
> _This article presents a list of notable historical references to the name *Palestine *as a place name in the Middle East throughout the history of the region, including its cognates such as *"Filastin"* and *"Palaestina."*
> The term "Peleset" (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in five inscriptions referring to a neighboring people or land starting from *circa 1150 BC* during the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt. The first known mention is at the Medinet Habu temple which refers to the Peleset among those who fought against Egypt during Ramesses III's reign, and the *last known is 300 years later on Padiiset's Statue*. The Assyrians called the same region "Palashtu/Palastu" or "Pilistu," beginning with Adad-nirari III in the_ _Nimrud Slab in c*. 800 BC* through to an Esarhaddon treaty more than a century later. Neither the Egyptian nor the Assyrian sources provided clear regional boundaries for the term._
> Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia
> 
> *Lee Edwin, *I tried to find an historical reference to *"Israel"* and found nothing, nada, zip.
> 
> But I did find references to a man named *"Israel"* who turns out to *a real looserrrrr, a lying retard with warts.*
> View attachment 430779
> 
> The maps above shows the brutal conquest of Palestine by the child murdering Isratlitiees
> -
Click to expand...


Hey, “genius”: Do you see any place named palestine on this administrative map of the Ottoman Empire? Maybe, if you move your lips it will increase your reading comprehension...

p


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Hey, “genius”: Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*, an English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*. You couldn‘t figure this out?



*Lee Edwin,* in your own words above you stated---------

_Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*
English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*_

Thank you for finally recognizing that “Palestine” does exist.

That’s a good start to a long-lasting friendship

I wish you and yours a great day and beyond

-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, “genius”: Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*, an English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*. You couldn‘t figure this out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin,* in your own words above you stated---------
> 
> _Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*
> English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*_
> 
> Thank you for finally recognizing that “Palestine” does exist.
> 
> That’s a good start to a long-lasting friendship
> 
> I wish you and yours a great day and beyond
> 
> -
Click to expand...


Palestine exists—It’s east of Neverland.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Hey, “genius”: Do you see any place named palestine on this administrative map of the Ottoman Empire?


Not on that map but I do see references to—

“Independent Sanjaq of Jerusalem”
“Sanjaq of Nablus”
“Sanjaq of Beirut”
“Province of Lebanon”
“Sanjaq of Tripoli”
With all the above encompassed by “Wilayet of Berirut”

BUT NO “ISRAEL” OR EVEN “Juda”

Go figure

-


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, “genius”: Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*, an English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*. You couldn‘t figure this out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin,* in your own words above you stated---------
> 
> _Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of *Palestine*
> English word originating as a Roman Latin word *Palaestina*_
> 
> Thank you for finally recognizing that “Palestine” does exist.
> 
> That’s a good start to a long-lasting friendship
> 
> I wish you and yours a great day and beyond
> 
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine exists—It’s east of Neverland.
Click to expand...

Nothing but economic levantas for the Levant!


----------



## watchingfromafar

danielpalos said:


> Nothing but economic levantas for the Levant!



While roaming the web I found this and I thought you might find it interesting too




__





						Page 8
					





					www.universalknowledge.net
				



-
*Repent
Ask for foregiveness
Honor Thy Father & Thy Mother
Love the stranger as you would love Thyself
And the Lord will forgive you
-*​


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing but economic levantas for the Levant!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While roaming the web I found this and I thought you might find it interesting too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Page 8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.universalknowledge.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> *Repent
> Ask for foregiveness
> Honor Thy Father & Thy Mother
> Love the stranger as you would love Thyself
> And the Lord will forgive you
> -*​
Click to expand...


Bogus. Don’t you look stupid.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Lee Edwin said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...anyone born in historic Palestine?
> No such place.
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, you must have missed your geography class or at least you got an *"F"
> 
> Palestine, recognized officially as the State of Palestine by the United Nations*_ and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah. Wikipedia
> Population: 4.569 million_
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> _Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين‎ Filasṭīn), recognized officially as the State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank .,., and Gaza Strip .,.,.,.with Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah.* The entirety of territory claimed by the State of Palestine has been occupied since 1948*_
> *The State of Palestine is recognized by 138 UN members and since 2012 *
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> *Mandatory Palestine established 1920 *in the region of Palestine under the terms of the League of Nations *Mandate for Palestine.*
> Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
> _This article presents a list of notable historical references to the name *Palestine *as a place name in the Middle East throughout the history of the region, including its cognates such as *"Filastin"* and *"Palaestina."*
> The term "Peleset" (transliterated from hieroglyphs as P-r-s-t) is found in five inscriptions referring to a neighboring people or land starting from *circa 1150 BC* during the Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt. The first known mention is at the Medinet Habu temple which refers to the Peleset among those who fought against Egypt during Ramesses III's reign, and the *last known is 300 years later on Padiiset's Statue*. The Assyrians called the same region "Palashtu/Palastu" or "Pilistu," beginning with Adad-nirari III in the_ _Nimrud Slab in c*. 800 BC* through to an Esarhaddon treaty more than a century later. Neither the Egyptian nor the Assyrian sources provided clear regional boundaries for the term._
> Timeline of the name "Palestine" - Wikipedia
> 
> *Lee Edwin, *I tried to find an historical reference to *"Israel"* and found nothing, nada, zip.
> 
> Boy I did find references to a man named "Israel" who turns out to a real looserrrrr, a lying retard with warts.
> View attachment 430779
> 
> The maps above shows the brutal conquest of Palestine by the child murdering Isratlitiees
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey, “genius”: Filastin is merely an Arab mispronunciation of Palestine, an English word originating as a Roman Latin word Palaestina. You couldn‘t figure this out?
Click to expand...

It is a terrorist supporter that hates Jews, hates America and just hates period. That is the only reason it infests this forum.


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, “genius”: Do you see any place named palestine on this administrative map of the Ottoman Empire?
> 
> 
> 
> Not on that map but I do see references to—
> 
> “Independent Sanjaq of Jerusalem”
> “Sanjaq of Nablus”
> “Sanjaq of Beirut”
> “Province of Lebanon”
> “Sanjaq of Tripoli”
> With all the above encompassed by “Wilayet of Berirut”
> 
> BUT NO “ISRAEL” OR EVEN “Juda”
> 
> Go figure
> 
> -
Click to expand...


No palestine.


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, “genius”: Do you see any place named palestine on this administrative map of the Ottoman Empire?
> 
> 
> 
> Not on that map but I do see references to—
> 
> “Independent Sanjaq of Jerusalem”
> “Sanjaq of Nablus”
> “Sanjaq of Beirut”
> “Province of Lebanon”
> “Sanjaq of Tripoli”
> With all the above encompassed by “Wilayet of Berirut”
> 
> BUT NO “ISRAEL” OR EVEN “Juda”
> 
> Go figure
> 
> -
Click to expand...


No state of Israel in the Ottoman Empire because the state of Israel was reestablished AFTER the Ottoman Empire. Maybe, try reading a book?


----------



## watchingfromafar

I got this link from this page and I thank who ever whatever posted it here




__





						Israeli ministers approve new restrictions on dovish groups
					

The Israeli so-called Zionist Democracy is now attacking its own citizens for daring to promote peace...Israel is beginning to implode from within.  Israeli ministers approve new restrictions on dovish groups  JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Cabinet ministers on Sunday gave a preliminary approval for a...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> _No state of Israel in the Ottoman Empire because the state of Israel was reestablished AFTER the Ottoman Empire. Maybe, try reading a book?_



Israel was not "reestablished" , it did not exist, "Israel" was a person not a place.
But if you need to believe your fairy tail I am not here to disturb you sleep.
*sleeeeep.,.,.,.,.,.,.,baby.,.,.,,.,.,steeeeep
-*​


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> I got this link from this page and I thank who ever whatever posted it here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli ministers approve new restrictions on dovish groups
> 
> 
> The Israeli so-called Zionist Democracy is now attacking its own citizens for daring to promote peace...Israel is beginning to implode from within.  Israeli ministers approve new restrictions on dovish groups  JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Cabinet ministers on Sunday gave a preliminary approval for a...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com





watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> _No state of Israel in the Ottoman Empire because the state of Israel was reestablished AFTER the Ottoman Empire. Maybe, try reading a book?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was not "reestablished" , it did not exist, "Israel" was a person not a place.
> But if you need to believe your fairy tail I am not here to disturb you sleep.
> *sleeeeep.,.,.,.,.,.,.,baby.,.,.,,.,.,steeeeep
> -*​
Click to expand...


You’re not intelligent—I get it.

Louvre Museum: “The Mesha Stele features the earliest written occurence of the world of Israel & the Kingdom of Israel...”  

The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------

*Genesis 32:28*
_And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._

(Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
(Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._

(Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._

*Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._

*“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html








						Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
					

Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...




					parstoday.com
				




From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed

-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> *Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------
> 
> *Genesis 32:28*
> _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._
> 
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
> http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> 
> Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed
> 
> -



Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> *Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------
> 
> *Genesis 32:28*
> _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._
> 
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
> http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> 
> Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed
> 
> -



Palestine never existed.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Bogus. Don’t you look stupid.



You are wearing me out.

Please Israeli’s,

*Do not Repent
Do not ask for forgiveness
Do not honor thy father & thy mother
Do not love the stranger as you love thyself*​
No wait, they are not doing it now
my bad -


----------



## watchingfromafar

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is a terrorist supporter that hates Jews, hates America and just hates period. That is the only reason it infests this forum.



If you are speaking about Lee Edwin you should lighten up. Hate is not a word in the Lord's vocabulary. Just don't use this term vocally or in righting and it will just fade away and be no more.
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...


My eyes might be bright, but I do not have binocular vision
-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bogus. Don’t you look stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are wearing me out.
> 
> Please Israeli’s,
> 
> *Do not Repent
> Do not ask for forgiveness
> Do not honor thy father & thy mother
> Do not love the stranger as you love thyself*​
> No wait, they are not doing it now
> my bad -
Click to expand...


Take your anti-psychotic medication.


----------



## danielpalos

Can we try to goad the Austrian Economists to try Ancap Free-Cities in the Levant?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...



I converted your one sided mythical doc and found no reference to
"Ancient Kingdom of Israel"
But there was a lot of folklore and mythology that I am sure you read to your children.
*garbage in garbage out*​
And then I found this---
*Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues*

_*On July 12, 2019, a nine-year-old Palestinian boy,* ‘Abd al-Rahman Shtaiwi, was *sitting in front of a West Bank home* in the village of Kafr Qaddum. Suddenly a *Zionist-Israeli bullet ripped through his head*, exploding into more than 70 fragments leaving him in a long-term coma.

A Palestinian demonstration was ongoing more than 200 meters away. *Israeli soldiers in body armor and helmets responded to the “threat” of a handful of children harmlessly throwing stones* from a distance of dozens of meters with a mixture of rubber bullets and live fire. Did they fire live rounds into the air, one of which, through bad luck, accidentally killed ‘Abd al-Rahman, *who was not even participating in the demonstration? Or did an Israeli sniper murder the boy as a sick attempt to terrorize Palestinians in hopes of quelling the demonstrations?*_
Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues

The above makes me utterly SICK. I loath, detests, find repugnant the murder of that child while I visualize myself spitting in da Zionist FACE with glee on my face

Knowing you, my bet is Killing that child must make you, *Lee Edwin* proud to be a Jew.

-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I converted your one sided mythical doc and found no reference to
> "Ancient Kingdom of Israel"
> But there was a lot of folklore and mythology that I am sure you read to your children.
> *garbage in garbage out*​
> And then I found this---
> *Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues*
> 
> _*On July 12, 2019, a nine-year-old Palestinian boy,* ‘Abd al-Rahman Shtaiwi, was *sitting in front of a West Bank home* in the village of Kafr Qaddum. Suddenly a *Zionist-Israeli bullet ripped through his head*, exploding into more than 70 fragments leaving him in a long-term coma.
> 
> A Palestinian demonstration was ongoing more than 200 meters away. *Israeli soldiers in body armor and helmets responded to the “threat” of a handful of children harmlessly throwing stones* from a distance of dozens of meters with a mixture of rubber bullets and live fire. Did they fire live rounds into the air, one of which, through bad luck, accidentally killed ‘Abd al-Rahman, *who was not even participating in the demonstration? Or did an Israeli sniper murder the boy as a sick attempt to terrorize Palestinians in hopes of quelling the demonstrations?*_
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> The above makes me utterly SICK. I loath, detests, find repugnant the murder of that child while I visualize myself spitting in da Zionist FACE with glee on my face
> 
> Knowing you, my bet is Killing that child must make you, *Lee Edwin* proud to be a Jew.
> 
> -
Click to expand...



Palestinian Doctor Praises Israel For Saving Childrens’ Lives

Palestinian MD lauds Israel for saving children


----------



## P F Tinmore

Lee Edwin said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------
> 
> *Genesis 32:28*
> _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._
> 
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
> http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> 
> Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed
> 
> -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
Click to expand...


----------



## Lee Edwin

P F Tinmore said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------
> 
> *Genesis 32:28*
> _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._
> 
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
> http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> 
> Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed
> 
> -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Israel, Judea: never palestine...


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, I rechecked the Bible to see if I just missed a reference to the “nation of Israel” & again I came up empty handed. But I did find this--------
> 
> *Genesis 32:28*
> _And he said, *Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel:* for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed._
> 
> (Ezek 36:17 KJV) _Son of man, when the _*house of Israel*_ dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman._
> (Ezek 36:18 KJV) _Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it._
> 
> (Ezek 36:22 KJV) _Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, _*O house of Israel*_, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went._
> 
> (Ezek 36:24 KJV) _For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land._
> 
> (Ezek 36:31 KJV) _Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations._
> 
> (Ezek 36:32 KJV) _Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel._
> 
> *Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV)* _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it._
> 
> *“I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."*
> http://www.israel-state-terrorism.org/children.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist genocide of Palestinians continues
> 
> 
> Famous analyst and Islamologist, Kevin Barrett, has authored a piece on the Zionist regime's bestial nature to genocide Palestinians. His article is titled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From biblical times to the present, the evil mindset of the Israelites has not changed
> 
> -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine never existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel, Judea: never palestine...
Click to expand...

The Levant was before Palestine.


----------



## watchingfromafar

danielpalos said:


> The Levant was before Palestine.



Wrong--
*Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
-


----------



## danielpalos

watchingfromafar said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
Click to expand...

You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.

Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...


There is nothing here but war and murder and more killing, nothing i would want to tell my children about.
*The Moabite Stone*
The Text of the Moabite Stone
[1] _I am Mesha, the son of Kemoš-yatti, the king of Moab, from Dibon. My father was king over Moab for thirty years, and I was king after my father._
[2] _And in Karchoh I made this high place for Kemoš [...] because he has delivered me from all kings, and because he has made me look down on all my enemies._
[3] _Omri was the king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab for many days, for Kemoš was angry with his land. And his son succeeded him, and he said - he too - "I will oppress Moab!" In my days he did so, but I looked down on him and on his house, and _*Israel has gone to ruin, yes, it has gone to ruin for ever!*
[4] _Omri had taken possession of the whole land of Medeba and he lived there in his days and half the days of his son, forty years, but Kemoš restored it in my days. And I built Ba'al Meon, and I made in it a water reservoir, and I built Kiriathaim._
[6] _And the men of Gad lived in the land of Ataroth from ancient times, and the king of Israel built Ataroth for himself, and I fought against the *city*, and I captured, and *I killed all the people from the city *as a sacrifice for Kemoš and for Moab, and I brought back the fire-hearth of [Daudoh] from there, and I hauled it before the face of Kemoš in Kerioth, and I made the men of Sharon live there, as well as the men of Maharith._
[7]_ And Kemoš said to me: "Go, take Nebo from Israel!" And I went in the night, and I fought against it from the break of dawn until noon, and I took it, and *I killed its whole population, seven thousand male citizens and aliens, female citizens and aliens, and servant girls;* for I had put it to the ban of Aštar Kemoš. And from there, I took the vessels of YHWH, and I hauled them before the face of Kemoš._
[8] _And the king of Israel had built Jahaz, and he stayed there during his campaigns against me, and Kemoš drove him away before my face, and I took two hundred men from Moab, all its division, and I led it up to Jahaz. And I have taken it in order to add it to Dibon._
[9] _I have built Karchoh, the *wall* of the woods and the wall of the citadel, and I have built its gates, and I have built its towers, and I have built the house of the king, and I have made the double reservoir for the spring, in the innermost of the city. Now, there was no cistern in the innermost of the city, in Karchoh, and I said to all the people: "Make, each one of you, a cistern in his house." And I cut out the moat for Karchoh by means of prisoners from Israel._
[10] _I have built Aroer, and I made the military road in the Arnon. I have built Beth Bamoth, for it had been destroyed. I have built Bezer, for it lay in ruins._
[11] _And the men of Dibon stood in *battle*-order, for all Dibon, they were in subjection. And I am the king over hundreds in the towns which I have added to the land._
[12] _And I have built the House of Medeba and the House of Diblathaim, and the House of Ba'al Meon, and I brought there [...] the flocks of the land._
[13] _And Horonaim, there lived [...]. And Kemoš said to me: "Go down, fight against Horonaim!" I went down [...] and Kemoš restored it in my days. And [...] from there [...]_
[14] _And I [...]_
(from “The Stela of Mesha,” at *Livius.org*)
https://www.ancient.eu/Moabite_Stone_[Mesha_Stele]/

Based on the above I concede the existence of a "King of Israel". The ancient references are interesting but *they do not excuse the IDF blatant murder of Palestinian children today*. Israel should be condemned for these acts of murder of children.
-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey bright eyes: Ancient Kingdom of Israel...
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing here but war and murder and more killing, nothing i would want to tell my children about.
> *The Moabite Stone*
> The Text of the Moabite Stone
> [1] _I am Mesha, the son of Kemoš-yatti, the king of Moab, from Dibon. My father was king over Moab for thirty years, and I was king after my father._
> [2] _And in Karchoh I made this high place for Kemoš [...] because he has delivered me from all kings, and because he has made me look down on all my enemies._
> [3] _Omri was the king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab for many days, for Kemoš was angry with his land. And his son succeeded him, and he said - he too - "I will oppress Moab!" In my days he did so, but I looked down on him and on his house, and _*Israel has gone to ruin, yes, it has gone to ruin for ever!*
> [4] _Omri had taken possession of the whole land of Medeba and he lived there in his days and half the days of his son, forty years, but Kemoš restored it in my days. And I built Ba'al Meon, and I made in it a water reservoir, and I built Kiriathaim._
> [6] _And the men of Gad lived in the land of Ataroth from ancient times, and the king of Israel built Ataroth for himself, and I fought against the *city*, and I captured, and *I killed all the people from the city *as a sacrifice for Kemoš and for Moab, and I brought back the fire-hearth of [Daudoh] from there, and I hauled it before the face of Kemoš in Kerioth, and I made the men of Sharon live there, as well as the men of Maharith._
> [7]_ And Kemoš said to me: "Go, take Nebo from Israel!" And I went in the night, and I fought against it from the break of dawn until noon, and I took it, and *I killed its whole population, seven thousand male citizens and aliens, female citizens and aliens, and servant girls;* for I had put it to the ban of Aštar Kemoš. And from there, I took the vessels of YHWH, and I hauled them before the face of Kemoš._
> [8] _And the king of Israel had built Jahaz, and he stayed there during his campaigns against me, and Kemoš drove him away before my face, and I took two hundred men from Moab, all its division, and I led it up to Jahaz. And I have taken it in order to add it to Dibon._
> [9] _I have built Karchoh, the *wall* of the woods and the wall of the citadel, and I have built its gates, and I have built its towers, and I have built the house of the king, and I have made the double reservoir for the spring, in the innermost of the city. Now, there was no cistern in the innermost of the city, in Karchoh, and I said to all the people: "Make, each one of you, a cistern in his house." And I cut out the moat for Karchoh by means of prisoners from Israel._
> [10] _I have built Aroer, and I made the military road in the Arnon. I have built Beth Bamoth, for it had been destroyed. I have built Bezer, for it lay in ruins._
> [11] _And the men of Dibon stood in *battle*-order, for all Dibon, they were in subjection. And I am the king over hundreds in the towns which I have added to the land._
> [12] _And I have built the House of Medeba and the House of Diblathaim, and the House of Ba'al Meon, and I brought there [...] the flocks of the land._
> [13] _And Horonaim, there lived [...]. And Kemoš said to me: "Go down, fight against Horonaim!" I went down [...] and Kemoš restored it in my days. And [...] from there [...]_
> [14] _And I [...]_
> (from “The Stela of Mesha,” at *Livius.org*)
> https://www.ancient.eu/Moabite_Stone_[Mesha_Stele]/
> 
> Based on the above I concede the existence of a "King of Israel". The ancient references are interesting but *they do not excuse the IDF blatant murder of Palestinian children today*. Israel should be condemned for these acts of murder of children.
> -
Click to expand...


Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser: King Jehu of Israel who appears in the Bible (2 Kings 9-10); House of King Omri who appears in the Bible (1 Kings 16)

Nimrud: Materialities of Assyrian Knowledge Production 	- The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
Click to expand...


Roman Empire officially called the country Judea, land of the Jews. With Jerusalem its Capital...


danielpalos said:


> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
Click to expand...


Romans called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Greeks did, as well. Persians called the country Yehud.


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Roman Empire officially called the country Judea, land of the Jews. With Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Romans called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Greeks did, as well. Persians called the country Yehud.
Click to expand...

Link?  Where is Judea now?  Only Israel exists there now.


----------



## watchingfromafar

danielpalos said:


> Link? Where is Judea now? Only Israel exists there now.


Debating the origin of the land now call “Israel” may be interesting to some but it is the here and now that matters. The Israel Defense Force (IDF) routinely singles out and murders Palestinian children. The world community should condemn this wanton killing of children.

The US should stop providing military aid and cash$ to keep Israel going until they acknowledge their past atrocities and welcome the Palestinians as one of their own.
-


----------



## danielpalos

Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!


----------



## Lee Edwin

danielpalos said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Roman Empire officially called the country Judea, land of the Jews. With Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Romans called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Greeks did, as well. Persians called the country Yehud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?  Where is Judea now?  Only Israel exists there now.
Click to expand...


Judea was/is the Latinized form of Judah. In the NT, Jesus was born in Judea and is also called King Of Israel.


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link? Where is Judea now? Only Israel exists there now.
> 
> 
> 
> Debating the origin of the land now call “Israel” may be interesting to some but it is the here and now that matters. The Israel Defense Force (IDF) routinely singles out and murders Palestinian children. The world community should condemn this wanton killing of children.
> 
> The US should stop providing military aid and cash$ to keep Israel going until they acknowledge their past atrocities and welcome the Palestinians as one of their own.
> -
Click to expand...



Palestinian Doctor Praises Israel For Saving Childrens’ Lives

Palestinian MD lauds Israel for saving children


----------



## danielpalos

Lee Edwin said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Roman Empire officially called the country Judea, land of the Jews. With Jerusalem its Capital...
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> watchingfromafar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Levant was before Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong--
> *Levant, (from the French lever, “to rise,” as in sunrise, meaning the east), historically, the countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores.* Common use of the term is associated with Venetian and other trading ventures and the establishment of commerce with cities such as Tyre and Sidon as a result of the Crusades. It was applied to the coastlands of Asia Minor and Syria, sometimes extending from Greece to Egypt. It was also used for Anatolia and as a synonym for the Middle or Near East. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the term High Levant referred to the Far East. The name *Levant States was given to the French mandate of Syria and Lebanon after World War I,* and the term is sometimes still used for those two countries, which became independent in 1946. An equivalent term, Al- Mashriq (“where the sun rises”) exists in Arabic.
> -
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are right.  I took it out of context.  The Romans were calling it Palestine before the Europeans started calling it the Levant.  Both names are for the Region not a State.
> 
> Economic _levantas_ for the Levant!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Romans called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Greeks did, as well. Persians called the country Yehud.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link?  Where is Judea now?  Only Israel exists there now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judea was/is the Latinized form of Judah. In the NT, Jesus was born in Judea and is also called King Of Israel.
Click to expand...

Why would Jews ask for a State of Israel instead of a State of Judea?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Judea was/is the Latinized form of Judah. In the NT, Jesus was born in Judea and is also called King Of Israel.



Yes I know. Keep in mind--There was no "New Testament" at the time. The Old Testament was "the" Bible.
I also know that in Jerusalem, Jesus taught the Old Testament to anyone who would listen. The Old Testament did not shine a good light on the Jewish people with numerous verses attesting to their ungodlily butyral  of God's instructions to His chosen..
Because Jesus was exposing the Jewish peoples bad behavior as attested to in the Old Testament the local Rabi's convinced the Romans, that if they got rid of Jesus the Rabi's would speak favorably about the Roman occupation.
We all know what happened next---




-


----------



## watchingfromafar

danielpalos said:


> Why would Jews ask for a State of Israel instead of a State of Judea?


Israel was a person that everybody could identify with. At least that is how see it.


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judea was/is the Latinized form of Judah. In the NT, Jesus was born in Judea and is also called King Of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I know. Keep in mind--There was no "New Testament" at the time. The Old Testament was "the" Bible.
> I also know that in Jerusalem, Jesus taught the Old Testament to anyone who would listen. The Old Testament did not shine a good light on the Jewish people with numerous verses attesting to their ungodlily butyral  of God's instructions to His chosen..
> Because Jesus was exposing the Jewish peoples bad behavior as attested to in the Old Testament the local Rabi's convinced the Romans, that if they got rid of Jesus the Rabi's would speak favorably about the Roman occupation.
> We all know what happened next---
> View attachment 431583
> -
Click to expand...


You‘re a moron, clueless that the Hebrew Bible, written by Jews for Jews, reflects that humans are flawed.


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Jews ask for a State of Israel instead of a State of Judea?
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was a person that everybody could identify with. At least that is how see it.
Click to expand...


Israel was the name of an ancient country. Now, even you know.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Israel was the name of an ancient country. Now, even you know.


*Lee Edwin*, either you are deliberately lying or just poorly informed; which is it--?
*28*_Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, *e* because you have truggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”_




__





						Genesis 32:28 Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men, and you have prevailed."
					





					biblehub.com
				



-


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Jacob*_ (*Yaakov* in Hebrew) was the third and final of the *Jewish Patriarchs*. Jacob lived in the *Land of Canaan, Haran, *and* Egypt*. Unlike Abraham and Isaac, Jacob’s entire family remained righteous—his 12 sons became the 12 tribes of Israel, the Shevatim.

The Jewish Sages call Jacob the "favorite" of the Patriarchs.1 After *Jacob successfully fought off an angel*, G‑d named him Israel (Yisrael in Hebrew)—the name that the entire Jewish people became known by as “Bnei Yisrael,” the Nation of Israel.
-_


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was the name of an ancient country. Now, even you know.
> 
> 
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, either you are deliberately lying or just poorly informed; which is it--?
> *28*_Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, *e* because you have truggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Genesis 32:28 Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men, and you have prevailed."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biblehub.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
Click to expand...


You’re not good at this. Ancient Kingdom Of Israel...


----------



## danielpalos

watchingfromafar said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Jews ask for a State of Israel instead of a State of Judea?
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was a person that everybody could identify with. At least that is how see it.
Click to expand...

Why do they claim to be Judeans instead of Israelites?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> You’re not good at this. Ancient Kingdom Of Israel...


It is irrelevant whether Israel is ancient or not. “Israel” is the name of a person referenced in the Bible. The Jewish people chose that name for their new country. In so doing they are bound by the biblical verses bound within.

God singled out the Jewish people and gave them instructions on how they should live their lives and thereby setting an example for others to follow.

The Israelis have violated that covenant in the biblical past, and they are still violating God’s instructions today.

The Israeli’s continues to steal land and murder Palestinians including the IDF singling out and murdering Palestinian children.

I googled “idf killing children” and got this—
Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Children_in_the_Israeli–Pales...
*Children* in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict refers to the impact of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict ... Though Israeli *children* were *killed* in the conflict during the decades prior, the first acts of Palestinian violence ... Eran Efrati, a former *IDF* commander on the West Bank has said that ill-treatment of arrested *children* is routine.
‎History · ‎Treatment of Palestinian ... · ‎Palestinian militant ... · ‎Effects on children
Everything you need to know about human rights in Israel and
www.amnesty.org › middle-east-and-north-africa › rep...

Israeli forces *killed* 38 Palestinians, including 11 *children*, during ... On 16 May, the *Israeli army* closed the investigation into the *killing* of Ibrahim Abu Thuraya, ...
The IDF spokesman announces: Continue to shoot ... - Haaretz
www.haaretz.com › opinion ›

Feb 8, 2020 — *The IDF Spokesman Announces: Continue to Shoot Palestinian Children · Sometimes the soldiers shoot with the intent to kill*, sometimes to punish ...

Child Fatalities | Defense for Children Palestine
www.dci-palestine.org › child_fatalities_statistics

This table shows the number of *children killed* as a result of *Israeli military* and settler presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since the beginning of the ...

*Lee Edwin*, you probably believe the murder of the children was justified for some un-godly reason
-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re not good at this. Ancient Kingdom Of Israel...
> 
> 
> 
> It is irrelevant whether Israel is ancient or not. “Israel” is the name of a person referenced in the Bible. The Jewish people chose that name for their new country. In so doing they are bound by the biblical verses bound within.
> 
> God singled out the Jewish people and gave them instructions on how they should live their lives and thereby setting an example for others to follow.
> 
> The Israelis have violated that covenant in the biblical past, and they are still violating God’s instructions today.
> 
> The Israeli’s continues to steal land and murder Palestinians including the IDF singling out and murdering Palestinian children.
> 
> I googled “idf killing children” and got this—
> Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia
> en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Children_in_the_Israeli–Pales...
> *Children* in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict refers to the impact of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict ... Though Israeli *children* were *killed* in the conflict during the decades prior, the first acts of Palestinian violence ... Eran Efrati, a former *IDF* commander on the West Bank has said that ill-treatment of arrested *children* is routine.
> ‎History · ‎Treatment of Palestinian ... · ‎Palestinian militant ... · ‎Effects on children
> Everything you need to know about human rights in Israel and
> www.amnesty.org › middle-east-and-north-africa › rep...
> 
> Israeli forces *killed* 38 Palestinians, including 11 *children*, during ... On 16 May, the *Israeli army* closed the investigation into the *killing* of Ibrahim Abu Thuraya, ...
> The IDF spokesman announces: Continue to shoot ... - Haaretz
> www.haaretz.com › opinion ›
> 
> Feb 8, 2020 — *The IDF Spokesman Announces: Continue to Shoot Palestinian Children · Sometimes the soldiers shoot with the intent to kill*, sometimes to punish ...
> 
> Child Fatalities | Defense for Children Palestine
> www.dci-palestine.org › child_fatalities_statistics
> 
> This table shows the number of *children killed* as a result of *Israeli military* and settler presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since the beginning of the ...
> 
> *Lee Edwin*, you probably believe the murder of the children was justified for some un-godly reason
> -
Click to expand...


You’re stuck on stupid. Israel was the name of a kingdom.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> You’re stuck on stupid. Israel was the name of a kingdom.


I don’t give a damn whether Israel was the name of a kingdom. And having said that, you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip. You can find books and movies about folklore and mythology, but you cannot find one single historical fact to support claims.

Lee, just for you I found a few more “Kingdoms” for you to explore
KingdomTitans
Kingdom Of The Wicked

As usual, you have it backwards & not only that, you have a serious reading comprehension problem as well. Maybe you need glasses and if not, I could care less.

Personally, between you and me, your views as well as mine mean nothing in the broad scope of this topic. The Jews in Israel lie, steal, and murder while having a smile on their faces. I believe you *Lee Edwin* falls into that camp as well.

-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re stuck on stupid. Israel was the name of a kingdom.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t give a damn whether Israel was the name of a kingdom. And having said that, you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip. You can find books and movies about folklore and mythology, but you cannot find one single historical fact to support claims.
> 
> Lee, just for you I found a few more “Kingdoms” for you to explore
> KingdomTitans
> Kingdom Of The Wicked
> 
> As usual, you have it backwards & not only that, you have a serious reading comprehension problem as well. Maybe you need glasses and if not, I could care less.
> 
> Personally, between you and me, your views as well as mine mean nothing in the broad scope of this topic. The Jews in Israel lie, steal, and murder while having a smile on their faces. I believe you *Lee Edwin* falls into that camp as well.
Click to expand...



“Israeli Innovations That Have Changed The World”
11 Israeli Innovations That Changed the World


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Lee*, use the following when asked about da kingdom
The *Kingdom of Israel*, Northern *Kingdom* or Samaria existed as an independent state until 722 BCE, when it was conquered by the Assyrian Empire. The *Kingdom* of Judah, or Southern *Kingdom*, existed as an independent state until 586 BCE, when it was conquered by the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
*Capital: *Gibeah (1030–1010 BCE); Mahanaim ...
Kingdom of Israel (united monarchy) - Wikipedia

The above changes nothing. The Israeli's steal, lie and murder and they will pay the ultimate price for doing so.




bye
-


----------



## Lee Edwin

watchingfromafar said:


> *Lee*, use the following when asked about da kingdom
> The *Kingdom of Israel*, Northern *Kingdom* or Samaria existed as an independent state until 722 BCE, when it was conquered by the Assyrian Empire. The *Kingdom* of Judah, or Southern *Kingdom*, existed as an independent state until 586 BCE, when it was conquered by the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
> *Capital: *Gibeah (1030–1010 BCE); Mahanaim ...
> Kingdom of Israel (united monarchy) - Wikipedia
> 
> The above changes nothing. The Israeli's steal, lie and murder and they will pay the ultimate price for doing so.
> 
> View attachment 431989
> bye



Kingdom of Israel. Stick it on your pointy little head.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Lee Edwin said:


> Kingdom of Israel. Stick it on your pointy little head.










Here's looking at you my sweet plump dumpling
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

watchingfromafar said:


> Feb 8, 2020 — *The IDF Spokesman Announces: Continue to Shoot Palestinian Children · Sometimes the soldiers shoot with the intent to kill*



the link above does not work
*








						The IDF spokesman announces: Continue to shoot Palestinian children | Opinion
					

***




					tinyurl.com
				



*


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?        
⁜→ watchingfromafar, "Lee Edwin, et al,

*BLUF*: I notice that a number of the Discussion Group Participants ask for "proof" of this or that - when, in fact, they actually want a hard exhibit and discount historical records.



watchingfromafar said:


> I don’t give a damn whether Israel was the name of a kingdom. And having said that, you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip. You can find books and movies about folklore and mythology, but you cannot find one single historical fact to support claims.
> 
> Lee, just for you I found a few more “Kingdoms” for you to explore
> KingdomTitans
> Kingdom Of The Wicked
> 
> As usual, you have it backwards & not only that, you have a serious reading comprehension problem as well. Maybe you need glasses and if not, I could care less.
> 
> Personally, between you and me, your views as well as mine mean nothing in the broad scope of this topic. The Jews in Israel lie, steal, and murder while having a smile on their faces. I believe you *Lee Edwin* falls into that camp as well.


*(COMMENT)*

The wild accusations (on this topic) like:  "you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip" are unfounded in many cases.  On display in the Grand Egyptian Museum in Cairo _(_*Exhibit JE 31408 Black Granite 10' Tall*_)_, is an intact, 3000 year old, small victory monument for the Pharaoh Merneptah _[son of Ramesses the Great (Ramesses II)]_, known as the Israel Stele _(because a majority of scholars translate a set of hieroglyphs in line 27 as "Israel")_ → it is a type of Victory Stele. The Stele was discovered in 1896 in the vicinity of Thebes, Egypt. It records, with praise, the destruction of Israel during the reign of Merneptah _("Israel is laid waste; its seed is not")_.

Many people tend to extract the interpretation of political activist and propagandist simply because it conforms to their own agenda _(like that of the Islamic Resistance Movement or the Popular Front Movements)_ without any fact checking.   But in this case, even the pro-Arab constituency _(the Egyptians)_ having the largest know that the claim "you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip" is misinformation.                                          




Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## watchingfromafar

RoccoR said:


> The wild accusations (on this topic) like:.,.,.,..,.,.,


Further down in that same post I said:

_Personally, between you and me, your views as well as mine mean nothing in the broad scope of this topic. The Jews in Israel lie, steal, and murder while having a smile on their faces. I believe you *Lee Edwin* falls into that camp as well. _

The past is for historians to right about. Its the here and now that matters and the Israeli's routinely murder children, in many cases shooting them in the head.

Anyone here who does not condemn such wanton killing are complacent, therefore they are just as guilty as the IDF sniper is.

get my drift?
-


----------



## Hollie

watchingfromafar said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The wild accusations (on this topic) like:.,.,.,..,.,.,
> 
> 
> 
> Further down in that same post I said:
> 
> _Personally, between you and me, your views as well as mine mean nothing in the broad scope of this topic. The Jews in Israel lie, steal, and murder while having a smile on their faces. I believe you *Lee Edwin* falls into that camp as well. _
> 
> The past is for historians to right about. Its the here and now that matters and the Israeli's routinely murder children, in many cases shooting them in the head.
> 
> Anyone here who does not condemn such wanton killing are complacent, therefore they are just as guilty as the IDF sniper is.
> 
> get my drift?
> -
Click to expand...

A lot of conspiracy theory rattling.

Have you paid Juan Cole for what you stole from him?


----------



## surada

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
Click to expand...


Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.

Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

surada said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
Click to expand...


Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.

If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.

Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.


----------



## surada

Ria_Longhorn said:


> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.
> 
> Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.
Click to expand...


Palestinians have always lived there.. and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power. Intermarriage is pretty normal. In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine. I noticed they have uncovered jar burials like the ones at Byblos and Baalbek.. The Canaanites practiced jar burials.

I should always check my memory.

*Biblical Archaeology 16: Sargon II Inscriptions | Theo ...*








						August 15, 2011 – Theo-sophical Ruminations
					

1 post published by Theosophical Ruminator on August 15, 2011




					theosophical.wordpress.com
				



...
Aug 15, 2011 · Archaeologists have discovered annals from the 7th year of Sargon’s reign which describe this very event. The annals read, “I crushed the tribes of Tamud, Ibadid, Marsimanu, and Haiapa, the Arabs who live, far away, in the desert (and) who know neither overseers nor officials and who had not (yet) brought their tribute to any king.


----------



## surada

Shusha said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
Click to expand...


Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.
> 
> Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always lived there.. and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power. Intermarriage is pretty normal. In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine. I noticed they have uncovered jar burials like the ones at Byblos and Baalbek.. The Canaanites practiced jar burials.
> 
> I should always check my memory.
> 
> *Biblical Archaeology 16: Sargon II Inscriptions | Theo ...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> August 15, 2011 – Theo-sophical Ruminations
> 
> 
> 1 post published by Theosophical Ruminator on August 15, 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theosophical.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> Aug 15, 2011 · Archaeologists have discovered annals from the 7th year of Sargon’s reign which describe this very event. The annals read, “I crushed the tribes of Tamud, Ibadid, Marsimanu, and Haiapa, the Arabs who live, far away, in the desert (and) who know neither overseers nor officials and who had not (yet) brought their tribute to any king.
Click to expand...


When two parties to a dispute go to court to settle their difference, the first words the judge utters are, "start from the beginning, and present any evidence you have."

One of the earliest mention of Israel can be found in the 9th Century BCE archaeological find, the Mesha Stele, commissioned by the king of Moab (present-day Jordan), where he mentions Israel and a king of Israel, namely, Omri. The Mesha Stele is currently housed at The Louvre in Paris, France.

If you claim that the land belongs to the "Palestinians" then it should be reflected in the archaeological records.  Cite one archaeological evidence for the "Palestinians."


----------



## surada

Ria_Longhorn said:


> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.
> 
> Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always lived there.. and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power. Intermarriage is pretty normal. In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine. I noticed they have uncovered jar burials like the ones at Byblos and Baalbek.. The Canaanites practiced jar burials.
> 
> I should always check my memory.
> 
> *Biblical Archaeology 16: Sargon II Inscriptions | Theo ...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> August 15, 2011 – Theo-sophical Ruminations
> 
> 
> 1 post published by Theosophical Ruminator on August 15, 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theosophical.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> Aug 15, 2011 · Archaeologists have discovered annals from the 7th year of Sargon’s reign which describe this very event. The annals read, “I crushed the tribes of Tamud, Ibadid, Marsimanu, and Haiapa, the Arabs who live, far away, in the desert (and) who know neither overseers nor officials and who had not (yet) brought their tribute to any king.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When two parties to a dispute go to court to settle their difference, the first words the judge utters are, "start from the beginning, and present any evidence you have."
> 
> One of the earliest mention of Israel can be found in the 9th Century BCE archaeological find, the Mesha Stele, commissioned by the king of Moab (present-day Jordan), where he mentions Israel and a king of Israel, namely, Omri. The Mesha Stele is currently housed at The Louvre in Paris, France.
> 
> If you claim that the land belongs to the "Palestinians" then it should be reflected in the archaeological records.  Cite one archaeological evidence for the "Palestinians."
Click to expand...


Palestine has been recognized as a province of Syria since 500 BC. Most Palestinians are descended from first century Jewish farmers who stayed. The Jews emerged from North Coast Canaanites.

There's plenty of evidence for non Jewish people in Palestine dating back to the Natufian people ..


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

surada wrote:
" Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "

Ria Longhorn:

Where in the Torah can one find this?


----------



## surada

Ria_Longhorn said:


> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?



I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.

Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.
> 
> Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.
Click to expand...


Since you have employed the Jewish bible in your argument , I shall do the same:

"The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac,
 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
 Saying, 'To you I will give the land of Canaan . . .' " -- Psalm 105: 9-11.


----------



## surada

Ria_Longhorn said:


> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.
> 
> Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since you have employed the Jewish bible in your argument , I shall do the same:
> 
> "The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac,
> And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
> Saying, 'To you I will give the land of Canaan . . .' " -- Psalm 105: 9-11.
Click to expand...


Much of Psalms was lifted from Ugarit poetry. If God gave it to Jacob how is it that Palestine was never exclusively Jewish?


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.
> 
> Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since you have employed the Jewish bible in your argument , I shall do the same:
> 
> "The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac,
> And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
> Saying, 'To you I will give the land of Canaan . . .' " -- Psalm 105: 9-11.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Much of Psalms was lifted from Ugarit poetry. If God gave it to Jacob how is it that Palestine was never exclusively Jewish?
Click to expand...

Poster, the argument is over.  G-d has the last word.  Blessed be the G-d of Israel.


----------



## surada

Ria_Longhorn said:


> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.
> 
> Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since you have employed the Jewish bible in your argument , I shall do the same:
> 
> "The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac,
> And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
> Saying, 'To you I will give the land of Canaan . . .' " -- Psalm 105: 9-11.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Much of Psalms was lifted from Ugarit poetry. If God gave it to Jacob how is it that Palestine was never exclusively Jewish?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Poster, the argument is over.  G-d has the last word.  Blessed be the G-d of Israel.
Click to expand...


You take the Bible literally?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
Click to expand...


Not really, for the alleged amalgamation to become indigenous,
had to develop a distinct civilization, for the lack of which you resort to the usual trick of - "everyone noone"...because there's no clear identity or civilization which they've developed post Muslim conquest, not heritage of of older - indigenous local culture , nada, can't even express the name of the place properly.

And no -_ "Indigenous Palestinians"_ is a contradiction of terms,
obvious for anyone with the most basic knowledge of local dialect.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.
> 
> Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always lived there.. and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power. Intermarriage is pretty normal. In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine. I noticed they have uncovered jar burials like the ones at Byblos and Baalbek.. The Canaanites practiced jar burials.
> 
> I should always check my memory.
> 
> *Biblical Archaeology 16: Sargon II Inscriptions | Theo ...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> August 15, 2011 – Theo-sophical Ruminations
> 
> 
> 1 post published by Theosophical Ruminator on August 15, 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theosophical.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> Aug 15, 2011 · Archaeologists have discovered annals from the 7th year of Sargon’s reign which describe this very event. The annals read, “I crushed the tribes of Tamud, Ibadid, Marsimanu, and Haiapa, the Arabs who live, far away, in the desert (and) who know neither overseers nor officials and who had not (yet) brought their tribute to any king.
Click to expand...


Just a post ago you said Sargon deported Arabs in 600BC,
and now you're saying "always lived there"....

that's how I know you're making stuff up as you go.

Learn what 'indigenous' means,
it's not what you think.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> surada wrote:
> " Arabs have lived in Palestine since Abraham and long before Islam. Read your torah.. They were in Jerusalem when the Jews returned from Babylon... and unless you forget Moses and Abraham had Arab wives. "
> 
> Ria Longhorn:
> 
> Where in the Torah can one find this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the Torah since I'm Christian, but you might read Ezra.
> 
> Moses' wife was Zipporah.. Abraham married Keturah.
Click to expand...


And?
Nice that you advise after admitting to not be familiar.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> surada said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.
> 
> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.
> 
> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.
> 
> And,  they were certainly the native inhabitants that the Covenant of the League of Nations referred to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.  The people who became the Jewish people were one of many warring tribes in the region who largely shared the same culture.  The Canaanites became the Jewish people.  All the other warring tribes were absorbed into competing cultures and did not survive.
> 
> 2.  There is absolutely no cultural connection between the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" and the Canaanites or the Israelites.  None.  Zero.  The culture of the present day Arab Muslims is the culture of the invading and colonizing peoples.  The definition of indigenous depends on pre-invasion cultures.
> 
> 3.  The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.
> 
> 
> And you don't really want to argue that the displacement or expulsion of part of a group renders the entire group as being non-indigenous and without rights, do you?  Because that is going to cause you some serious problems in the discussions about the "Palestinian" RoR.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, Arabs have been in Palestine since the return from Babylon.. See Ezra in the OT or actually before when Sargon 2 settled 4 Arab tribes in Samaria circa 600 BC.
> 
> Then of course there are the ten Greeks cities of the Decapolis.. The indigenous Palestinians are an amalgamation of all those people.. Greeks, Turks, Syrians, Crusaders..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sargon II was an 8th Century BCE figure, not a 7th Century BCE one.
> 
> If the Arab Palestinians are Greek, Turk, Syrian, and Crusaders, then the Palestinians are not indigenous to the land in question.
> 
> Know that the Jewish People and the land are bound both by divine edict and historical verity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians have always lived there.. and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power. Intermarriage is pretty normal. In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine. I noticed they have uncovered jar burials like the ones at Byblos and Baalbek.. The Canaanites practiced jar burials.
> 
> I should always check my memory.
> 
> *Biblical Archaeology 16: Sargon II Inscriptions | Theo ...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> August 15, 2011 – Theo-sophical Ruminations
> 
> 
> 1 post published by Theosophical Ruminator on August 15, 2011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theosophical.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> Aug 15, 2011 · Archaeologists have discovered annals from the 7th year of Sargon’s reign which describe this very event. The annals read, “I crushed the tribes of Tamud, Ibadid, Marsimanu, and Haiapa, the Arabs who live, far away, in the desert (and) who know neither overseers nor officials and who had not (yet) brought their tribute to any king.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When two parties to a dispute go to court to settle their difference, the first words the judge utters are, "start from the beginning, and present any evidence you have."
> 
> One of the earliest mention of Israel can be found in the 9th Century BCE archaeological find, the Mesha Stele, commissioned by the king of Moab (present-day Jordan), where he mentions Israel and a king of Israel, namely, Omri. The Mesha Stele is currently housed at The Louvre in Paris, France.
> 
> If you claim that the land belongs to the "Palestinians" then it should be reflected in the archaeological records.  Cite one archaeological evidence for the "Palestinians."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine has been recognized as a province of Syria since 500 BC. Most Palestinians are descended from first century Jewish farmers who stayed. The Jews emerged from North Coast Canaanites.
> 
> There's plenty of evidence for non Jewish people in Palestine dating back to the Natufian people ..
Click to expand...


A name given by whom? A Greek, Persian?
Doesn't change a thing.

Some are, most aren't and have no trace.
Those who say otherwise can't prove although really want that "kumbayah" for decades.

Again that there's evidence of non Jewish people changes nothing,
as long as you don't understand what the term 'indigenous' means.

If that argument was valid, Elizabeth Warren could claim to be indigenous American,
as every average American, through mere probability of non-exclusivity, existing another tribe, or nation in the vicinity. But we wouldn't really buy that from an average Joe from Milwauke, simply because he happens to park his ass there...you know to claim _"always lived there"._

Average Arab in Palestine is exactly like the average American,
only America has been isolated, while this is the crossroads between 2 continents.

Genghis Khan alone was what worth?


----------



## Lee Edwin

montelatici said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
Click to expand...


Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.


----------



## Lee Edwin

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
Click to expand...


Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...


----------



## Lee Edwin

Lee Edwin said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...
> 
> View attachment 451174
Click to expand...


How come nobody is named al-Palestini?


----------



## rylah

Lee Edwin said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
Click to expand...


Not to split hairs,

just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.

That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.


----------



## rylah

Lee Edwin said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...
> 
> View attachment 451174
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come nobody is named al-Palestini?
Click to expand...


How come they can't even pronounce _'P-alestine'_,
without learning a foreign language?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...
> 
> View attachment 451174
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come nobody is named al-Palestini?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come they can't even pronounce _'P-alestine'_,
> without learning a foreign language?
Click to expand...

Juvenile.


----------



## Lee Edwin

rylah said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to split hairs,
> 
> just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.
> 
> That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.
Click to expand...


Phoenicians were Canaanites—No relation to Romans who were Italian. Philistines, after whom palestine was named, were Aegean in origin and are believed to have been Mycenaean Greeks, among the Sea Peoples who settled on the eastern Mediterranean coast.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Lee Edwin said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to split hairs,
> 
> just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.
> 
> That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phoenicians were Canaanites—No relation to Romans who were Italian. Philistines, after whom palestine was named, were Aegean in origin and are believed to have been Mycenaean Greeks, among the Sea Peoples who settled on the eastern Mediterranean coast.
Click to expand...

OK, and?


----------



## Lee Edwin

P F Tinmore said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to split hairs,
> 
> just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.
> 
> That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phoenicians were Canaanites—No relation to Romans who were Italian. Philistines, after whom palestine was named, were Aegean in origin and are believed to have been Mycenaean Greeks, among the Sea Peoples who settled on the eastern Mediterranean coast.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, and?
Click to expand...


You‘re wasting a ridiculous amount of your life arguing over “palestine” which was originally related to non-indigenous, non-semitic raiders from Europe who didn’t even name anything palestine, and which designated a different location, on the Mediterranean coast.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...
> 
> View attachment 451174
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come nobody is named al-Palestini?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come they can't even pronounce _'P-alestine'_,
> without learning a foreign language?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Juvenile.
Click to expand...


What is juvenile, that you can't refute it,
or that you're cheering people killing themselves and others,
over what you claim is theirs, *but they can not even properly pronounce*?

I wouldn't call that juvenile, rather sick or sociopathic, yet unfortunately remains fact.


----------



## Lee Edwin

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indigenous Palestinians? Well, no...
> 
> View attachment 451174
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come nobody is named al-Palestini?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come they can't even pronounce _'P-alestine'_,
> without learning a foreign language?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Juvenile.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is juvenile, that you can't refute it,
> or that you're cheering people killing themselves and others,
> over what you claim is theirs, *but they can not even properly pronounce*?
> 
> I wouldn't call that juvenile, rather sick or sociopathic, yet unfortunately remains fact.
Click to expand...


Arabs conventionally call it Filastin, though it’s not a native Arabic word—Filastin is an Arab adaptation of palestine, which is English, and Greek and Latin in origin.


----------



## rylah

Lee Edwin said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to split hairs,
> 
> just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.
> 
> That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phoenicians were Canaanites—No relation to Romans who were Italian. Philistines, after whom palestine was named, were Aegean in origin and are believed to have been Mycenaean Greeks, among the Sea Peoples who settled on the eastern Mediterranean coast.
Click to expand...


They could have also been related to predecessors of Vikings,
but anyway those redhead 'sea people' were definitely not Bedouins,
and not indigenous according the name given to them in the local language.


----------



## Lee Edwin

rylah said:


> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lee Edwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't actually think it matters.  I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous".  It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture.  Not so difficult after all.
> 
> But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else.  As long as that is applied equally.  The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people.  ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't.  Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not.  Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.  The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um, palestine is a European word, referring to philistines who were Europeans from the Aegean. The Romans, who were European, imposed the name palaestina on Jews, the indigenous population. Yeah, Jews have a really long history in their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to split hairs,
> 
> just an interesting information I've came around recently reading about the beginnings of Rome, which also happens to answer many questions regarding this specific topic of indigeneity, and common misconceptions regarding the Levant and attempts to derive anthropological evidence from modern genetic studies of populations.  The point is that there's enough historic, folklore and archaeological evidence to the story of Rome being founded by what Europeans called 'Phoenicians', i.e. general name for Levantene people. Aside from Rome, Italy, there were significant settlements in Spain, and of course Carthage.
> 
> That said, Philistinies were different to Levantenes, as their name tells, a different civilization, unlike A(a)rmenians for example, who intermixed significantly and were essentially a brotherly nation to Levantenes, and who's cultural presence and influence remained evident throughout the region, and especially in Hebrew civilization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Phoenicians were Canaanites—No relation to Romans who were Italian. Philistines, after whom palestine was named, were Aegean in origin and are believed to have been Mycenaean Greeks, among the Sea Peoples who settled on the eastern Mediterranean coast.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They could have also been related to predecessors of Vikings,
> but anyway those redhead 'sea people' were definitely not Bedouins,
> and not indigenous according the name given to them in the local language.
Click to expand...


DNA research locates the philistines originally in the southern Europe/Aegean region. Ramses III at his famous temple at Medinet Habu recorded their attack on Egypt, indicating they arrived on warships from foreign islands...


----------



## Open Bolt

montelatici said:


> So the Jews the invading and colonizing people (Battle of Jericho and all that) cannot be indigenous by definition.  Next.


Except the Jews are not the invading and colonizing people.  They are an original indigenous population.




montelatici said:


> In any case, people claiming to be indigenous must at least have lived in an area for some time.  I don't think living in Europe for 2,000 years can make a people indigenous to a place on another continent.


The indigenous people are the original population.  That includes the Jews.




montelatici said:


> The Palestinians who have ancestry back to the Canaanites, Philistines etc. (as well as to invading Israelites) are thus closest to being indigenous.


Philistines??  Really?

The Jews have ancestry back to the Canaanites too.  Thus they as well are closest to being indigenous.




montelatici said:


> So, the Jews are not indigenous as by your definition invaders can't be indigenous.


The Jews are not invaders.  As descendants of the original population they are very much indigenous.




montelatici said:


> Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine.  Full stop.  They are Europeans.


They didn't convert.  European Jews are descended from the original Canaanite population.




montelatici said:


> The European Jews are certainly not indigenous to the Middle East or Palestine


That is incorrect.  European Jews are indigenous to the West Bank area.




montelatici said:


> All the Jewish migrants to Israel were/are from somewhere else outside of Palestine.


That is incorrect.  Jewish migrants to Israel are descended from the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.




montelatici said:


> Look, the Jews were from somewhere outside of Palestine and invaded the area, so they are not indigenous.


That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original population of the West Bank area, so are very much indigenous.




montelatici said:


> But Jews were conquerors, they came from somewhere else.


That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original Canaanites.




montelatici said:


> The Europeans that colonized Palestine were culturally European and ethnically European.


Perhaps.  But they are still descended from the original Canaanites.




montelatici said:


> The Jews invaded Canaan, that's a fact.


History, DNA, and archaeology say that it's not a fact.




montelatici said:


> The colonists are the Jews.  They came from elsewhere,


Not according to history, archaeology, and DNA.




montelatici said:


> the Muslims and Christians of Palestine are, by definition, the native people.


The Palestinians should learn to share with other indigenous people.


----------



## Open Bolt

P F Tinmore said:


> 3. The Jewish people have lived continuously in the territory in question going back thousands of years.​Not the ones out of Europe.


DNA and history say otherwise.  The Jews from Europe are part of the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.




P F Tinmore said:


> Do you have any proof that they were not there before the Jews or are you just babbling?


Well, since archeology shows that the Jews are descended from the original indigenous population, no one at all was there before them.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> Except the Jews are not the invading and colonizing people.  They are an original indigenous population.
> 
> 
> 
> The indigenous people are the original population.  That includes the Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Philistines??  Really?
> 
> The Jews have ancestry back to the Canaanites too.  Thus they as well are closest to being indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are not invaders.  As descendants of the original population they are very much indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't convert.  European Jews are descended from the original Canaanite population.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  European Jews are indigenous to the West Bank area.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  Jewish migrants to Israel are descended from the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original population of the West Bank area, so are very much indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.  But they are still descended from the original Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> History, DNA, and archaeology say that it's not a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to history, archaeology, and DNA.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians should learn to share with other indigenous people.


Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave in the first century.


----------



## Open Bolt

watchingfromafar said:


> The maps above shows the brutal conquest of Palestine


The maps are a lie.




watchingfromafar said:


> Israel was not "reestablished" , it did not exist, "Israel" was a person not a place.


History and archaeology say that you are wrong.




watchingfromafar said:


> I don’t give a damn whether Israel was the name of a kingdom. And having said that, you cannot provide any historical proof because there isn’t any, none, nada, zip. You can find books and movies about folklore and mythology, but you cannot find one single historical fact to support claims.


That is incorrect.  There is ample archaeological evidence for the existence of both Jewish kingdoms.  As just one example: the Omrides' vital role in the coalition that defeated the Neo-Assyrians.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> DNA and history say otherwise.  The Jews from Europe are part of the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, since archeology shows that the Jews are descended from the original indigenous population, no one at all was there before them.


In 500 BC Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria. There were a half dozen Canaanite tribes living in Palestine.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave in the first century.


That doesn't give them any right to deny reentry to the descendants of those who were forced to leave.




surada said:


> In 500 BC Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria. There were a half dozen Canaanite tribes living in Palestine.


The Israelis were Canaanite tribes too.




surada said:


> Palestinians have always lived there..


The Israelis too, except for when they were forced to leave against their will.




surada said:


> and for most of its history Israel was under the control of an outside power.


When do you start the clock?  The Canaanites ruled themselves for thousands of years before the Egyptian New Kingdom conquered them.




surada said:


> In any case, European Jews don't have an exclusive claim on Palestine.


Perhaps not exclusive.  But as descendants of the original indigenous population, they do have a claim.


----------



## Open Bolt

montelatici said:


> 1. No, the Jews, more properly called Hebrews, invaded Canaan from elsewhere.


DNA, history, and archaeology say they didn't.




montelatici said:


> This is not only a secular archeological fact, it is what the bible states.


That is incorrect.  Secular archaeology shows that the Jews are descended from the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.




montelatici said:


> Plus, these Hebrews fell later to the Neo-Assyrians in 900 BC or so.


Judah did not fall to the Neo-Assyrians.




montelatici said:


> 2. Of course there is a cultural connection between the Palestinians and the Canaanites.


There are also cultural connections between the Jews and the Canaanites.

The Jews are direct descendants of the Canaanites.




montelatici said:


> Here are a few excerpts from secular historical treatises on the subject.  Note: I have chosen a few in which the historian is Jewish.
> _‘Palestinians are the descendants of all the indigenous peoples who lived in Palestine over the centuries; since the seventh century, they have been predominantly Muslim in religion and almost completely Arab in language and culture.’_
> Dowty, Alan (2008). Israel/Palestine. London, UK: Polity. p. 221.


Jews are also the descendants of indigenous peoples who lived in Palestine.




montelatici said:


> _‘Palestinians are an indigenous people who either live in, or originate from, historical Palestine. Although the Muslims guaranteed security and allowed religious freedom to all inhabitants of the region, the majority converted to Islam and adopted Arab culture.’_
> Bassam Abu-Libdeh, Peter D. Turnpenny, and Ahmed Teebi, ‘Genetic Disease in Palestine and Palestinians,’ in Dhavendra Kuma (ed.) Genomics and Health in the Developing World, OUP 2012 pp.700-711, p.700.


Jews are also an indigenous people who either live in or originate from historical Palestine.




montelatici said:


> _“[being of] Canaanite origin, Palestinians have priority; their descendants have continued to live there, which gives them continuity; and (except for the 800,000 dispossessed refugees of 1948 – as determined by Israeli officials at the time, not including the hundreds of thousands subsequently expelled), they are still living there, which gives them present possession. Thus we see that on purely statistical grounds they have a proven legal right to their land.”_
> Prof. Ilene Beatty, highly renowned historian/anthropologist and specialist on the “Holy Land” in Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan, 1957.


Being of Canaanite origin, Jews also have priority, with a proven legal right to their land.




montelatici said:


> The Arab population of Palestine _was native in all the senses of the word, and their roots in Palestine can be traced back at least 40 centuries._
> Professor Maxime Rodinson, Professor of law at the Sorbonne University in Paris, Israel and the Arabs, 1968.


Jewish roots in the region trace back just as far.




montelatici said:


> 3. The Palestinians have lived continuously in the area from before the arrival of the Jews.


That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original population.




montelatici said:


> How can fact be a lie?


By not being a fact to begin with.




montelatici said:


> The Jews that colonized Palestine came from outside of Palestine.


That is incorrect.  European Jews are descended from the original Canaanite population of the West Bank area.




montelatici said:


> The non-Jews had been living in Palestine had been living in Palestine for many generations.  That's just a fact.


That doesn't give the Palestinians any right to wage endless war against other indigenous populations.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> That doesn't give them any right to deny reentry to the descendants of those who were forced to leave.
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis were Canaanite tribes too.
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis too, except for when they were forced to leave against their will.
> 
> 
> 
> Where do you start the clock?  The Canaanites ruled themselves for thousands of years before the Egyptian New Kingdom conquered them.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps not exclusive.  But as descendants of the original indigenous population, they do have a claim.


I know they were also Canaanites... And before them the Natufians.. and then the Akkadians and the Amorites.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> I know they were also Canaanites... And before them the Natufians.. and then the Akkadians and the Amorites.


Then we agree that both the Palestinians and the Jews are equally indigenous??


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> Then we agree that both the Palestinians and the Jews are equally indigenous??


Yes. I get the Jews sought sanctuary in Palestine. I don't get how they treated the Palestinians.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Yes. I get the Jews sought sanctuary in Palestine. I don't get how they treated the Palestinians.


All they are doing is defending themselves when the Palestinians attack them.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Then we agree that both the Palestinians and the Jews are equally indigenous??


Arabs are indigenous of ancient Canaan?
Since when?
Why the need to make Arabs who call themselves Palestinians because of the Mandate for Palestine, and nothing else, indigenous of the area they moved into.  Most of whom moved to the area of Palestine around the end of the 19th century until 1947-48.

How are they indigenous.

Explain.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> All they are doing is defending themselves when the Palestinians attack them.


Nope. Read Zionist Aspirations in Palestine written in 1920.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs are indigenous of ancient Canaan?
> Since when?
> Why the need to make Arabs who call themselves Palestinians because of the Mandate for Palestine, and nothing else, indigenous of the area they moved into.  Most of whom moved to the area of Palestine around the end of the 19th century until 1947-48.
> 
> How are they indigenous.
> 
> Explain.


Yes. It was part of the Akkadian empire . They were from Arabia and so we're the Amorites.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. Read Zionist Aspirations in Palestine written in 1920.


Stop spreading your endless love for Arabs in all of the threads .

You have been given many chances to prove your theories.

To this day:  ZERO

Arabs have never been indigenous of Ancient Canaan, or Africa, or anywhere else but the Arabian Peninsula, where the idea of Arab and Arabic comes from.  And that mostly from around 2000 years ago.

Now rest


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Yes. It was part of the Akkadian empire . They were from Arabia and so we're the Amorites.


THEY WERE.......FROM WERE??????

ARABIA

Indigenous of ARABIA

Thank you.

End of lesson


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Stop spreading your endless love for Arabs in all of the threads .
> 
> You have been given many chances to prove your theories.
> 
> To this day:  ZERO
> 
> Arabs have never been indigenous of Ancient Canaan, or Africa, or anywhere else but the Arabian Peninsula, where the idea of Arab and Arabic comes from.  And that mostly from around 2000 years ago.
> 
> Now rest


You don't know anything about history. Abraham was from Urfa near Haran. He was probably an Arab like Sargon.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> THEY WERE.......FROM WERE??????
> 
> ARABIA
> 
> Indigenous of ARABIA
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> End of lesson





			https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/akka/hd_akka.htm


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You don't know anything about history. Abraham was from Urfa near Haran. He was probably an Arab like Sargon.


Probably!!!!!!!

Probably?????

This is your next insane theory to turn Jews into Arabs??????

Can anyone get some sanity out of you?


----------



## surada

The Akkadians were there long before there were any Jews.       https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/akka/hd_akka.htm


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/akka/hd_akka.htm


Akkadians were not Arabs, no matter how much you try to force them be, as there are none of their descendants available to tell you that you are full of it.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Probably!!!!!!!
> 
> Probably?????
> 
> This is your next insane theory to turn Jews into Arabs??????
> 
> Can anyone get some sanity out of you?


Jews are not a race. Just a religion.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Jews are not a race. Just a religion.


We have never said that we are a race.

Useless idiot!!!!


----------



## Uncensored2008

P F Tinmore said:


> OK, and?



What we call Arabs weren't in the middle east until about the 3rd Century AD.

You are the invaders. You are the occupiers.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs are indigenous of ancient Canaan?
> Since when?
> Why the need to make Arabs who call themselves Palestinians because of the Mandate for Palestine, and nothing else, indigenous of the area they moved into.  Most of whom moved to the area of Palestine around the end of the 19th century until 1947-48.
> How are they indigenous.
> Explain.


DNA shows that the Palestinians and the Jews are both descended from the Bronze Age Canaanites.








						The shared genetic heritage of Jews and Palestinians
					

The Times recently carried this unusual report on an Israeli Jew (Tsvi Misinai, a retired computer expert) who's hoping to prove that Palestinians are




					www.patheos.com
				











						Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, study finds
					

If a common heritage conferred peace, then perhaps the long history of conflict in the Middle East would have been resolved years ago. For, according to a new scientific study, Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, and they all share a common genetic lineage that...



					www.sciencedaily.com


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Nope. Read Zionist Aspirations in Palestine written in 1920.


That is incorrect.  The ongoing violence is due to Palestinians attacking Israelis, who defend themselves.

Ultimately the reason negotiations fail is because both sides cannot reach agreement, which is not really the fault of either side.  But it is not really fair to blame Israelis when Palestinians attack them.




surada said:


> The Akkadians were there long before there were any Jews.       https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/akka/hd_akka.htm


The Akkadians were over in Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq.  The Bronze Age culture in the West Bank area were the Canaanites.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  The ongoing violence is due to Palestinians attacking Israelis, who defend themselves.
> 
> Ultimately the reason negotiations fail is because both sides cannot reach agreement, which is not really the fault of either side.  But it is not really fair to blame Israelis when Palestinians attack them.
> 
> 
> 
> The Akkadians were over in Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq.  The Bronze Age culture in the West Bank area were the Canaanites.


Look at a map of the Akkadian empire. The Arabs didn't immigrate from Europe and Russia. They were always there.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Look at a map of the Akkadian empire.











						File:Empire akkad.svg - Wikimedia Commons
					






					commons.wikimedia.org
				



Looks like mostly Iraq to me.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> DNA shows that the Palestinians and the Jews are both descended from the Bronze Age Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The shared genetic heritage of Jews and Palestinians
> 
> 
> The Times recently carried this unusual report on an Israeli Jew (Tsvi Misinai, a retired computer expert) who's hoping to prove that Palestinians are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.patheos.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, study finds
> 
> 
> If a common heritage conferred peace, then perhaps the long history of conflict in the Middle East would have been resolved years ago. For, according to a new scientific study, Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, and they all share a common genetic lineage that...
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencedaily.com


All of the above has been debunked.

Arabs are Arabs.  That is what the newly called Palestinians, since 1963, are.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> All of the above has been debunked.
> 
> Arabs are Arabs.  That is what the newly called Palestinians, since 1963, are.


Lots of Palestinians worked in Arabia in the 1950s. They were called Palestinians.


----------



## surada

__





						Redirect Notice
					





					images.app.goo.gl


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Lots of Palestinians worked in Arabia in the 1950s. They were called Palestinians.


But they never said that they were not ARABS.  From Arabia.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> images.app.goo.gl


Conquering other people's territory does not make them indigenous of all of the area conquered.

You simply will not learn.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> All of the above has been debunked.


I have not heard about this.  Do you have a cite?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> I have not heard about this.  Do you have a cite?


Just check who runs those sites.

Who are these Drs who have done the study?
Are they following science or what anti Israel people want them to say?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> I have not heard about this.  Do you have a cite?


May I ask you why do you want the Jews and Palestinians to be related?

You mentioned before that both are at fault.

Does wanting an end to the conflict and a want for peace, behind your beliefs?


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> May I ask you why do you want the Jews and Palestinians to be related?


It's not a matter of what I want.  I just go where the facts lead.




Sixties Fan said:


> You mentioned before that both are at fault.


Actually I said that neither side was at fault (in regards to who is to blame for the Israelis and Palestinians never being able to reach agreement on a two-state solution).




Sixties Fan said:


> Does wanting an end to the conflict and a want for peace, behind your beliefs?


No.  I just believe what the science says.




Sixties Fan said:


> Who are these Drs who have done the study?







__





						Michael Hammer, PhD | Department of Neurology
					






					neurology.arizona.edu


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> It's not a matter of what I want.  I just go where the facts lead.
> 
> (You are getting your facts from the wrong sources.)
> 
> Actually I said that neither side was at fault (in regards to who is to blame for the Israelis and Palestinians never being able to reach agreement on a two-state solution).
> 
> (One side is at fault.  The Arab Muslims and Christians who cannot stand that the Jews have slipped away from their control and gained sovereignty over any part of the Jewish ancient homeland which too many Muslims want to believe is part of Islam, because Islam conquered that area.  Many Muslims are still wanting to take back Spain, Vienna, and any other territory once conquered by Islam )
> 
> No.  I just believe what the science says.


Neither one of your sources is science.  The first one, Misinai, was just "hoping" to prove that both were related to use it as cause to end the war.
He seems to be a Jew who is against the existence of Israel. He embraces the idea that all Jews were converted to Islam after the Muslim invasion.  Not so.

"The Times recently carried this unusual report on an Israeli Jew (Tsvi Misinai, a retired computer expert) who’s hoping to prove that Palestinians are descended from Jews. Apparently, he thinks that proving this will help to stop the bloodshed."

He proved nothing. He wants to believe

The second one, by Harry Ostrer.  If you do the proper research about him, he did not want to show his research to anyone.  That is a red flag that something is not right.

*Elhaik has criticized Ostrer's explanations for Jewish demographic history* and Ostrer being unwilling to share his data with other researchers, "unless research includes novelty and strength of the proposal, non-overlap with current or planned activities, and non-defamatory nature toward the Jewish people."

----









						‘Jews a Race’ Genetic Theory Comes Under Fierce Attack by DNA Expert
					

Scientists usually don’t call each other “liars” and “frauds.” But that’s how Johns Hopkins University post-doctoral researcher Eran Elhaik describes a group of widely respected geneticists, including Harry Ostrer, professor of pathology and genetics at Yeshiva University’s Albert Einstein...




					forward.com
				







Open Bolt said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Hammer, PhD | Department of Neurology
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neurology.arizona.edu



You wish to go on believing that Arabs and Jews are the same, or related,  or almost, you go ahead.  

We know who we are, where we come from and our history.

And all Arabs know very well where they are indigenous of, and how related they are not to the Jews.


Arabs know very well, that they are only claiming a relation to the Jews and indigenous status to Canaan since 1948, when the Arabs lost the war against the Jews to destroy the new State of Israel.

Too many people have suddenly, since 1948, decided to rewrite the history of the Jews, and especially that of the Arabs who ended up giving themselves the nationality of Palestinians in 1964n by Arafat and the KGB.

History does not work that way.  









						Manipulating History for Political Purposes: Narratives
					

Aside from the topical and pragmatic issues on the negotiating table between Israel and the Palestinians – there is a far deeper discussion that is not taking place in the negotiating room but in the international arena.




					www.israelnationalnews.com


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Neither one of your sources is science.


The articles are about research produced by scientists and published in peer reviewed journals.




Sixties Fan said:


> The first one, Misinai, was just "hoping" to prove that both were related to use it as cause to end the war.


The first article only mentions Misinai in passing as a way to introduce the subject.  The article is about two studies, one from the University of Arizona and one from Hebrew University in Jerusalem.




Sixties Fan said:


> He seems to be a Jew who is against the existence of Israel. He embraces the idea that all Jews were converted to Islam after the Muslim invasion.  Not so.


The Misinai guy is indeed wrong.  The Jews and Palestinians separated much earlier, during the Bronze Age.

Perhaps the Palestinians were one of the Iron Age neighbors of the two Israeli kingdoms.  As I recall, the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites were also descended from the Canaanites.




Sixties Fan said:


> The second one, by Harry Ostrer.  If you do the proper research about him, he did not want to show his research to anyone.  That is a red flag that something is not right.
> 
> *Elhaik has criticized Ostrer's explanations for Jewish demographic history* and Ostrer being unwilling to share his data with other researchers, "unless research includes novelty and strength of the proposal, non-overlap with current or planned activities, and non-defamatory nature toward the Jewish people."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Jews a Race’ Genetic Theory Comes Under Fierce Attack by DNA Expert
> 
> 
> Scientists usually don’t call each other “liars” and “frauds.” But that’s how Johns Hopkins University post-doctoral researcher Eran Elhaik describes a group of widely respected geneticists, including Harry Ostrer, professor of pathology and genetics at Yeshiva University’s Albert Einstein...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forward.com


This Elhaik guy claims that DNA shows that Jews are from Europe and not from the Middle East at all.

I'd want to see other reputable scientists confirm such findings before I believed a claim so extraordinary, and also see a good explanation reconciling this claim with the historical and archaeological evidence showing that the Jewish people came from the West Bank region.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave in the first century.


This is more of a nitpick than a contradiction, but the Palestinians separated from the Jews much earlier, during the Bronze Age.

Both the Jews and the Palestinians descended from the Canaanites, but they were already separate peoples by the time the Iron Age rolled around.

Perhaps the Palestinians are descended from the Ammonites, Moabites, and/or Edomites (which all descended from the Canaanites just like the two Jewish kingdoms did, but then formed their own separate Iron Age cultures neighboring the two Israeli kingdoms).


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> This is more of a nitpick than a contradiction, but the Palestinians separated from the Jews much earlier, during the Bronze Age.
> 
> Both the Jews and the Palestinians descended from the Canaanites, but they were already separate peoples by the time the Iron Age rolled around.
> 
> Perhaps the Palestinians are descended from the Ammonites, Moabites, and/or Edomites (which all descended from the Canaanites just like the two Jewish kingdoms did, but then formed their own separate Iron Age cultures neighboring the two Israeli kingdoms).


Ben Gurion said they were descendants of Jewish farmers who stayed and tended the Roman terraces and aqueducts.. and ancient olive trees. Shlomo Sands said the same thing. If you believe the Torah or in my case the Old Testament they were half brothers born to Hagar and Keturah . Sadly, there's no excuse for the past 80 years. Many Jews returned to Palestine when they were expelled from Spain and Portugal without incident.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Ben Gurion said they were descendants of Jewish farmers who stayed and tended the Roman terraces and aqueducts.. and ancient olive trees. Shlomo Sands said the same thing.


DNA says the Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites just like the Jews are, but that they had already diverged into separate cultures by the dawn of the Iron Age.




surada said:


> Sadly, there's no excuse for the past 80 years.


Israel has no choice but to defend themselves when people attack them.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Conquering other people's territory does not make them indigenous of all of the area conquered.
> 
> You simply will not learn.


Arabs have been in Palestine since Abraham. Remember, Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> DNA says the Palestinians are descendants of the Canaanites just like the Jews are, but that they had already diverged into separate cultures by the dawn of the Iron Age.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has no choice but to defend themselves when people attack them.


Read Zionist Aspirations in Palestine... Written in 1920. The Jewish refugees didn't treat them right.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Arabs have been in Palestine since Abraham. Remember, Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.



The earliest historic record mentioning Arabs,
is only in 9th century BCE, and outside the Levant.

No one heard of any "Arabs" yet at the time of Avraham Avinu and Mosheh Rabbenu A"H.
So the only reason Arab supremacists resort to this lame revisionism, is because even
they have given up on the "Palestinian nation" scheme, being anything other than
another Arab colony. So now they're left with stealing the identity of greater
civilizations before them, as a lame excuse for Arab imperialism.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Read Zionist Aspirations in Palestine... Written in 1920. The Jewish refugees didn't treat them right.



How should have they treated them,
after the local Jewish community was expelled
from all their holy cities during the Arab pogroms?

They have no one to blame but themselves both for
initiating Zionism in response, and then getting defeated.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Jews are not a race. Just a religion.



See, that 'either-or' fallacy to frame Jews - simply doesn't work.

If we agree it's not race, then how can it be 'just a religion'
when Jews can be both 'religious' and 'secular'?

....tribe, nation, civilization....


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> See, that 'either-or' fallacy to frame Jews - simply doesn't work.
> 
> If we agree it's not race, then how can it be 'just a religion'
> when Jews can be both 'religious' and 'secular'?
> 
> ....tribe, nation, civilization....


They call themselves Jews.


----------



## surada

Y





rylah said:


> How should have they treated them,
> after the local Jewish community was expelled
> from all their holy cities during the Arab pogroms?
> 
> They have no one to blame but themselves both for
> initiating Zionism in response, and then getting defeated.


    You haven't read what the refugees did.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Y    You haven't read what the refugees did.


Have you read what the Arabs did before any of that?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Have you read what the Arabs did before any of that?


Jews were a very small minority in Palestine. See the census of 1870 and they didn't count the Bedouin. The ottomans left them alone. It was sleepy and apolitical with the three groups mostly governing themselves.  When the European Zionists arrived most were Socialists and they intended to expell the Arabs whether Christian or Muslim. They looked down on the Arabs. They were very nationalistic like the Nazis had been towards them when they revoked Jewish citizenship.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Jews were a very small minority in Palestine. See the census of 1870 and they didn't count the Bedouin. The ottomans left them alone. It was sleepy and apolitical with the three groups mostly governing themselves.  When the European Zionists arrived most were Socialists and they intended to expell the Arabs whether Christian or Muslim. They looked down on the Arabs. They were very nationalistic like the Nazis had been towards them when they revoked Jewish citizenship.


Take this discussion to the other thread.

This thread is about who is indigenous.

Meet you there.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Jews were a very small minority in Palestine. See the census of 1870 and they didn't count the Bedouin. The ottomans left them alone. It was sleepy and apolitical with the three groups mostly governing themselves.  When the European Zionists arrived most were Socialists and they intended to expell the Arabs whether Christian or Muslim. They looked down on the Arabs. They were very nationalistic like the Nazis had been towards them when they revoked Jewish citizenship.


PS :  One does not count who is the indigenous people in any place in the world by the number of indigenous people one finds at any time in history.

Indigenous people are indigenous people, ask the indigenous people of the Americas, Australia, NZ, Hawaii, and all other places which have been invaded at any time in history since cities and armies were created.

But the only people not having the right to be the indigenous people on their homeland......drum roll..

The Jews.

Thank you for your constant attempts at making the Jews NOT the indigenous people of the land, and endlessly taking away their right to sovereignty over their own ancient homeland.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Take this discussion to the other thread.
> 
> This thread is about who is indigenous.
> 
> Meet you there.


The European Zionists were not indigenous. They ridiculed the people who lived there and despised their culture. Would you want 30 million foreigners to move to the US and take your homes?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> PS :  One does not count who is the indigenous people in any place in the world by the number of indigenous people one finds at any time in history.
> 
> Indigenous people are indigenous people, ask the indigenous people of the Americas, Australia, NZ, Hawaii, and all other places which have been invaded at any time in history since cities and armies were created.
> 
> But the only people not having the right to be the indigenous people on their homeland......drum roll..
> 
> The Jews.
> 
> Thank you for your constant attempts at making the Jews NOT the indigenous people of the land, and endlessly taking away their right to sovereignty over their own ancient homeland.


Jews were a tiny minority. There's more to the history of the Levant than just Jewish history. Where is your family from? Mine is from the Netherlands... Originally England.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The European Zionists were not indigenous. They ridiculed the people who lived there and despised their culture. Would you want 30 million foreigners to move to the US and take your homes?


Stop telling that lie.  It works only for people like yourself.
False comparisons.  Always.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Jews were a tiny minority. There's more to the history of the Levant than just Jewish history. Where is your family from? Mine is from the Netherlands... Originally England.


This is about who is Indigenous.

Not who ended up becoming part of the history of the area.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> This is about who is Indigenous.
> 
> Not who ended up becoming part of the history of the area.


Arabs are semites and they are indigenous to the Levant... Just like the Syrians and Lebanese. 4 Arab tribes were settled in Samaria by Sargon 2. Sargon 1 was an Akkadian Arab.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Stop telling that lie.  It works only for people like yourself.
> False comparisons.  Always.


The population of Palestine doubled in a period of 15 years with the influx of European Jews. Then the Zionists forced Palestinians into Lebanon and Lebanon's demographic changed almost overnight.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Arabs are semites and they are indigenous to the Levant... Just like the Syrians and Lebanese. 4 Arab tribes were settled in Samaria by Sargon 2. Sargon 1 was an Akkadian Arab.


Arabs speak a semitic language.  They are indigenous to the ARABIAN Peninsula, as the name should give anyone who is honest, a hint.

They know it.

You know it.

You can stop lying for Islam.

Islam and Christianity are not going to destroy Israel and drive the Jews away and murder them all at will.

Whatever the wish of extremist Christians and Muslims is to do with Jews, as they want, will not be realized in this century or any other century in the future.


surada said:


> The population of Palestine doubled in a period of 15 years with the influx of European Jews. Then the Zionists forced Palestinians into Lebanon and Lebanon's demographic changed almost overnight.


You are discussing what belongs in the other thread .  Are you afraid of the other thread that you refuse to go to it?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs speak a semitic language.  They are indigenous to the ARABIAN Peninsula, as the name should give anyone who is honest, a hint.
> 
> They know it.
> 
> You know it.
> 
> You can stop lying for Islam.
> 
> Islam and Christianity are not going to destroy Israel and drive the Jews away and murder them all at will.
> 
> Whatever the wish of extremist Christians and Muslims is to do with Jews, as they want, will not be realized in this century or any other century in the future.
> 
> You are discussing what belongs in the other thread .  Are you afraid of the other thread that you refuse to go to it?


Arabs migrated to Mesopotamia and the Levant long before there was Judaism. No one is going to destroy Israel.  Treat people decently and you won't have a problem. Jews lived all over the Arab world for 2500 years. Why?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Arabs migrated to Mesopotamia and the Levant long before there was Judaism.


You do not have one grain of evidence for it, as you have shown in all the other threads.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You do not have one grain of evidence for it, as you have shown in all the other threads.


There's plenty of evidence of all kinds. The Arabs began to Mesopotamia and the Levant over 10,000 years ago as the glaciers retreated and Arabia became more arid. Have you forgotten about the Amorites and Akkadians? Have you forgotten that Abraham and Moses had Arab wives?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> There's plenty of evidence of all kinds. The Arabs began to Mesopotamia and the Levant over 10,000 years ago as the glaciers retreated and Arabia became more arid. Have you forgotten about the Amorites and Akkadians? Have you forgotten that Abraham and Moses had Arab wives?


Your words are endlessly empty.  Arabs, indigenous of Arabia, migrated all over the place.  It does not make them indigenous of ANY other place on the planet but the ARABIAN Peninsula.

You showed no proof of 10,000 years ago before, on any thread, not now, not ever because there is none.

It is just a lie to make it look like the Palestinians are the "indigenous" people of ancient Canaan.

"Palestinians" know that the are Arabs indigenous from Arabia.

It is only Israel that is making the leaders want the land as "part of the Islamic Empire"

When the Hashemites took TransJordan.  Not a word.

When the Egyptians and the Hashemites took Gaza and Judea and Samaria.....NOT A WORD.

You do know very well why the Arabs keep screaming at the Jews not being indigenous. 

 And that is WRONG.

When are you going to stop helping with the lies which are only meant to provoke ignorant people to attack Jews, as Jews are being attacked AROUND the WORLD.

And not a sigh from you as it continues to happen.

Stop Antisemitism.

Stop Jew Hatred.

It starts with you.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> The European Zionists were not indigenous.


History and DNA says that they are.




surada said:


> Jews were a tiny minority.


Because most of them had been forcibly expelled against their will.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> History and DNA says that they are.
> 
> 
> 
> Because most of them had been forcibly expelled against their will.


In 70 AD? Omar invited them to return. They are all the same people although many of the European Jews have light colored hair and blue eyes.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> In 70 AD?


I forget the exact year.  A lot were expelled by that Hadrian guy who built the wall in England.




surada said:


> Omar invited them to return.


Well now they have.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> In 70 AD? Omar invited them to return. They are all the same people although many of the European Jews have light colored hair and blue eyes.


Such racism, prejudice.  Beware of what you ask for.

You do not get to decide who is a Jew and what Jews ought to look like.

Christian learned prejudice against the European Jews, and ONLY after 1948.

Hitler had no problem murdering  millions of European Jews, knowing that they were indigenous of Ancient Canaan.  He wanted them to leave Germany and be free to return to their homeland.

Al Husseini had other ideas, since before Hitler, in 1920.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Such racism, prejudice.  Beware of what you ask for.
> 
> You do not get to decide who is a Jew and what Jews ought to look like.
> 
> Christian learned prejudice against the European Jews, and ONLY after 1948.
> 
> Hitler had no problem murdering  millions of European Jews, knowing that they were indigenous of Ancient Canaan.  He wanted them to leave Germany and be free to return to their homeland.
> 
> Al Husseini had other ideas, since before Hitler, in 1920.


Jews were also persecuted in the US. The mufti wanted to slow foreign immigration because the European Jews had already doubled the population. Anyone who calls themselves a Jew are Jews in my book ..


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Jews were also persecuted in the US. The mufti wanted to slow foreign immigration because the European Jews had already doubled the population. Anyone who calls themselves a Jew are Jews in my book ..


You are discussing something other than someone's indigenous status.

Hatred for Jews does not give anyone the right to stop the Jews from immigrating, returning to their ancient homeland.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You are discussing something other than someone's indigenous status.
> 
> Hatred for Jews does not give anyone the right to stop the Jews from immigrating, returning to their ancient homeland.


You all stopped the Palestinians from returning with guns.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You all stopped the Palestinians from returning with guns.


WRONG THREAD !!!!!


----------



## surada

Palestinian Christians went to my church in Arabia in the 1950s.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Palestinian Christians went to my church in Arabia in the 1950s.


Arabs who came from the Mandate for Palestine went to your church in the 1950s.  That is different.
They could have stayed in Gaza, Judea or Samaria, taken by Egypt and Jordan.

Arabs choosing to return to their homeland in Arabia.  And you make a fuss about it, against Israel, against the Jews.


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs who came from the Mandate for Palestine went to your church in the 1950s.  That is different.
> They could have stayed in Gaza, Judea or Samaria, taken by Egypt and Jordan.
> 
> Arabs choosing to return to their homeland in Arabia.  And you make a fuss about it, against Israel, against the Jews.



That was before the switch to the "Palestinian" brand...
Even today when glorifying Jihad, they still talk about Arab pride.
Nothing to do with any 'Palestinian nation', it's all about Arab imperialism.


----------



## Rehmani

Open Bolt said:


> Except the Jews are not the invading and colonizing people.  They are an original indigenous population.
> 
> 
> 
> The indigenous people are the original population.  That includes the Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Philistines??  Really?
> 
> The Jews have ancestry back to the Canaanites too.  Thus they as well are closest to being indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews are not invaders.  As descendants of the original population they are very much indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't convert.  European Jews are descended from the original Canaanite population.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  European Jews are indigenous to the West Bank area.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  Jewish migrants to Israel are descended from the original indigenous population of the West Bank area.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original population of the West Bank area, so are very much indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  The Jews are descended from the original Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps.  But they are still descended from the original Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> History, DNA, and archaeology say that it's not a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> Not according to history, archaeology, and DNA.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians should learn to share with other indigenous people.


indigenous means those people who don't have past history like Aborigines in australia.
Jews have a past history they came from Iraq like Abrahim PBUH.


----------



## rylah

Rehmani said:


> indigenous means those people who don't have past history like Aborigines in australia.
> Jews have a past history they came from Iraq like Abrahim PBUH.



That's an imperialist position
Arab supremacists take by default
against any forms of national liberty.

This way one can claim no one is indigenous,
to anywhere, and minorities don't deserve self
determination, because they "all came from somewhere".

But to protect minorities, indigenous status has a legal definition,
as in essentially distinct civilization tied to a specific land.

Arabs despite maintaining their imperialist control over the M.East.
have yet to become indigenous to either the Levant or Africa.


----------



## Open Bolt

Rehmani said:


> indigenous means those people who don't have past history like Aborigines in australia.


That is incorrect.  Indigenous means the people who _do_ have a past history like Aborigines in Australia.




Rehmani said:


> Jews have a past history


Yes.




Rehmani said:


> they came from Iraq


No.  They are descended from the original Canaanite population of the West Bank area.


----------



## rylah




----------



## sergiobramasole

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs who came from the Mandate for Palestine went to your church in the 1950s.  That is different.
> They could have stayed in Gaza, Judea or Samaria, taken by Egypt and Jordan.
> 
> Arabs choosing to return to their homeland in Arabia.  And you make a fuss about it, against Israel, against the Jews.


Israel has been a nation for over three thousand years. As the Merneptah Stele attests to that.  The assertion that Muslim Arabs in Judea&Samaria are the indigenous inhabitants isn't supported by history. Indigenous people have native rulers and build settlements. Every town from the river to the sea has Jewish roots. Arab-speaking people are the descendants of settlers and colonists who came from Jazeera, Mesopotamia, Masr, the Balkans and Asia Minor. In fact, no Muslim Aran  claims roots therein before Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem. And that great warrior was a Kurd.


----------



## Open Bolt

sergiobramasole said:


> Israel has been a nation for over three thousand years. As the Merneptah Stele attests to that.  The assertion that Muslim Arabs in Judea&Samaria are the indigenous inhabitants isn't supported by history. Indigenous people have native rulers and build settlements. Every town from the river to the sea has Jewish roots. Arab-speaking people are the descendants of settlers and colonists who came from Jazeera, Mesopotamia, Masr, the Balkans and Asia Minor. In fact, no Muslim Aran  claims roots therein before Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem. And that great warrior was a Kurd.


DNA shows that the Jews and the Palestinians are both descended from the indigenous Canaanites, although they had already become separate groups by the time of the Iron Age.

The Israelites were not the only Iron Age descendants of the Canaanites.  Perhaps the Palestinians are the descendants of the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


----------



## sergiobramasole

Open Bolt said:


> DNA shows that the Jews and the Palestinians are both descended from the indigenous Canaanites, although they had already become separate groups by the time of the Iron Age.
> 
> The Israelites were not the only Iron Age descendants of the Canaanites.  Perhaps the Palestinians are the descendants of the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.s  The Canaanites, like the Philistines



The Canaanites, like the Philistines centuries later, melted within a more predominant Hebrew community, becoming ethnic  Jews themselves. 
Arabs' DNA pool is extremely diverse; few can claim old Semitic bloodlines.  Their ancient monarchies from the Hashemites in Jordan to  Bahrain are but not their lower strata from Gaza, Egypt, Sudan, and so on and so forth.


----------



## Jay Stone

Open Bolt said:


> DNA shows that the Jews and the Palestinians are both descended from the indigenous Canaanites, although they had already become separate groups by the time of the Iron Age.
> 
> The Israelites were not the only Iron Age descendants of the Canaanites.  Perhaps the Palestinians are the descendants of the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


Israelites were Canaanites. Hebrew is a Canaanite language. Arabic is not a Canaanite language. Fakestinians are recently invented Arabs and  non-Arab Muslims such as Bosnians with no link to Canaanites. Jews in fact are the only living link to Canaanite. This is why Canaanites are recorded in the Jewish Bible but not in Arabs’ Koran.


----------



## Jay Stone

Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  Indigenous means the people who _do_ have a past history like Aborigines in Australia.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> No.  They are descended from the original Canaanite population of the West Bank area.


Original Canaanites were destroyed in the late Bronze Age. Israelites later emerged.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Israelites were Canaanites. Hebrew is a Canaanite language. Arabic is not a Canaanite language. Fakestinians are recently invented Arabs and  non-Arab Muslims such as Bosnians with no link to Canaanites. Jews in fact are the only living link to Canaanite. This is why Canaanites are recorded in the Jewish Bible but not in Arabs’ Koran.



The Jews had been expelled from Palestine 500 years before Islam. Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave.. of course they intermarried with Syrians, Lebanese, Greeks, Romans, Turks and crusaders.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Jews had been expelled from Palestine 500 years before Islam. Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave.. of course they intermarried with Syrians, Lebanese, Greeks, Romans, Turks and crusaders.


Never mind answering Surada.  She rewrites history all the time.

Suggestion to Jay:

Stick to newer posts in threads which are actually active with recent posts.  Otherwise one is only repeating the same things over and over again.  Welcome.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> The Jews had been expelled from Palestine 500 years before Islam. Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave.. of course they intermarried with Syrians, Lebanese, Greeks, Romans, Turks and crusaders.


There was no place called palestine. Jews were never expelled. If Fakestinians had a legitimate history, you wouldn’t need to make up stupid shit like they’re really Jews.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> There was no place called palestine. Jews were never expelled. If Fakestinians had a legitimate history, you wouldn’t need to make up stupid shit like they’re really Jews.



Palestinians were descended from Jews according to Ben Gurion and Shlomo Sands. and a whole lot of DNA studies. There were very few Jews in Palestine from 70 AD to the 1920s.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Palestinians were descended from Jews according to Ben Gurion and Shlomo Sands. and a whole lot of DNA studies. There were very few Jews in Palestine from 70 AD to the 1920s.


That is a lie.  There is no such DNA study.  You would not be able to come up with the people who took part in those "studies" if your life depended on you.

And it continues to be odd that the Muslims, Kurds or Arabs, met with no such Palestinians when they invaded in the 7th Century.   They met the indigenous Jews, and only the Indigenous Jews as written in Islamic sources.

Who exactly are you trying to influence with your lies?  Any success so far?


----------



## Tom Paine 1949

The diaspora of Jews was real enough. There were expulsions, persecution by occupiers and voluntary emigration. Some of the Jewish rebellions were themselves absurd and self-destructive. Surada may not be strictly accurate, but it is certain that many Jews remained in the area for centuries, intermarried, lost their “Jewishness,” converted, etc. The Palestinians of today can speak Arabic, be Muslim or Christian, yet they are in many respects just as “Semitic” as Jewish returnees to Israel.

You are evidentially determined to deny any historical connection between these two peoples, who share a single land, many “racial” features and ancient customs, and a tragic history of conflict in a “Holy Land” of broken stones and religious  obsessions.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Palestinians were descended from Jews according to Ben Gurion and Shlomo Sands. and a whole lot of DNA studies. There were very few Jews in Palestine from 70 AD to the 1920s.


Shlomo Sand taught French cinema! LOL!


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> That is a lie.  There is no such DNA study.  You would not be able to come up with the people who took part in those "studies" if your life depended on you.
> 
> And it continues to be odd that the Muslims, Kurds or Arabs, met with no such Palestinians when they invaded in the 7th Century.   They met the indigenous Jews, and only the Indigenous Jews as written in Islamic sources.
> 
> Who exactly are you trying to influence with your lies?  Any success so far?



Sure they did. You're confusing Arabs with Muslims. Omar invited the Jews to return to Jerusalem. There's more to history than just Jewish history. Look at the travel journals of Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin Tudela..... very few Jews. There's lots of DNA studies. Remember too that Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Palestinians were descended from Jews according to Ben Gurion and Shlomo Sands. and a whole lot of DNA studies. There were very few Jews in Palestine from 70 AD to the 1920s.


“Canaanites were spread across a wide region during the Bronze Age. (The study) supports the idea that differient Levantine cultural groups such as the Moabites, *ISRAELITES* and Phoenicians had a common genetic background”

The DNA of ancient Canaanites lives on in modern-day Lebanese, genetic analysis shows


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Sure they did. You're confusing Arabs with Muslims. Omar invited the Jews to return to Jerusalem. There's more to history than just Jewish history. Look at the travel journals of Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin Tudela..... very few Jews. There's lots of DNA studies. Remember too that Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


Moses and Abraham did not have Arab wives. LOL! The word “Arab” doesn’t even appear in the Torah.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Sure they did. You're confusing Arabs with Muslims. Omar invited the Jews to return to Jerusalem. There's more to history than just Jewish history. Look at the travel journals of Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin Tudela..... very few Jews. There's lots of DNA studies. Remember too that Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


Stop with your lies.  They have been debunked time and again.  You just think that if you keep repeating them, then someday they may come true.

These lies are NEVER going to come true.  EVER.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Sure they did. You're confusing Arabs with Muslims. Omar invited the Jews to return to Jerusalem. There's more to history than just Jewish history. Look at the travel journals of Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin Tudela..... very few Jews. There's lots of DNA studies. Remember too that Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.




Prominent Muslim geographer Muhammad al-Muqadassi, lived in Jerusalem 945 AD—991 AD: “In Jerusalem the Christians and the Jews are predominant, and the mosque is void of either congregation or assembly of learned men.”
(“The Best Divisions For Knowledge of the Regions”)


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jay Stone said:


> Moses and Abraham did not have Arab wives. LOL! The word “Arab” doesn’t even appear in the Torah.


Do not waste you time on her lies.  She has been around for years rewriting Jewish History and all that there is left to do now is dismiss her.  Put her on ignore, if you must.  Let go.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> “Canaanites were spread across a wide region during the Bronze Age. (The study) supports the idea that differient Levantine cultural groups such as the Moabites, *ISRAELITES* and Phoenicians had a common genetic background”
> 
> The DNA of ancient Canaanites lives on in modern-day Lebanese, genetic analysis shows



This guy, Schlomo Sands is a professor in Israel.









						Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
					

His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jay Stone said:


> Prominent Muslim geographer Muhammad al-Muqadassi, lived in Jerusalem 945 AD—991 AD: “In Jerusalem the Christians and the Jews are predominant, and the mosque is void of either congregation or assembly of learned men.”
> (“The Best Divisions For Knowledge of the Regions”)


Surada does not care about any of that.  This thread is about who is Indigenous to the land.

Jews are indigenous to Judea/Israel
Arabs/Palestinians are indigenous to Arabia.

End of story.

We need not repeat it anymore.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> This guy, Schlomo Sands is a professor in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
> 
> 
> His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


He is an Israel hater who rewrote Jewish history.

You, and other Jew haters will embrace any Jew hater, Christian, Muslim and even Jews as if they have any truth to tell.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Moses and Abraham did not have Arab wives. LOL! The word “Arab” doesn’t even appear in the Torah.


Moses wife was Zipporah.  Abraham's wife was Keturah.









						Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
					

His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> This guy, Schlomo Sands is a professor in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
> 
> 
> His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


And, you didn’t know that the subject of French cinema is taught in Israel?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Moses wife was Zipporah.  Abraham's wife was Keturah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
> 
> 
> His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


I do hope that you have a meeting with your psychologist tomorrow.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Moses wife was Zipporah.  Abraham's wife was Keturah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
> 
> 
> His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


Where does the Bible say they were Arabs? Moses and Abraham were Hebrews.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Surada does not care about any of that.  This thread is about who is Indigenous to the land.
> 
> Jews are indigenous to Judea/Israel
> Arabs/Palestinians are indigenous to Arabia.
> 
> End of story.
> 
> We need not repeat it anymore.



The Akkadians were from the Arabian peninsula and they were there before Judaism. Look at a map of their empire.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Where does the Bible say they were Arabs? Moses and Abraham were Hebrews.



Yes, they were Hebrews and had Arab wives. Don't you read your Torah?





__





						Verso
					

Verso Books is the largest independent, radical publishing house in the English-speaking world.




					www.versobooks.com


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> The Akkadians were from the Arabian peninsula and they were there before Judaism. Look at a map of their empire.


Akkadians were not Arabs. Arabs weren‘t even Arabs. Arabs did not exist as a nation until the Islamic period, long after Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Akkadians were from the Arabian peninsula and they were there before Judaism. Look at a map of their empire.


It has been debunked ad nauseam .   Your repeated attempts to turn Akkadians, who have nothing to do with the Arabs and the Palestinians in particular, into Arabs is nauseating.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Yes, they were Hebrews and had Arab wives. Don't you read your Torah?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Verso
> 
> 
> Verso Books is the largest independent, radical publishing house in the English-speaking world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.versobooks.com


Arabs did not exist. Duh!


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Arabs did not exist. Duh!



Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?



			https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Yes, they were Hebrews and had Arab wives. Don't you read your Torah?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Verso
> 
> 
> Verso Books is the largest independent, radical publishing house in the English-speaking world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.versobooks.com


LOL, you give a link to Sands book, and that is the Torah to you?


----------



## Jay Stone

Sixties Fan said:


> It has been debunked ad nauseam .   Your repeated attempts to turn Akkadians, who have nothing to do





surada said:


> Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


Arabs did not exist as a people until the Islamic period, Middle Ages. Now, you know.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


Again, a History by a Non Historian, aka Sands.
Read real historians.  Read the original Torah, the Hebrew Scriptures in Hebrew.

Sands, a guy who spits on Judaism and left it, and has worked against both Israel and Jews.  Not valid here, there or anywhere where sanity prevails.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


Shlomo Sand, who taught French cinema. Duh! Jesus, his family, and his followers were all Jews. Duh!


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> It has been debunked ad nauseam .   Your repeated attempts to turn Akkadians, who have nothing to do with the Arabs and the Palestinians in particular, into Arabs is nauseating.



Look at a map of the Akkadian empire and their origins. The Amorites were also Arabs.  The Marsh Arabs of Iraq came from Al Hasa 6000 years ago.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


Ancient Jewish community in ancient Israel that created ancient Dead Sea Scrolls

The Dead Sea Scrolls | PBS LearningMedia


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Again, a History by a Non Historian, aka Sands.
> Read real historians.  Read the original Torah, the Hebrew Scriptures in Hebrew.
> 
> Sands, a guy who spits on Judaism and left it, and has worked against both Israel and Jews.  Not valid here, there or anywhere where sanity prevails.



Sands is the head of the history department at the university in TelAviv.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Look at a map of the Akkadian empire and their origins. The Amorites were also Arabs.  The Marsh Arabs of Iraq came from Al Hasa 6000 years ago.


The point is not the map.  The point is that you are trying to turn non Arabs into Arabs, and make it so that their taking over for sometime of some land in Canaan, should make it now that "Arabs" were present during the time of the Hebrew Scriptures .

Stop wasting out time.

Jay, stop answering her.  Thanks.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Look at a map of the Akkadian empire and their origins. The Amorites were also Arabs.  The Marsh Arabs of Iraq came from Al Hasa 6000 years ago.


Nonsense. Arabs didn‘t exist until Islam.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Sands is the head of the history department at the university in TelAviv.


He taught French cinema. Take the L.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Ancient Jewish community in ancient Israel that created ancient Dead Sea Scrolls
> 
> The Dead Sea Scrolls | PBS LearningMedia



The Dead Sea scrolls are from 200-150 BC. Some copies of earlier texts.

The clay tablets at Sumer, Ras Shamra and Dilmun are much, much older than the Jews.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Lol😂😂🤣 don't you have any education?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.17.2.156


First century Jewish city in Israel and Jewish house of worship believed to be where Jesus preached, including Jewish menorah and depiction of Jewish Temple in Jerusalem...


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Nonsense. Arabs didn‘t exist until Islam.


 Now you really are stupid.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> The Dead Sea scrolls are from 200-150 BC. Some copies of earlier texts.
> 
> The clay tablets at Sumer, Ras Shamra and Dilmun are much, much older than the Jews.


Nothing to do with Arabs.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> The Dead Sea scrolls are from 200-150 BC. Some copies of earlier texts.
> 
> The clay tablets at Sumer, Ras Shamra and Dilmun are much, much older than the Jews.


Shlomo Sand evidently never heard of Dead Sea Scrolls.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Sands is the head of the history department at the university in TelAviv.


He teaches French, not Jewish history

1978 - 1982 Doctoral student at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
1983 - 1985 Maître assistant associé, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
1988 - 1994 Tenure, Tel Aviv University
1995 - 2001 Associate Professor, Tel Aviv University
2002 - 2014 Full Professor, Tel Aviv University
2014 - Present - Professor Emeritus, Tel Aviv University
Main areas of teaching: French Intellectual History, Political History of the 20th Century, Cinema and History, Nation and Nationalism, History and Theory.

---------------------------------
Stop annoying us with your endless rewriting of Jewish History.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Now you really are stupid.


Show me pre-Quranic records found in the Arabian peninsula in which the inhabitants identified as Arabs.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jay Stone said:


> Show me pre-Quranic records found in the Arabian peninsula in which the inhabitants identified as Arabs.


This is not the thread for it.

Let us stop here and not give her any more rope to twist herself with.

Shalom


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Look at a map of the Akkadian empire and their origins. The Amorites were also Arabs.  The Marsh Arabs of Iraq came from Al Hasa 6000 years ago.


Scholar of Arab history Professor Peter Webb: “To begin reconstructing the history of people who called themselves Arabs, we must cross into the Islamic period.”


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Scholar of Arab history Professor Peter Webb: “To begin reconstructing the history of people who called themselves Arabs, we must cross into the Islamic period.”



Around 600 BC.. before Islam, Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria.

Why do you reject your brightest scholars.. your historians, archaeologists, your scientists, your military historians?









						Israel is rewriting the history of Middle Eastern Jews for propaganda | Opinion
					

***




					www.haaretz.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Around 600 BC.. before Islam, Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria.
> 
> Why do you reject your brightest scholars.. your historians, archaeologists, your scientists, your military historians?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is rewriting the history of Middle Eastern Jews for propaganda | Opinion
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.haaretz.com


Which phrase in that article, exactly, proves any point you are trying to make?


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Around 600 BC.. before Islam, Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria.
> 
> Why do you reject your brightest scholars.. your historians, archaeologists, your scientists, your military historians?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is rewriting the history of Middle Eastern Jews for propaganda | Opinion
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.haaretz.com


The word “arab“ is Greek. Was Sargon Greek?


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Around 600 BC.. before Islam, Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria.
> 
> Why do you reject your brightest scholars.. your historians, archaeologists, your scientists, your military historians?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is rewriting the history of Middle Eastern Jews for propaganda | Opinion
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.haaretz.com


Muhammad al-Sharkawi, “History of the Development of the Arabic Language”: “In fact, there is no native Arab recorded definition or historiography of the Arabs before the advent of Islam or immediately thereafter that is written in Arabic.”


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Around 600 BC.. before Islam, Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria.
> 
> Why do you reject your brightest scholars.. your historians, archaeologists, your scientists, your military historians?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is rewriting the history of Middle Eastern Jews for propaganda | Opinion
> 
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.haaretz.com


Eminent scholar of Arab history Professor Peter Webb, “Reimagining The Arabs”: “Arabian populations (pre-Islam) left no records referring to themselves as ‘Arabs.’ Suspicions that there was no ancient ‘Arab community’ are corroborated in the centuries before Islam. Archaeologists have unearthed thousands of pre-Islamic inscriptions and reference to ‘Arab’ is absent within this corpus.”


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> The word “arab“ is Greek. Was Sargon Greek?


Nope.  He was an Arab.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope.  He was an Arab.


Someone from Arabia, possibly.  Did he consider himself to be an Arab?  Did he call himself one?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Someone from Arabia, possibly.  Did he consider himself to be an Arab?  Did he call himself one?



They identified as Arabs from the 9th century BC. Are you a European Jew?

Arabs - Wikipedia


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> They identified as Arabs from the 9th century BC. Are you a European Jew?
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia


In other words, since the term Arab can only be found from the 9th Century BCE, Sargon, an Akkadian, never ever called himself one, but identified himself and his people as Akkadians, nor did anyone else before that Century.  And that would include Abraham and Mose's wives who were not Arabs.

But, keep dreaming.


----------



## Tom Paine 1949

This discussion moves at the speed of light, with hardly a second to be translated to fingertips typing away furiously. But little light is shed.

Earlier there was mention by Surada that Israeli Professor Shlomo Sands and Zionist leader BenGurion argued that Palestinian Muslims & Christians in part descended from earlier Jewish populations. I really didn’t like the answer of Joe Stone (& SixtiesFan?) that merely denigrated Sands for having specialized in European history, nationalist movements, film, etc.

That was about as relevant as pointing out that BenGurion was a vegetarian. Whatever one thinks of Shlomo Sands’ political views, his historical reframing of European Jewish roots and Zionist nation-building history provided a controversial but useful alternative to the present Israeli-centric historiography of Judiac scholars. His famous book about Jewish national self-imagining is interesting and spurred many different responses:









						The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Nope.  He was an Arab.



Really ,did he even speak Arabic?


----------



## rylah

Tom Paine 1949 said:


> This discussion moves at the speed of light, with hardly a second to be translated to fingertips typing away furiously. But little light is shed.
> 
> Earlier there was mention by Surada that Israeli Professor Shlomo Sands and Zionist leader BenGurion argued that Palestinian Muslims & Christians in part descended from earlier Jewish populations. I really didn’t like the answer of Joe Stone (& SixtiesFan?) that merely denigrated Sands for having specialized in European history, nationalist movements, film, etc.
> 
> That was about as relevant as pointing out that BenGurion was a vegetarian. Whatever one thinks of Shlomo Sands’ political views, his historical reframing of European Jewish roots and Zionist nation-building history provided a controversial but useful alternative to the present Israeli-centric historiography of Judiac scholars. His famous book of Jewish national self-imagining is interesting and spurred many different responses:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



It is exactly because of people like Shlomah Sand,
that you can see the authenticity of the Jewish people.
Other nations didn't dare question their own identity so openly.

Which is why it remained intact to witness all empires go down into
the dustbin of history, and to revive their civilization despite the odds.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> They identified as Arabs from the 9th century BC. Are you a European Jew?
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia



The first historic record mentioning Arabs is only 1300 after Sargon?

Quiet late arrival to the history of human civilization...


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> The first historic record mentioning Arabs is only 1300 after Sargon?
> 
> Quiet late arrival to the history of human civilization...



Not Sargon 2 Sargon. He was an Arab.. an Akkadian from the Arabian peninsula.

Moses'wife Zipporah was an Arab and so was Abraham's wife Keturah. The Edomites, Amorites and Midianites were all Arabs.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Not Sargon 2 Sargon. He was an Arab.. an Akkadian from the Arabian peninsula.
> 
> Moses'wife Zipporah was an Arab and so was Abraham's wife Keturah. The Edomites, Amorites and Midianites were all Arabs.



They were all Arabs 1300 years
before Arabs even appear in historic record?

See, even when Arab supremacists try to rewrite history,
you also inevitably admit Arabs are not indigenous to the Levant.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Nope.  He was an Arab.


No ancient civilizations were Arabs. Sorry.


----------



## Jay Stone

rylah said:


> They were all Arabs 1300 years
> before Arabs even appear in historic record?
> 
> See, even when Arab supremacists try to rewrite history,
> you also inevitably admit Arabs are not indigenous to the Levant.


Arabs are obviously indigenous to the Arabian peninsula. Old Arab proverb: “Yemen is the womb of the Arabs.”


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Not Sargon 2 Sargon. He was an Arab.. an Akkadian from the Arabian peninsula.
> 
> Moses'wife Zipporah was an Arab and so was Abraham's wife Keturah. The Edomites, Amorites and Midianites were all Arabs.


No. Arabs didn‘t populate the eastern Mediterranean until the Arab Conquests in the Middle Ages. Conquest—Get it? Arabs conquered other people. Arabs didn‘t conquer Arabs.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> No. Arabs didn‘t populate the eastern Mediterranean until the Arab Conquests in the Middle Ages. Conquest—Get it? Arabs conquered other people.



Long before Islam they traded with Egypt, Mesopotamia and Palestine. Herod and the pharaohs bought frankense and myrr for funeral rituals. They also traded salt, pearls and textiles from their trade with the Indus valley.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> They identified as Arabs from the 9th century BC. Are you a European Jew?
> 
> Arabs - Wikipedia


Arab historians trace the first Arab tribes to the year 500 CE. That’s the Middle Ages, not ancient history. Sorry.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Long before Islam they traded with Egypt, Mesopotamia and Palestine. Herod and the pharaohs bought frankense and myrr for funeral rituals. They also traded salt, pearls and textiles from their trade with the Indus valley.


You just make this stupid shit up as you go along?


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Long before Islam they traded with Egypt, Mesopotamia and Palestine. Herod and the pharaohs bought frankense and myrr for funeral rituals. They also traded salt, pearls and textiles from their trade with the Indus valley.


In the history of Arabs by Albert Hourani, Arab history started in the Islamic period. No bullshit about Akkadians or other ancient civilizations having been Arabs.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> In the history of Arabs by Albert Hourani, Arab history started in the Islamic period. No bullshit about Akkadians or other ancient civilizations having been Arabs.



That's not true but it's convenient. The problem is that Abraham was probably an Arab.









						The Arabs as Semites Arabia the Cradle of the Semitic Race
					

Of all the lands comparable to Arabia in size, and of all the peoples approaching the Arabs in historical interest and importance, no country and no nationality have perhaps received so little consideration and study in modern times as have Arabia and the Arabs.




					link.springer.com


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> That's not true but it's convenient. The problem is that Abraham was probably an Arab.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs as Semites Arabia the Cradle of the Semitic Race
> 
> 
> Of all the lands comparable to Arabia in size, and of all the peoples approaching the Arabs in historical interest and importance, no country and no nationality have perhaps received so little consideration and study in modern times as have Arabia and the Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> link.springer.com



Arab supremacists are brainwashed to believe everyone were Arabs,
1300 before anyone heard of, or even spoke Arabic?

Talk about 'cradle of overcompensation'...









						A Note on Arabic Literacy and Translation - ALTA Language Services
					

Greece annually translates five times more books from English than the entire Arab world, and currently, 65 million Arab adults are illiterate. These



					www.altalang.com


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> That's not true but it's convenient. The problem is that Abraham was probably an Arab.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs as Semites Arabia the Cradle of the Semitic Race
> 
> 
> Of all the lands comparable to Arabia in size, and of all the peoples approaching the Arabs in historical interest and importance, no country and no nationality have perhaps received so little consideration and study in modern times as have Arabia and the Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> link.springer.com


It’s true that Hourani’s history of Arabs starts in the Islamic period.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> That's not true but it's convenient. The problem is that Abraham was probably an Arab.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs as Semites Arabia the Cradle of the Semitic Race
> 
> 
> Of all the lands comparable to Arabia in size, and of all the peoples approaching the Arabs in historical interest and importance, no country and no nationality have perhaps received so little consideration and study in modern times as have Arabia and the Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> link.springer.com


Abraham an Arab? He’s a Hebrew in the Jewish Bible. His name is a Hebrew word. His grandson Jacob founded the Israelites. Not even the Koran says Abraham was an Arab.


----------



## Jay Stone

rylah said:


> Arab supremacists are brainwashed to believe everyone were Arabs,
> 1300 before anyone heard of, or even spoke Arabic?
> 
> Talk about 'cradle of overcompensation'...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Note on Arabic Literacy and Translation - ALTA Language Services
> 
> 
> Greece annually translates five times more books from English than the entire Arab world, and currently, 65 million Arab adults are illiterate. These
> 
> 
> 
> www.altalang.com


Hebrew is a Canaanite language. Arabic is not a Canaanite language.


----------



## rylah

Jay Stone said:


> Abraham an Arab? He’s a Hebrew in the Jewish Bible. His name is a Hebrew word. His grandson Jacob founded the Israelites. Not even the Koran says Abraham was an Arab.



According to Arab supremacists,
Moses and even Alexander were all Arabs,
that's before claiming they all were also Muslims...









						Ahmose I - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Abraham an Arab? He’s a Hebrew in the Jewish Bible. His name is a Hebrew word. His grandson Jacob founded the Israelites. Not even the Koran says Abraham was an Arab.



Abraham or Abram is also an Arab name. He was from Urfa near Haran. Now look at the history of Syria. Even the Torah says they are half brothers. Abraham had six sons by Keturah.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Abraham or Abram is also an Arab name. He was from Urfa near Haran. Now look at the history of Syria. Even the Torah says they are half brothers. Abraham had six sons by Keturah.


Abraham and Abram are Hebrew words, not Arabic. Nowhere does the Bible say he was an Arab and nowhere does Arabs’ own Koran say he was an Arab. Sorry.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Abraham or Abram is also an Arab name. He was from Urfa near Haran. Now look at the history of Syria. Even the Torah says they are half brothers. Abraham had six sons by Keturah.


Abraham is a Hebrew word. Now, you know The amazing name Abraham: meaning and etymology


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Hebrew is a Canaanite language. Arabic is not a Canaanite language.



Hebrew is a semitic language... Like Arabic, Amharic, Syriac, Ugaritic, Phoenician . Look it up. Starting with ancient southern Arabic, Eastern semitic, Western semitic and proto Semitic. It's rich and complicated.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Hebrew is a semitic language... Like Arabic, Amharic, Syriac, Ugaritic, Phoenician . Look it up. Starting with ancient southern Arabic, Eastern semitic, Western semitic and proto Semitic. It's rich and complicated.


Hebrew Bible was written 1,500+ years before the Arabic Koran.


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Abraham is a Hebrew word. Now, you know The amazing name Abraham: meaning and etymology


Abraham in Arabic is Ibrahim.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Abraham or Abram is also an Arab name. He was from Urfa near Haran. Now look at the history of Syria. Even the Torah says they are half brothers. Abraham had six sons by Keturah.



Which makes Ishmael not an Arab,
but son of an Egyptian concubine.

So is there a meaning in Arabic?


----------



## surada

Jay Stone said:


> Hebrew Bible was written 1,500+ years before the Arabic Koran.


Yes of course. That's not in dispute.


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Hebrew is a semitic language... Like Arabic, Amharic, Syriac, Ugaritic, Phoenician . Look it up. Starting with ancient southern Arabic, Eastern semitic, Western semitic and proto Semitic. It's rich and complicated.


Can you show me “Abraham” in any Arabian records before the Koran?


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Which makes Ishmael not an Arab, but an Egyptian,
> so is there a meaning in Arabic?



Abraham had six sons with his Arab wife Keturah.


----------



## Jay Stone

rylah said:


> Which makes Ishmael not an Arab, but an Egyptian,
> so is there a meaning in Arabic?


Where does Arabs’ Koran say Ishmael was an Arab?


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Abraham had six sons with his Arab wife Keturah.


Where does the Bible and the Koran say she was an Arab?


----------



## Jay Stone

surada said:


> Abraham had six sons with his Arab wife Keturah.


If Abraham and Keturah were Arabs and had Arab children, how come there is no mention of this in Arabian records?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Abraham had six sons with his Arab wife Keturah.



His wife spoke Arabic 1300 years
before Arabs even appear in historic record?

I guess that explains why *Arabs* *can't pronounce 'P-alestine'*....


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> His wife spoke Arabic 1300 years
> before Arabs even appear in historic record?
> 
> I guess that explains why *Arabs* *can't pronounce 'P-alestine'*....



Joseph was sold to Ishmaelite traders.






__





						Google Image Result for https://alchetron.com/cdn/midian-son-of-abraham-f67a0e3a-7fec-48d2-a8ef-c07feedb261-resize-750.jpg
					





					images.app.goo.gl


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Joseph was sold to Ishmaelite traders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://alchetron.com/cdn/midian-son-of-abraham-f67a0e3a-7fec-48d2-a8ef-c07feedb261-resize-750.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> images.app.goo.gl


Egyptians also understood when Joseph A'H said
he was a Hebrew _'from the land of the Hebrews'._

And we have already established that Ishmael
was merely a son of an Egyptian concubine.

Some sources say Pharaoh's daughter.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> And we have already established that Ishmael
> was merely a son of an Egyptian concubine.
> 
> Some sources say Pharaoh's daughter.



Merely? Some say Isaac was the child of pharaoh.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Merely? Some say Isaac was the child of pharaoh.



Yeah the clowns, like the Arab supremacists
who overcompensate for lack of roots and history...

But at least we're progressing, even you admit it's about Jews,
and Arabs are rather foreign to Levant and especially* 'P-alestine'...*


----------



## Sixties Fan

[  This document may explain a lot of things about the origin of the word Arab ]

After the fall of the Assyrians, the succeeding Babylonian and then Achaemenid Persian empires inherited the Assyrian administrative system, and as they occupied the same frontiers, they perpetuated the Assyrians’ ‘Arab’-sounding words to label various groups who buffeted the borders over subsequent centuries, but inner Arabian populations still left no records in which they refer to themselves as ‘Arabs’. It was into this worldview whereby empires used the word ‘Arab’ generically for dimly perceived desert outsiders that the Greeks emerged and began writing ‘Arabs’ into their histories. Like the Assyrians, the Greeks had little direct contact with Arabia beyond the desert frontier, and their unfamiliarity with the region permitted their generalisation that outside the Fertile Crescent lived a world of roughly homogenous ‘Arabs’. ‘Arab’ became a convenient device to cut-and-dry the ‘barbarians’ to the south, and what appears in classical literature as the supposed original state of ‘the Arab people’ is very much like Greek generalisations about ‘Celts’: an imprecise guesstimate augmented by literary flourish, not a reflection of a budding Arab community across Arabia.

Suspicions that there was no ancient ‘Arab community’ in Arabia are corroborated by Arabian voices from the centuries before Islam. Archaeologists have unearthed thousands of pre-Islamic inscriptions from Yemen to Jordan, and reference to ‘Arab’ as a label for oneself or one’s own community is absent within this corpus. Even evidence for the Arabic language itself is trace. It appears that Arabians in the first centuries CE were a scattered array of very diverse peoples, speaking somewhat related but distinct languages, and lacking a sense of political, communal or cultural unity. There are no ancient indigenous myths of common origin tying Arabian populations together into an imagined ‘Arab family’, and there was neither a common religion nor a set of shared symbols which communities could use to construct unities, as Arabia’s confessional map was 
divided between Christians, Jews, polytheists and some less ascertainable monotheistic creeds. Instead of a pre- Islamic Arabia filled with ‘Arabs’, we find that peoples in central Arabia referred to themselves as Ma’addites, southern Arabia (Yemen) was organised into kingdoms with very particular languages and state structures, populations on the eastern Gulf were oriented towards Iran with limited political or cultural commonalities with other Arabians, and in the north the Roman/ Byzantine and Persian empires warred against each other, creating divisive alliances that blocked pathways by which peoples could unite under a common identity.

The straightforward Greek projections of Arab origins in a Bedouin mould thus seem, upon close analysis, to be most misleading. Numerically, most of Arabia’s pre- Islamic populations were not Bedouin, they did not express a common unity, and it appears that none called themselves Arabs. The ingredients needed to classify pre- Islamic Arabians as members of one Arab ethnicity are wanting. And accordingly, Victorian impressions about the Arab racial purity of Bedouin are misplaced too, since Arab identity does not stem from an archaic lifestyle. To use the word ‘Arab’ as descriptive of a primitive way of life merely replicates prejudices of Assyrian and Greek writers, taking us away from a truthful understanding of Middle Eastern communities.

(full article online)



			https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/843/BAR27-10-Webb-reduced_0.pdf


----------



## rylah

*How the Middle East would look without Arab imperialism*


----------



## Open Bolt

sergiobramasole said:


> The Canaanites, like the Philistines centuries later, melted within a more predominant Hebrew community, becoming ethnic  Jews themselves.


I've never heard of the Philistines merging with the Jews.

With the Canaanites, it isn't so much that they merged with the Jews, but that the Canaanites of the West Bank area evolved into the Jews.




sergiobramasole said:


> Arabs' DNA pool is extremely diverse; few can claim old Semitic bloodlines.  Their ancient monarchies from the Hashemites in Jordan to  Bahrain are but not their lower strata from Gaza, Egypt, Sudan, and so on and so forth.


Perhaps.  But the Palestinians have a different lineage, that does trace back to the Canaanites.  I speculate that the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


----------



## Open Bolt

Jay Stone said:


> Israelites were Canaanites. Hebrew is a Canaanite language.


Agreed.




Jay Stone said:


> Arabic is not a Canaanite language.


True, but Moabite, Ammonite, and Edomite are Canaanite languages.




Jay Stone said:


> Fakestinians are recently invented Arabs and non-Arab Muslims such as Bosnians with no link to Canaanites. Jews in fact are the only living link to Canaanite.


DNA shows that the Palestinians are not descended from Israelites, but it does show that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites.

Perhaps the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.




Jay Stone said:


> This is why Canaanites are recorded in the Jewish Bible but not in Arabs’ Koran.


Agreed.  Arabs are not from the area.




Jay Stone said:


> Original Canaanites were destroyed in the late Bronze Age. Israelites later emerged.


Archaeology shows that Bronze Age Canaanite culture collapsed and their descendants formed a number of smaller Iron Age cultures.

The two Israelite kingdoms were two of these Iron Age cultures.  Other Iron Age cultures to arise from the ashes of Bronze Age Canaan are the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites.




Jay Stone said:


> Jews were never expelled.


Actually that Hadrian guy (the same one who built the wall in the UK) expelled a lot of Jews against their will.




Jay Stone said:


> “Canaanites were spread across a wide region during the Bronze Age. (The study) supports the idea that differient Levantine cultural groups such as the Moabites, *ISRAELITES* and Phoenicians had a common genetic background”
> The DNA of ancient Canaanites lives on in modern-day Lebanese, genetic analysis shows


Agreed.  And also the Ammonites and Edomites.

I speculate that the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> The Jews had been expelled from Palestine 500 years before Islam. Most Palestinians are descended from Jewish farmers who didn't leave.. of course they intermarried with Syrians, Lebanese, Greeks, Romans, Turks and crusaders.


DNA shows that what you say is not true.  The Palestinians are not descended from Israelites.

They are however descended from the Canaanites.  That probably means that the Palestinians come from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.




surada said:


> Palestinians were descended from Jews according to Ben Gurion and Shlomo Sands. and a whole lot of DNA studies. There were very few Jews in Palestine from 70 AD to the 1920s.


That is incorrect.  DNA shows that the Palestinians are not descended from the Israelites.




surada said:


> This guy, Schlomo Sands is a professor in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’
> 
> 
> His past was Jewish, but today he believes Israel to be one of the most racist societies in the western world. Historian Shlomo Sand explains why he doesn’t want to be Jewish anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


Self-hating Jews are always ugly when they spout their antisemitic bilge.




surada said:


> The Akkadians were from the Arabian peninsula and they were there before Judaism. Look at a map of their empire.


That is incorrect.  The Akkadians were from Mesopotamia.  And I am not aware of the Akkadians ever being in the West Bank area.




surada said:


> Nope.  He was an Arab.


No he wasn't.  He was from Mesopotamia.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Jews are indigenous to Judea/Israel
> Arabs/Palestinians are indigenous to Arabia.


If Palestinians are descended from the Moabites or Ammonites, that makes them indigenous to Jordan.








						File:Kingdoms around Israel 830 map.svg - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> True, but Moabite, Ammonite, and Edomite are Canaanite languages.
> 
> 
> 
> DNA shows that the Palestinians are not descended from Israelites, but it does show that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites.


[ Palestinians are Arabs.  They are not descended from any of the Canaanite tribes of the time ]


Open Bolt said:


> Perhaps the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  Arabs are not from the area.
> 
> 
> 
> Archaeology shows that Bronze Age Canaanite culture collapsed and their descendants formed a number of smaller Iron Age cultures.
> 
> The two Israelite kingdoms were two of these Iron Age cultures.  Other Iron Age cultures to arise from the ashes of Bronze Age Canaan are the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that Hadrian guy (the same one who built the wall in the UK) expelled a lot of Jews against their will.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  And also the Ammonites and Edomites.
> 
> I speculate that the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


Wrong, the Palestinians are not descended from the Moabites, Ammonites or Edomites.

When you do find any evidence to the contrary, post it here.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> If Palestinians are descended from the Moabites or Ammonites, that makes them indigenous to Jordan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> File:Kingdoms around Israel 830 map.svg - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Stop with the assumptions.
You are showing wishful thinking and not evidence at all.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Palestinians are Arabs.  They are not descended from any of the Canaanite tribes of the time
> Wrong, the Palestinians are not descended from the Moabites, Ammonites or Edomites.
> When you do find any evidence to the contrary, post it here.


Here is evidence that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites, but not descended from the Israelites:








						The shared genetic heritage of Jews and Palestinians
					

The Times recently carried this unusual report on an Israeli Jew (Tsvi Misinai, a retired computer expert) who's hoping to prove that Palestinians are




					www.patheos.com
				











						Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, study finds
					

If a common heritage conferred peace, then perhaps the long history of conflict in the Middle East would have been resolved years ago. For, according to a new scientific study, Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, and they all share a common genetic lineage that...



					www.sciencedaily.com
				




"Canaanite but not Israelite" doesn't leave a lot of options.  I can think of only four:
Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, and Phoenician.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Here is evidence that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites, but not descended from the Israelites:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The shared genetic heritage of Jews and Palestinians
> 
> 
> The Times recently carried this unusual report on an Israeli Jew (Tsvi Misinai, a retired computer expert) who's hoping to prove that Palestinians are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.patheos.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, study finds
> 
> 
> If a common heritage conferred peace, then perhaps the long history of conflict in the Middle East would have been resolved years ago. For, according to a new scientific study, Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, and they all share a common genetic lineage that...
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencedaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Canaanite but not Israelite" doesn't leave a lot of options.  I can think of only four:
> Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, and Phoenician.


Not one of those studies is valid.
Who participated in those studies? 
What were their names?  Where did they come from?
How can anyone check on the validity of the people studied?
No evidence is available.

You do get some things right, but others so wrong.
Palestinian Arabs are NOT descended  from any of the Canaanite tribes.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Not one of those studies is valid.
> Who participated in those studies?
> What were their names?  Where did they come from?
> How can anyone check on the validity of the people studied?
> No evidence is available.


Both studies were done by reputable scientists from reputable universities (one a reputable Israeli university), and both were published in peer reviewed scientific journals.


			https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.100115997
		



			https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(07)61325-1


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Both studies were done by reputable scientists from reputable universities (one a reputable Israeli university), and both were published in peer reviewed scientific journals.
> 
> 
> https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.100115997
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(07)61325-1


Believe what you wish.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Sure they did. You're confusing Arabs with Muslims. Omar invited the Jews to return to Jerusalem. There's more to history than just Jewish history. Look at the travel journals of Ibn Battuta and Rabbi Benjamin Tudela..... very few Jews. There's lots of DNA studies. Remember too that Moses and Abraham had Arab wives.


And the Ottomans invited Jews escaping the Crusades and Inquisitions to come back to what the Ottoman Muslims considered Jewish homeland aka Jerusalem / Israel.  For the next six hundred years the Ottomans controlled the region, not once did they ever consider a Palestine or Palestinian People. Palestine is a European Christian name, and the first so called Palestinians were Jews.  Arafat the Egyptian born terrorist hijacked the name Palestinian as strategy to confuse the West.   There are not and never have been a Palestinian people. In The late 1800’s early 1900’s prior to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Ottomans who were meticulous at keeping good records, had Jerusalem as a Jewish majority city, with Christians as second, and last Muslims Arabs.  The Arabs who later called themselves Palestinians invaded the region for jobs and opportunities that were created by the Jewish entrepreneurship, ingenuity and resourcefulness, once the Ottomans were defeated and the region came under British control. 

The land is Jewish ancestral, religious and spiritual homeland. That is a fact.  Many Arab countries have finally recognized that the Palestinian cause is a big hoax, and have made peace with Israel under the Abraham accords To the benefit of  both their peoples. 

The Jews are there to stay and the state of Israel will remain strong, prosperous and a leader in science, medicine, education and military.  Deal with it, or not, nobody cares. The war is over, your side lost. Jerusalem has been declared the capital of the state of Israel, and the major Arab countries have normalized relations and trade with Israel. Game over.


----------



## Roudy

Jay Stone said:


> Abraham an Arab? He’s a Hebrew in the Jewish Bible. His name is a Hebrew word. His grandson Jacob founded the Israelites. Not even the Koran says Abraham was an Arab.


Abraham was an Arab.  Ha ha ha.   Now I’ve heard it all.


----------



## Roudy

rylah said:


> Yeah the clowns, like the Arab supremacists
> who overcompensate for lack of roots and history...
> 
> But at least we're progressing, even you admit it's about Jews,
> and Arabs are rather foreign to Levant and especially* 'P-alestine'...*


Now that’s funny, a guy with an Indian accent teaching Arabs to fix theirs.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> And the Ottomans invited Jews escaping the Crusades and Inquisitions to come back to what the Ottoman Muslims considered Jewish homeland aka Jerusalem / Israel.  For the next six hundred years the Ottomans controlled the region, not once did they ever consider a Palestine or Palestinian People. Palestine is a European Christian name, and the first so called Palestinians were Jews.  Arafat the Egyptian born terrorist hijacked the name Palestinian as strategy to confuse the West.   There are not and never have been a Palestinian people. In The late 1800’s early 1900’s prior to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Ottomans who were meticulous at keeping good records, had Jerusalem as a Jewish majority city, with Christians as second, and last Muslims Arabs.  The Arabs who later called themselves Palestinians invaded the region for jobs and opportunities that were created by the Jewish entrepreneurship, ingenuity and resourcefulness, once the Ottomans were defeated and the region came under British control.
> 
> The land is Jewish ancestral, religious and spiritual homeland. That is a fact.  Many Arab countries have finally recognized that the Palestinian cause is a big hoax, and have made peace with Israel under the Abraham accords To the benefit of  both their peoples.
> 
> The Jews are there to stay and the state of Israel will remain strong, prosperous and a leader in science, medicine, education and military.  Deal with it, or not, nobody cares. The war is over, your side lost. Jerusalem has been declared the capital of the state of Israel, and the major Arab countries have normalized relations and trade with Israel. Game over.


Nope. Read the Turkish census of 1870. Jews were a tiny minority and they made no effort to count the Bedouin. The Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem was the largest.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. Read the Turkish census of 1870. Jews were a tiny minority and they made no effort to count the Bedouin. The Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem was the largest.


It is not about how many Aborigines were found in Australia when the Europeans arrived, or when the Europeans arrived in New Zealand, or Hawaii or the Americas.
The Europeans knew who were the indigenous people of all of those places the same way the Kurds and Arab Muslims knew who were the indigenous people in Jerusalem and the area of the Nation of Israel.

It is never about how many Jews were living in their homeland back than or 200 years ago, or 100 years ago.

You play this number nonsense all the time.

You do KNOW that the Arabs are not the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, of Israel, of Judea and of Jerusalem.

Generation after generation of Arabs, Muslim and Christian,  in Gaza and the PA are paying the price for those lies, for some Muslims and Christians  being intolerant to Jewish sovereignty over their own ancient homeland.

But you keep up the lies as if their lives do not matter.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> It is not about how many Aborigines were found in Australia when the Europeans arrived, or when the Europeans arrived in New Zealand, or Hawaii or the Americas.
> The Europeans knew who were the indigenous people of all of those places the same way the Kurds and Arab Muslims knew who were the indigenous people in Jerusalem and the area of the Nation of Israel.
> 
> It is never about how many Jews were living in their homeland back than or 200 years ago, or 100 years ago.
> 
> You play this number nonsense all the time.
> 
> You do KNOW that the Arabs are not the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, of Israel, of Judea and of Jerusalem.
> 
> Generation after generation of Arabs, Muslim and Christian,  in Gaza and the PA are paying the price for those lies, for some Muslims and Christians  being intolerant to Jewish sovereignty over their own ancient homeland.
> 
> But you keep up the lies as if their lives do not matter.



Canaan was Egyptian.. so was Sinai. It was inhabited by Canaanites.









						Canaan
					

Canaan was the name of a large and prosperous ancient country (at times independent, at others a tributary to Egypt) located in the Levant region of present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel. It...




					www.worldhistory.org


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Nope. Read the Turkish census of 1870. Jews were a tiny minority and they made no effort to count the Bedouin. The Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem was the largest.



Exactly, indigenous nations are minorities.

What do Arab supremacists have against minority rights?


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Exactly, indigenous nations are minorities.
> 
> What do Arab supremacists have against minority rights?



What if 100 million African refugees immigrated to the US in the next 15 years and they were armed socialists?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> What if 100 million African refugees immigrated to the US in the next 15 years and they were armed socialists?



What if they ware Cherokees? I'd say historic justice!

Do Arab supremacists also blame Africans for expelling the local
Jewish communities from all their holy cities, and initiating Zionism?









						Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama Recognizes Israel as Sovereign Jewish Nation and Jerusalem as its Eternal Undivided Capital
					

On September 25th, the Tribal Council of the Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama met to share a meal together and convene for tribal affairs




					www.israellycool.com


----------



## rylah

When you can't even pronounce 'P-alestine',
and carry a flag *invented by the British empire...*


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> What if they ware Cherokees? I'd say historic justice!
> 
> Do Arab supremacists also blame Africans for expelling the local
> Jewish communities from all their holy cities, and initiating Zionism?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama Recognizes Israel as Sovereign Jewish Nation and Jerusalem as its Eternal Undivided Capital
> 
> 
> On September 25th, the Tribal Council of the Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama met to share a meal together and convene for tribal affairs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.israellycool.com



Our treatment of the American Indians is shameful...a dark period in US history. That's why colonizing occupied territory is illegal. That's why we didn't let Iraq take over Kuwait even though Kuwait was once a province of Iraq.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Our treatment of the American Indians is shameful...a dark period in US history. That's why colonizing occupied territory is illegal. That's why we didn't let Iraq take over Kuwait even though Kuwait was once a province of Iraq.


Then tell the Arabs to stop occupying Jewish Homeland territory.  That goes for the whole area of the Mandate for Palestine, where 80% is now occupied by foreign Arabs.

And let us add all of North Africa, which belongs to the indigenous minorities which have been occupied and also colonized since the 7th century CE.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Then tell the Arabs to stop occupying Jewish Homeland territory.  That goes for the whole area of the Mandate for Palestine, where 80% is now occupied by foreign Arabs.
> 
> And let us add all of North Africa, which belongs to the indigenous minorities which have been occupied and also colonized since the 7th century CE.



It was Arab homeland too. The British didn't give you all of Palestine or any part of Transjordan, Lebanon, the Golan heights, Shayba farms, east Jerusalem or the West Bank. Other people lived there for thousands of years..


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> It was Arab homeland too. The British didn't give you all of Palestine or any part of Transjordan, Lebanon, the Golan heights, Shayba farms, east Jerusalem or the West Bank. Other people lived there for thousands of years..


No, no, no.

You are distorting it for your own purposes.

Someone's homeland is different from someone invading, colonizing and keeping the Indigenous people as a minority and without the right all people should have.

According to your thinking, Arabia, all of Asia Minor and North Africa is also Arab homeland.  Simply because they moved there, by force, and took land by force.

But that is not what one's homeland is, and you do know that.

Your Irish's ancestor's homeland is Ireland.
Your Dutch ancestor's homeland is the Netherlands.

Having moved anywhere else in the world and made a home there, does not make it their Indigenous homeland.

You do know that.

That is how it works for all peoples on the planet.

But you and the Arab Nation, or Muslim Nation, and the Christian Nation as well, do insist that when it comes to Jews, they do not have an ancient homeland, and as it was taken from them, they cannot ever have it back.

Indigenous people from all over the world 1000% disagree with this very distorted view of what constitutes one's homeland.

Especially when the Ancient indigenous people are not allowed to retain not even 20% of the 100% which should have been theirs by right, and too many people are trying to destroy that country and make sure that its people can never have a country of their own, especially ON their own ancient homeland, ever again.


That is what you are working too hard for.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> It was Arab homeland too. The British didn't give you all of Palestine or any part of Transjordan, Lebanon, the Golan heights, Shayba farms, east Jerusalem or the West Bank. Other people lived there for thousands of years..



*Arab imperialists say the same about Africa.*

So your problem is that there is one Jewish state in Levant,
or that the Middle East didn't end up entirely under the Arab yoke?





B


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> *Arab imperialists say the same about Africa.*
> 
> So your problem is that there is one Jewish state in Levant,
> or that the Middle East didn't end up entirely under the Arab yoke?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B



Nope. I don't have a problem with a Jewish state at all. I have a problem with the Zionists taking more land than they were given.

The temple was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans not the Arabs. The Haram Al Shariff has been there nearly 1400 years. It no longer belongs to the Jews. You know the law.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. I don't have a problem with a Jewish state at all. I have a problem with the Zionists taking more land than they were given.
> 
> The temple was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans not the Arabs. The Haram Al Shariff has been there nearly 1400 years. It no longer belongs to the Jews. You know the law.


Jews were given ALL of the Mandate for Palestine.  All of it.  But with the Arab riots and rejection of a Jewish State, it became less and less.  In 1922 it definitely became much less by the British suddenly giving 78% to the Hashemite foreign Arab tribe.

Why did the Hashemites have any rights to 78% of the Jewish Ancient homeland?
Answer that.

Arab thieves now own the Temple Mount?  Under whose's law?

The Arabs who first came to the land did say that the land belonged to the children of Israel.  Guess who those are.  It is not the Army of Mohammad, then or now.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Jews were given ALL of the Mandate for Palestine.  All of it.  But with the Arab riots and rejection of a Jewish State, it became less and less.  In 1922 it definitely became much less by the British suddenly giving 78% to the Hashemite foreign Arab tribe.
> 
> Why did the Hashemites have any rights to 78% of the Jewish Ancient homeland?
> Answer that.
> 
> Arab thieves now own the Temple Mount?  Under whose's law?
> 
> The Arabs who first came to the land did say that the land belonged to the children of Israel.  Guess who those are.  It is not the Army of Mohammad, then or now.



By 1948 the Jewish terror gangs had killed over 500 British peacekeepers and then they killed Count Bernadotte who saved 30,000 from the Holocaust.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> It was Arab homeland too. The British didn't give you all of Palestine or any part of Transjordan, Lebanon, the Golan heights, Shayba farms, east Jerusalem or the West Bank. Other people lived there for thousands of years..


Let us play the game of whose homeland it is.

Jews made it their home in Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, and all over Europe, etc from before the destruction of the First Temple.

In other words, by your own thinking, the Jews, like any other people who migrated and lived anywhere in those lands, had every right to remain where they were because they had made where they were their homeland.  They built their homes, their businesses, schools, synagogues.  Did trade with others.

But wait, Jews decide to be sovereign over any part of their ancient homeland, where many Jews still lived, and some Christians and Muslims decide, because of their 2000 year old beliefs, that the Jews have given away their right to that land.

But wait again, it is ONLY JEWS, not any other indigenous people who can legally regain and rebuild their Nation on their ancient homelands, just as may First Nations in the USA  have been doing.


Why only Jews do not have the right to have their ancient capital of Jerusalem, their ancient homelands of Judea and Samaria, the Golan?

You keep mentioning those areas because the Hashemites took those lands in the 1948 war, and not because it actually belonged to a people called Palestinians or the Hashemites.

The Hashemites made sure that for 19 years the other Arabs in those areas would have no control over it, would not even think of building their own State in that area, much less be free of the Hashemites and take over.


Why?  Because most Muslims thought that all of the area was an Islamic conquered territory, so it did not matter who occupied or owned it, as long as it was in the hands of Muslims.   Exactly as it was during all of centuries of Ottoman conquest.

Come up with something honest.  Come up with who is actually Indigenous to the land and who really respects the other's civil, religious, and any other rights not only Jews but Muslims, Christians, Druze and all the other religions which live at the moment in Israel should be able to have.


Those right did not exist to Christians and others under Ottoman and Egyptian or Hashemite control of the territories.


As possibly a Christian you should care, but apparently do not, that Christians have had no rights under Muslim control, that they have been expelled from many of the countries Jews have been expelled, even from cities controlled by Muslims in Areas A and B of Judea and Samaria.


You do not care about the people who really need attention as to what is happening to them.  That is quite an amazing world you do live in.  Only Arabs matter, they took it, so not they own it.


But the question should be WHICH  Arabs, which tribes.......as not all tribes are involved in the conquest of any of the Muslim conquered territories.  It might as well still belong to the Ottomans.

You do realize that the Ottomans were a small number of Turks, and one could not possibly say that all the land the Ottomans conquered belonged to all of those living in Turkey?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> By 1948 the Jewish terror gangs had killed over 500 British peacekeepers and then they killed Count Bernadotte who saved 30,000 from the Holocaust.


I am not going to cry over those soldiers you insist in calling peacekeepers when they were not.  You know that they were not peacekeepers.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Canaan was Egyptian..


Egypt briefly conquered and dominated Canaan.

For most of history, Canaan belonged to the Canaanites.




surada said:


> It was inhabited by Canaanites.


The Canaanites in the West Bank area evolved into the Jewish people.




surada said:


> It was Arab homeland too.


No it wasn't.  The West Bank is the homeland only of the Jewish people.

The Palestinian homeland is either Jordan or Lebanon.

The Arabic homeland is Arabia.




surada said:


> The British didn't give you all of Palestine or any part of Transjordan, Lebanon, the Golan heights, Shayba farms, east Jerusalem or the West Bank.


Irrelevant.




surada said:


> Other people lived there for thousands of years..


Also irrelevant.




surada said:


> I have a problem with the Zionists taking more land than they were given.


If you didn't want land ownership to be decided by military force, then you shouldn't have started a war with Israel that guaranteed that land ownership would be decided by military force.

If the Arabs had peacefully accepted the UN partition, Israel would have peacefully accepted it as well.




surada said:


> The Haram Al Shariff has been there nearly 1400 years. It no longer belongs to the Jews.


Wrong.  Stolen property belongs to the legitimate owners, not to Islamic thieves.




surada said:


> You know the law.


The law says that stolen property belongs to the legitimate owners, not to Islamic thieves.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Nope. Read the Turkish census of 1870. Jews were a tiny minority and they made no effort to count the Bedouin. The Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem was the largest.


Wrong again. It’s good to know actual history as opposed to repeating Islamist propaganda 








						Did Jews take Israel away from Palestinians? | The Jewish Federation of Sarasota-Manatee
					

Jews DID NOT take Israel away from Palestinians. Palestine is a geographic region, not a nationality. Jews have lived on the land for thousands of years...




					jfedsrq.org
				




It is inaccurate to say Jews are interlopers into the Middle East and that they only came to the land after the Holocaust. While Jews were dispersed from the Middle East at various times, Jews have lived continuously in the Land of Israel, including through Babylonian, Persian, Roman, Byzantine, Muslim and Crusader rule. 
Large Jewish populations were established in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century BCE and in other cities throughout Palestine by the eleventh century.
According to a British census in 1864, Jews constituted a *majority* of the population of Jerusalem.  In 1875, an Ottoman census of Jerusalem confirmed the Jewish majority in Jerusalem and another in 1905 showed Jews represented two-thirds of the Jerusalem population.





__





						Land Ownership in Palestine, 1880–1948 | survival
					






					lessons.myjli.com
				




While there are no precise totals on the extent of Arab immigration between the two World Wars, estimates vary between 60,000 and 100,000. The principal cause of the change of direction was Jewish development, which created new and attractive work opportunities and, in general, a standard of living previously unknown in the Middle East.

In the largely Jewish Haifa area the number of Arab peasants increased by 8 per cent a year during the same period. In the Jaffa and Ramla districts (heavily Jewish populated), the Arab rural population grew from 42,300 to some 126,000—an annual increase of 12 per cent, or more than four times as much as can be attributed to natural increase (L. Shimony, _The Arabs of Palestine,_ Tel-Aviv, 1947, pp. 422–23).

One reason for the Arab gravitation toward Jewish-inhabited areas, and from neighbouring countries to Palestine, was the incomparably higher wage scales paid there, as may be seen from the following table.


----------



## Jay Stone

Roudy said:


> Abraham was an Arab.  Ha ha ha.   Now I’ve heard it all.


It gets even more ridiculous: Jesus was a Palestinian.


----------



## Jay Stone

Open Bolt said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> True, but Moabite, Ammonite, and Edomite are Canaanite languages.
> 
> 
> 
> DNA shows that the Palestinians are not descended from Israelites, but it does show that the Palestinians are descended from the Canaanites.
> 
> Perhaps the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  Arabs are not from the area.
> 
> 
> 
> Archaeology shows that Bronze Age Canaanite culture collapsed and their descendants formed a number of smaller Iron Age cultures.
> 
> The two Israelite kingdoms were two of these Iron Age cultures.  Other Iron Age cultures to arise from the ashes of Bronze Age Canaan are the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that Hadrian guy (the same one who built the wall in the UK) expelled a lot of Jews against their will.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  And also the Ammonites and Edomites.
> 
> I speculate that the Palestinians are descended from the Moabites, Ammonites, or Edomites.


“As a whole, the Lebanese people have more genetic overlap with the Canaanites from Sidon than do other modern Middle Eastern populations such as Jordanians, Syrians or Palestinians.”

The DNA of ancient Canaanites lives on in modern-day Lebanese, genetic analysis shows


----------



## Open Bolt

Jay Stone said:


> “As a whole, the Lebanese people have more genetic overlap with the Canaanites from Sidon than do other modern Middle Eastern populations such as Jordanians, Syrians or Palestinians.”


Perhaps the Palestinians are indigenous to Jordan alone then.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Perhaps the Palestinians are indigenous to Jordan alone then.


Being Palestinian is a Nationality acquired in 1963-64 when Arafat set it up in Moscow with the KGB.

Palestinians are mostly Arabs.  Being Arabs means that their ancestors came from the Arabian Peninsula all the way to the end of the 19th century, or the first half of the 20th century.  

Hashemites are Arabs from Arabia.  They had no claim on TransJordan.  The British gave it to them in 1922 as a business deal.  TransJordan is part of the Jewish homeland which was part of the Mandate for Palestine, aka, Israel.

Each Arab clan will tell their story as coming from Arabia.  There are some who became Palestinians who are from Egypt, but are not Arabs.

There are also the Druse and the Bedouin.  Some live under the PA, others live as Israelis in Israel.

None of them is indigenous of Ancient Canaan.

You may be confusing the number of Arabs who are Palestinians because they fled Israel in 1948 who have been living in Jordan and make up the majority of the population.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> None of them is indigenous of Ancient Canaan.


DNA studies disagree.  They show the Palestinians as coming from non-Israeli Canaanites.  The Moabites and Ammonites look to me like likely ancestors.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> DNA studies disagree.  They show the Palestinians as coming from non-Israeli Canaanites.  The Moabites and Ammonites look to me like likely ancestors.


1) In order to actually be able to tell if any of the Palestinians is related to the Moabites or Ammonites, one would need the DNA of either tribe.
None exists, as not one member of those tribes has come forward in present times.  The same thing with the Philistines, Palestinians insist they are also descended from.

2) To say that some who call themselves Palestinians today may be descended from any ancient Canaanite is one thing.  But the Palestinians say that ALL of them are descended from ancient Canaanites.

3) Abbas latest version is that the Palestinians have been in Canaan for the past 10,000 years.  There is neither archeological or historical proof of that.


Choose any of the versions devised by the Palestinian leaders in the past 50 years.  They have not been able to come up with one ounce of proof so far.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street

Open Bolt said:


> DNA studies disagree.  They show the Palestinians as coming from non-Israeli Canaanites.  The Moabites and Ammonites look to me like likely ancestors.


*Sheldon Cooperstein*

The Jews originated as Aryans in Sumeria.  They were a MENSA group that invented the wheel, the sail, and all those beginnings of a technological boom that never developed beyond that for 6,000 years.  As happens in everybody's experience today, power-hungry Lower IQs got rich and dominant off Jewish inventions and purposely brainwashed their subjects to nerd-bash them.  So Abraham left.  The myth of Prometheus is all about them.

The way to interpret the contradictory descriptions of Ishmael in the Bible is that the Jews were captured and forced to learn Semitic.  Only after they escaped from that, led by Moses, did they start bashing Arabs.

Proof of their Indo-European descent is that Yahweh is pronounced practically the same way Jove is pronounced in Latin.  It is a reaction to a bloodthirsty Mongol invasion in the Caucasus areas, where the Jews originated (see Azerbaijan) and means "Get going; run for your lives!"


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> 1) In order to actually be able to tell if any of the Palestinians is related to the Moabites or Ammonites, one would need the DNA of either tribe.
> None exists, as not one member of those tribes has come forward in present times.


It would probably be possible to get ancient DNA samples from well-preserved graves.

But it really doesn't matter which group of Canaanites the Palestinians are descended from.  DNA shows that they were descended from Canaanites of some sort.




Sixties Fan said:


> The same thing with the Philistines, Palestinians insist they are also descended from.


They'd be wrong about that.  The Philistines were Greek invaders.




Sixties Fan said:


> 2) To say that some who call themselves Palestinians today may be descended from any ancient Canaanite is one thing.  But the Palestinians say that ALL of them are descended from ancient Canaanites.


DNA backs them up on that.  But the Palestinians are not from the West Bank area.  The Canaanites who are indigenous to the West Bank area are the Jewish people.  The Palestinians are descended from other Canaanites.




Sixties Fan said:


> 3) Abbas latest version is that the Palestinians have been in Canaan for the past 10,000 years.  There is neither archeological or historical proof of that.


I think it can be said that the Canaanites were around for at least that long.

That also means that the Jewish people have been in Canaan for the past 10,000 years.




Sixties Fan said:


> Choose any of the versions devised by the Palestinian leaders in the past 50 years.  They have not been able to come up with one ounce of proof so far.


The Palestinians have DNA studies linking them to the Canaanites, but not to the West Bank area Canaanites.


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *Sheldon Cooperstein*
> 
> The Jews originated as Aryans in Sumeria.  They were a MENSA group that invented the wheel, the sail, and all those beginnings of a technological boom that never developed beyond that for 6,000 years.  As happens in everybody's experience today, power-hungry Lower IQs got rich and dominant off Jewish inventions and purposely brainwashed their subjects to nerd-bash them.  So Abraham left.  The myth of Prometheus is all about them.
> 
> The way to interpret the contradictory descriptions of Ishmael in the Bible is that the Jews were captured and forced to learn Semitic.  Only after they escaped from that, led by Moses, did they start bashing Arabs.
> 
> Proof of their Indo-European descent is that Yahweh is pronounced practically the same way Jove is pronounced in Latin.  It is a reaction to a bloodthirsty Mongol invasion in the Caucasus areas, where the Jews originated (see Azerbaijan) and means "Get going; run for your lives!"


Religious Quack.  Total Quack.  Keep quacking.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> It would probably be possible to get ancient DNA samples from well-preserved graves.
> 
> But it really doesn't matter which group of Canaanites the Palestinians are descended from.  DNA shows that they were descended from Canaanites of some sort.
> 
> 
> 
> They'd be wrong about that.  The Philistines were Greek invaders.
> 
> 
> 
> DNA backs them up on that.  But the Palestinians are not from the West Bank area.  The Canaanites who are indigenous to the West Bank area are the Jewish people.  The Palestinians are descended from other Canaanites.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it can be said that the Canaanites were around for at least that long.
> 
> That also means that the Jewish people have been in Canaan for the past 10,000 years.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have DNA studies linking them to the Canaanites, but not to the West Bank area Canaanites.


Where would those graves be, and why have they not been exhumed so far?  The Palestinians would be clamoring for that, and looking all over as to where those two tribes would be buried.  So far, no interest at all.

You lack a knowledge of history.

Get back to me when you become better informed about it.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> Where would those graves be,


In Ammon and Moab.  Today they are in Jordan.




Sixties Fan said:


> and why have they not been exhumed so far?


Archaeological finds come when they come.




Sixties Fan said:


> The Palestinians would be clamoring for that, and looking all over as to where those two tribes would be buried.  So far, no interest at all.


Kingdoms, not tribes.




Sixties Fan said:


> You lack a knowledge of history.


That is incorrect.  I have a sound knowledge of history.


----------



## Jay Stone

Open Bolt said:


> Perhaps the Palestinians are indigenous to Jordan alone then.


Indigenous to many places—How come nobody is named al-Palestini?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jay Stone said:


> Indigenous to many places—How come nobody is named al-Palestini? View attachment 657577


Arabic does not have the letter P.  Therefore.....


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> In Ammon and Moab.  Today they are in Jordan.
> 
> 
> 
> Archaeological finds come when they come.
> 
> 
> 
> Kingdoms, not tribes.
> 
> 
> 
> That is incorrect.  I have a sound knowledge of history.


What is keeping the Jordanian government from digging for their graves?
Or any Palestinian organization in Jordan to start the excavation where they think those kingdoms were?


----------



## Jay Stone

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabic does not have the letter P.  Therefore.....


How come nobody is named al-Filastini? Arafat was Egyptian, not palestinian.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> What is keeping the Jordanian government from digging for their graves?
> Or any Palestinian organization in Jordan to start the excavation where they think those kingdoms were?


Nothing is preventing it.  But archaeology is usually done by scientists and not by governments.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> Nothing is preventing it.  But archaeology is usually done by scientists and not by governments.


There seems to be an unusual lack of interest in finding the graves or any archeology of those Kingdoms in Jordan by any Palestinian who lives there.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> There seems to be an unusual lack of interest in finding the graves or any archeology of those Kingdoms in Jordan by any Palestinian who lives there.


It doesn't seem that unusual.  I am also unaware of any Israelis clamoring to dig up graves of ancient Israelites so the DNA can prove Jewish ancestry.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Open Bolt said:


> It doesn't seem that unusual.  I am also unaware of any Israelis clamoring to dig up graves of ancient Israelites so the DNA can prove Jewish ancestry.


There is plenty of proof that Israelis are descended of ancient Israelites.

I cannot see the Muslims allowing for any DNA proof out of the Cave of the Patriarchs, or the Cemetery in Jerusalem, or the Tomb of Joseph or Rachel. Or any other Jewish tomb outside of Israel.  They have not called for any DNA proof to show that they, the Muslims, are also descended of Abraham.


There is plenty of archeology in Jordan which would lead to the finding of graves, or bones from that period:






						3000 Year Old Moabite Temple Found in Jordan - Associates for Biblical Research
					






					biblearchaeology.org
				




So, someday they will find someone's bones.  Until then.....


----------



## Roudy

Jay Stone said:


> It gets even more ridiculous: Jesus was a Palestinian.


Yeah, Jesus the Zionist circumcised Jew was a Palestinian at a time there was no Palestine.   

Also, did you know that the first thing that happened to Neil Armstrong did when stepping on the moon was he somehow heard the Muslim call to prayer, convert to Islam by stating Mohammad as the final messenger, then get on all fours and recite the Muslim prayer?  I have it from reliable sources that.Mr. Armstrong was also a Palestinian.

True story dude.


----------



## Roudy

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *Sheldon Cooperstein*
> 
> The Jews originated as Aryans in Sumeria.  They were a MENSA group that invented the wheel, the sail, and all those beginnings of a technological boom that never developed beyond that for 6,000 years.  As happens in everybody's experience today, power-hungry Lower IQs got rich and dominant off Jewish inventions and purposely brainwashed their subjects to nerd-bash them.  So Abraham left.  The myth of Prometheus is all about them.
> 
> The way to interpret the contradictory descriptions of Ishmael in the Bible is that the Jews were captured and forced to learn Semitic.  Only after they escaped from that, led by Moses, did they start bashing Arabs.
> 
> Proof of their Indo-European descent is that Yahweh is pronounced practically the same way Jove is pronounced in Latin.  It is a reaction to a bloodthirsty Mongol invasion in the Caucasus areas, where the Jews originated (see Azerbaijan) and means "Get going; run for your lives!"


Jews originated from the Aryans?! Do the Neo Nazis and White Supremacists know of this latest discovery?!









						Azerbaijan: A People from the Mists of Time - GeoHistory
					

Azerbaijan's name comes from the Persian words, azer, which means "fire" and baygan, which means "protector." The name was first applied in ancient times to




					geohistory.today
				



Azerbaijan's name comes from the Persian words, *azer, which means “fire” and baygan, which means “protector.”* The name was first applied in ancient times to the area around Baku, Azerbaijan's current capital.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Our treatment of the American Indians is shameful...a dark period in US history. That's why colonizing occupied territory is illegal. That's why we didn't let Iraq take over Kuwait even though Kuwait was once a province of Iraq.


The treatment of invading Arab Muslims of the indigenous people they conquered, their women, religions, cultures, history and languages?  Beyond horrifying.


----------



## Open Bolt

Sixties Fan said:


> There is plenty of proof that Israelis are descended of ancient Israelites.


The best proof that I know of is DNA results showing that modern day Jews are descended from ancient Canaanites.

The same DNA studies show that the Palestinians are also descended from ancient Canaanites, although from a different group of ancient Canaanites than the ones that modern Jews are descended from.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> The treatment of invading Arab Muslims of the indigenous people they conquered, their women, religions, cultures, history and languages?  Beyond horrifying.



The Arabs had trade relations from Mesopotamia to the Levant to East Africa and the Indus valley and lots of intermarriage long before Islam so most conversions we're not violent. They sold frankincense and myrrh to Herod and the pharaohs.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Arabs had trade relations from Mesopotamia to the Levant to East Africa and the Indus valley and lots of intermarriage long before Islam so most conversions we're not violent. They sold frankincense and myrrh to Herod and the pharaohs.


Nothing to do with who is indigenous. But it is proof that they were not of the region, they came into the area as traders, etc.

Jews went around trading all around Asia and Europe.  Would that make them also indigenous of the places where they ended up staying, be it in Europe or anywhere else in Asia.  Do they claim indigenous status to those places ?

The same with Chinese and Hindus, etc  who moved around doing trade, and then settled somewhere else in Asia or Europe.

Lots of intermarriage, according to what sources?  Most tribes everywhere remain secluded from others.  Individual ones, maybe.  But where is 

Did the Chinese and Hindu traders intermarry with Europeans.  Does that now make their descendants Indigenous Europeans with rights to Poland, or Belgium, England, etc?  

Roudy was referring to post 7th century Muslim invasion, not people who migrated here and there before that.

There weren't enough Arabs who moved to Canaan or married with any of the Canaanite Nations in order to turn most modern Arabs into Indigenous.
Simply because most Arabs moved into the area at the end of the 19th century or early 20th century, and ended up in a Mandate called Palestine, those Arabs know that they are not indigenous of the land, but moved into it only recently.

But the Arab leaders of today borrowed and are now using the word Palestinian to keep the Indigenous people ( the only ones who are still recognizable and recognized, the Jewish People .).....and only because of a religion founded in the 7th century......that religion, and those leaders have decided that the Indigenous people cannot hold sovereignty over their ancient homeland.


That is the only reason why there is a false dispute as to who is Indigenous to the Land of Israel, to any part of the Jewish Homeland which now is 80% in the hands of people who only 100 years ago  moved to the area and got the land because another foreign power gave it to them, against the Mandate they had for that Mandate to be for the Indigenous Jewish People.

Not one other Indigenous people of the area have shown themselves to claim any other part of the area.  The Moabites, Ammonites, etc.

And the Arabs have clearly not called themselves descended from any of the other Canaanite Nations, but started by saying that they were descendants of the Philistines, who were Greek Foreign invaders, and not locals.  With no proof, as usual, as there is none.


The Palestinians cannot prove indigenous status because they have none.
Al Husseini clan moved to the area in the 10th, 11th century.  It does not make them Indigenous of the area, even though Al Husseini himself is the one who became the leader against any Jewish rebuilding of their ancient Nation on their ancient Homeland.

The same goes for all others who call themselves Palestinians, whether they came with the Muslims in the 7th century invasion, or any time afterwards.

Born in the USA is not the same as being Indigenous of the continent.


Enough said.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Nothing to do with who is indigenous. But it is proof that they were not of the region, they came into the area as traders, etc.
> 
> Jews went around trading all around Asia and Europe.  Would that make them also indigenous of the places where they ended up staying, be it in Europe or anywhere else in Asia.  Do they claim indigenous status to those places ?
> 
> The same with Chinese and Hindus, etc  who moved around doing trade, and then settled somewhere else in Asia or Europe.
> 
> Lots of intermarriage, according to what sources?  Most tribes everywhere remain secluded from others.  Individual ones, maybe.  But where is
> 
> Did the Chinese and Hindu traders intermarry with Europeans.  Does that now make their descendants Indigenous Europeans with rights to Poland, or Belgium, England, etc?
> 
> Roudy was referring to post 7th century Muslim invasion, not people who migrated here and there before that.
> 
> There weren't enough Arabs who moved to Canaan or married with any of the Canaanite Nations in order to turn most modern Arabs into Indigenous.
> Simply because most Arabs moved into the area at the end of the 19th century or early 20th century, and ended up in a Mandate called Palestine, those Arabs know that they are not indigenous of the land, but moved into it only recently.
> 
> But the Arab leaders of today borrowed and are now using the word Palestinian to keep the Indigenous people ( the only ones who are still recognizable and recognized, the Jewish People .).....and only because of a religion founded in the 7th century......that religion, and those leaders have decided that the Indigenous people cannot hold sovereignty over their ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> That is the only reason why there is a false dispute as to who is Indigenous to the Land of Israel, to any part of the Jewish Homeland which now is 80% in the hands of people who only 100 years ago  moved to the area and got the land because another foreign power gave it to them, against the Mandate they had for that Mandate to be for the Indigenous Jewish People.
> 
> Not one other Indigenous people of the area have shown themselves to claim any other part of the area.  The Moabites, Ammonites, etc.
> 
> And the Arabs have clearly not called themselves descended from any of the other Canaanite Nations, but started by saying that they were descendants of the Philistines, who were Greek Foreign invaders, and not locals.  With no proof, as usual, as there is none.
> 
> 
> The Palestinians cannot prove indigenous status because they have none.
> Al Husseini clan moved to the area in the 10th, 11th century.  It does not make them Indigenous of the area, even though Al Husseini himself is the one who became the leader against any Jewish rebuilding of their ancient Nation on their ancient Homeland.
> 
> The same goes for all others who call themselves Palestinians, whether they came with the Muslims in the 7th century invasion, or any time afterwards.
> 
> Born in the USA is not the same as being Indigenous of the continent.
> 
> 
> Enough said.



27,000 Arabs settled in Samaria around 700 BC. The Akkadians and Amorites were Arabs. Midianites were Arabs. Assyrians we're Arabs.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> 27,000 Arabs settled in Samaria around 700 BC. The Akkadians and Amorites were Arabs. Midianites were Arabs. Assyrians we're Arabs.


Even IF they were Arabs, none of their descendants has shown up to claim their identity or their ancestors land.  Which they would not get as the Muslims would refuse to acknowledge them just as they refuse to acknowledge the Jews.

And coming from Arabia does not make one an Arab 3000 years ago.  
You do not wish to accept that the Akkadians were not Arabs, and others may not have been Arabs either, that is on you.

Are the English the same as the Polish?
Are the Apaches the same as any of the other 500 plus First Nations in the America?

You know that they are not, and that not all people who lived in Arabia were ethnically, etc Arabs.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Even IF they were Arabs, none of their descendants has shown up to claim their identity or their ancestors land.  Which they would not get as the Muslims would refuse to acknowledge them just as they refuse to acknowledge the Jews.
> 
> And coming from Arabia does not make one an Arab 3000 years ago.
> You do not wish to accept that the Akkadians were not Arabs, and others may not have been Arabs either, that is on you.
> 
> Are the English the same as the Polish?
> Are the Apaches the same as any of the other 500 plus First Nations in the America?
> 
> You know that they are not, and that not all people who lived in Arabia were ethnically, etc Arabs.



LOL 😂 the Arabs have always acknowledged the Jews. You're pitiful.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> LOL 😂 the Arabs have always acknowledged the Jews. You're pitiful.


Of course.  Especially when they started the lie about the Jews being converts from the Kazars, they were definitely acknowledging that the Jews who were rebuilding Israel were the Indigenous People of the land.

Especially when they started lying about there being no Jewish history in the region called Palestine, in Jerusalem, they were acknowledging the Jews.

What is your deceit about all of this called?


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> The Arabs had trade relations from Mesopotamia to the Levant to East Africa and the Indus valley and lots of intermarriage long before Islam so most conversions we're not violent. They sold frankincense and myrrh to Herod and the pharaohs.


The “Arabs“ invaded people and committed genocide upon them, and forced them into their religion at the point of the sword, raped their women, looted and pillaged, changed their language, rewrote their history, destroyed their culture, and took Black Africans as slaves. In fact they started the slave trade way before the White Europeans did.  Do you think the sword that is on the Saudi Arabian flag but a symbol of Islam is because it represents peacefulness and co existence? 

Let me know if you would like a list of the people the Arabs invaded, raped, and looted.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Roudy said:


> The “Arabs“ invaded people and committed genocide upon them, and forced them into their religion at the point of the sword, raped their women, looted and pillaged, changed their language, rewrote their history, destroyed their culture, and took Black Africans as slaves. In fact they started the slave trade way before the White Europeans did.  Do you think the sword that is on the Saudi Arabian flag but a symbol of Islam is because it represents peacefulness and co existence?
> 
> Let me know if you would like a list of the people the Arabs invaded, raped, and looted.


This is for another thread.  Which is what I pointed out to Surada.
She is referring to people who moved to Mesopotamia and other places in Canaan as being Arabs, when those like the Akkadians did not view themselves as such, and did not even speak Arabic.

She insists that they are Indigenous to Palestine, when the Akkadians came from nowhere in Arabia and their Empire was in Mesopotamia.  Long gone now.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> The Arabs had trade relations from Mesopotamia to the Levant to East Africa and the Indus valley and lots of intermarriage long before Islam so most conversions we're not violent. They sold frankincense and myrrh to Herod and the pharaohs.



Everyone had trade relations with India,
does it mean Africa and Mecca belong to them?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> LOL 😂 the Arabs have always acknowledged the Jews. You're pitiful.



The Jiziyah is specifically to be paid - with humiliation.
Same bully attitude assumed in your view of minorities.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Everyone had trade relations with India,
> does it mean Africa and Mecca belong to them?



Dilmun was the connection. They've found thousands of clay tablets about inventories and trade deals as well as the original flood myth. Much older than Judaism. They were trading in pearls, textiles, dates and salt with Mesopotamia, Palestine and Egypt.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Under Sharia, the Jiziyah is specifically to be paid - with humiliation.


Nope. Only able-bodied men pay jizya and only if they won't fight to defend the community. It's like buying your way out of military service.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Dilmun was the connection. They've found thousands of clay tablets about inventories and trade deals as well as the original flood myth. Much older than Judaism. They were trading in pearls, textiles, dates and salt with Mesopotamia, Palestine and Egypt.



Nice gibberish to evade addressing a simple question.
Does trade with India mean Mecca belongs to them?
Or you wanna go further claim that also
the Egyptians were Arabs?

There's no mention of Arabs until 9th BCE so...
according to your concept, its Copts who should have Medina.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Nope. Only able-bodied men pay jizya and only if they won't fight to defend the community. It's like buying your way out of military service.



But why does it have to be done specifically with humiliation?
If that is what you mean by Arab 'acknowledgment'...

This is one of the examples of Arab imperialism.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> 27,000 Arabs settled in Samaria around 700 BC. The Akkadians and Amorites were Arabs. Midianites were Arabs. Assyrians we're Arabs.



If you claim Arabs settled in 700 BC,
why do you need to rewrite the history
of civilizations before the appearance of Arabs?

Does it justify Arab rule over the Middle East and Africa?


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> If you claim Arabs settled in 700 BC,
> Why do you the need to rewrite the history
> of civilizations before the appearance of Arabs?
> 
> Does it justify Arab rule over the Middle East and Africa?



Your problem is that there are millions more Arabs than Jews. Do you want to change their religion or just claim their land too?


Abraham and Moses both had Arab wives long before the four Arab tribes were settled in Samaria.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Your problem is that there are millions more Arabs than Jews. Do you want to change their religion or just claim their land too?
> 
> 
> Abraham and Moses both had Arab wives long before the four Arab tribes were settled in Samaria.



See, eventually your argument goes to imperialism against minorities,
rather than having anything to do indigenous rights, your argument is
fundamentally against indigenous nations.

As for your second claim it neither makes sense,
because there were no Arabs at the time,
Mosheh Rabbenu's wife was Kushite.

Arabs supremacists simply won't admit they crave
for an exclusive domination over the entire Middle East...


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Your problem is that there are millions more Arabs than Jews.


That doesn't give Arabs any right to steal Jewish land and religious sites.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> That doesn't give Arabs any right to steal Jewish land and religious sites.



Muslims and Christians revere the patriarchs. Jews were living all over before the birth of Christ... Alexandria, Damascus, Rome, Aleppo, Baghdad, Elephantine island, Persia and all around the Mediterranean sea.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Muslims and Christians revere the patriarchs. Jews were living all over before the birth of Christ... Alexandria, Damascus, Rome, Aleppo, Baghdad, Elephantine island, Persia and all around the Mediterranean sea.


None of that gives anyone the right to steal Jewish land and religious sites.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Muslims and Christians revere the patriarchs. Jews were living all over before the birth of Christ... Alexandria, Damascus, Rome, Aleppo, Baghdad, Elephantine island, Persia and all around the Mediterranean sea.


Muslims do not revere the Patriarchs.  They appropriated the Patriarchs, along with everything else which is Jewish, and then called their version of a religion as having surpassed Judaism.

That is called contempt for Judaism, the same contempt Christianity has, which was borrowed by Islam.

They revere the Patriarchs and keep destroying the Tombs of Rachel and Joseph?  Or any Jewish History evidence in Israel, Judea, Samaria, or anywhere else?

Do not give us this "Jews lived all over", so did everyone else.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Muslims do not revere the Patriarchs.  They appropriated the Patriarchs, along with everything else which is Jewish, and then called their version of a religion as having surpassed Judaism.
> 
> That is called contempt for Judaism, the same contempt Christianity has, which was borrowed by Islam.
> 
> They revere the Patriarchs and keep destroying the Tombs of Rachel and Joseph?  Or any Jewish History evidence in Israel, Judea, Samaria, or anywhere else?
> 
> Do not give us this "Jews lived all over", so did everyone else.



Why do you think that they left Palestine?  I see your hatred extends to Christian's too. That's pathetic.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Why do you think that they left Palestine?  I see your hatred extends to Christian's too. That's pathetic.


Who left Palestine?
Check with your shrink about seeing hatred everywhere.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Muslims and Christians revere the patriarchs. Jews were living all over before the birth of Christ... Alexandria, Damascus, Rome, Aleppo, Baghdad, Elephantine island, Persia and all around the Mediterranean sea.



Muslims don't revere them, they exploit their figures
to spread the lie they were Muslims, try to ban
Jews and destroy their graves.

Yes, living in those places  Jews don't claim they belong to them,
meaning they're not indigenous to those places.

Which contradicts your assumptions that Arabs have any right
to rule over the numerous indigenous nations 
in the Middle  East and Africa.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> Why do you think that they left Palestine?  I see your hatred extends to Christian's too. That's pathetic.


It was also wrong for Xtian crusaders to steal Jewish land and holy sites.

The crusaders should have stuck to their mandate of protecting the Byzantine Empire from Islamic aggression.  Imagine history if the Byzantine Empire had continued to stand as a bulwark against Islam.

Although... Dracula did an excellent job of curtailing Islamic aggression into Europe after the Byzantine Empire fell.  _That_ was a guy who knew what to do to Muslims when they attack your country.  It's a shame he couldn't have been resurrected and placed in charge of America's war on terror.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> It was also wrong for Xtian crusaders to steal Jewish land and holy sites.
> 
> The crusaders should have stuck to their mandate of protecting the Byzantine Empire from Islamic aggression.  Imagine history if the Byzantine Empire had continued to stand as a bulwark against Islam.
> 
> Although... Dracula did an excellent job of curtailing Islamic aggression into Europe after the Byzantine Empire fell.  _That_ was a guy who knew what to do to Muslims when they attack your country.  It's a shame he couldn't have been resurrected and placed in charge of America's war on terror.



America got a lot of help in the war against terrorism. Do you know any Arabs or Muslims?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> America got a lot of help in the war against terrorism. Do you know any Arabs or Muslims?


Stop changing the subject, everyone.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Nope. I don't have a problem with a Jewish state at all. I have a problem with the Zionists taking more land than they were given.
> 
> The temple was destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans not the Arabs. The Haram Al Shariff has been there nearly 1400 years. It no longer belongs to the Jews. You know the law.



Funny, I don't think going against the hegemony and
kicking Arab tuches is exactly being given something.
Every land in the Levant freed from Arab rule,
is actually blessed liberation.

It were the Arabs who colonized the place with another mosque,
as a sign of their submitting the region to their hegemony.
Neither appealing to law when referring to Sharia,
a relevant argument for Arab hegemony
over indigenous nations.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Stop changing the subject, everyone.



Okay. You want to concentrate on your victim status.





rylah said:


> Funny, I don't think going against the hegemony and
> kicking Arab tuches is exactly being given something.
> Every land in the Levant freed from Arab rule,
> is actually blessed liberation.
> 
> It were the Arabs who colonized the place with another mosque,
> as a sign of their submitting the region to their hegemony.
> Neither appealing to law when referring to Sharia,
> a relevant argument for Arab hegemony
> over indigenous nations.



Get real. Look what you did to Lebanon.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Okay. You want to concentrate on your victim status.
> 
> Get real. Look what you did to Lebanon.


Now you are really showing yourself to be a fool.
If you cannot convince others that your words are right, and they are only words, than you go on your learned nonsense.

You know nothing about Lebanon history and it is not going to be discussed here.  Start your own thread about it.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Okay. You want to concentrate on your victim status.
> 
> Get real. Look what you did to Lebanon.



Seriously, that's your argument for the success
or any justice in the Arab Islamist rule over Lebanon?

Indeed look how short it took to
turn into another failed Arab state...
another argument for why better less of those
in the Middle East, Africa and specifically the Levant.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Seriously, that's your argument the success
> or any justice in the Arab Islamist rule over Lebanon?
> 
> Indeed look how short it took for it to turn
> into another failed Arab state...



You created enough refugees to flip their demographic in 1948 and in 1967


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Seriously, that's your argument for the success
> or any justice in the Arab Islamist rule over Lebanon?
> 
> Indeed look how short it took to
> turn into another failed Arab state...



Lebanon hasn't been getting US foreign aid since 1948.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> You created enough refugees to flip their demographic in 1948 and in 1967



There're currently numerous conflicts
between Arabs themselves that make these
less than a drop in the ocean. In fact the main cause of
losses and deaths in the region are Arabs killing other Arabs.

Another reason why Arab hegemony is unjust to indigenous minorities.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> There're currently numerous conflict
> between Arabs themselves that make these
> less than a drop in the ocean. In fact the main cause of
> losses and deaths in the region is Arabs killing other Arabs.



For instance?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Lebanon hasn't been getting US foreign aid since 1948.


Are you incapable of starting your own thread about it?

Jews, like most people, migrated to other places. From China, to Arabia, to India, to North Africa, to Europe in the olden days.

They moved to those lands keeping their religion, not imposing that religion on anyone else, living with the other people in those lands. Even taken by force to Babylon and Rome, they did not later attempt to colonize and take over those lands. 

Jews did not mistreat other peoples, attack them, steal from them, force them to accept Judaism as theirs.

And that is totally the opposite of what happened both with Christianity first, and then Islam.

Jews were seen as betrayers of both new religions, and mistreated at every turn.

Arabs, unlike the Jews, moved outside of Arabia to conquer the land and the people, to colonize every place they took, force Islam and Arabic on the population.

The History if Christianity is exactly the same with Spain and England making most of the conquest from 1492 on,  forcing Christianity and their languages on the New World populations.


Insist all you want that the Jews are the ones who have taken land from others and are the colonizers of their own ancient homeland.

It does not pass the smell test.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> For instance?



Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, name it...
Majority of Arab refugees and deaths
are caused under Arab rule.

Only a handful are not a total failure.
What is called the 'Arab world' is the
largest illiterate group on earth.

Another argument why Arab imperialism
has no moral standing to any rule over
the greater indigenous civilizations.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Are you incapable of starting your own thread about it?
> 
> Jews, like most people, migrated to other places. From China, to Arabia, to India, to North Africa, to Europe in the olden days.
> 
> They moved to those lands keeping their religion, not imposing that religion on anyone else, living with the other people in those lands. Even taken by force to Babylon and Rome, they did not later attempt to colonize and take over those lands.
> 
> Jews did not mistreat other peoples, attack them, steal from them, force them to accept Judaism as theirs.
> 
> And that is totally the opposite of what happened both with Christianity first, and then Islam.
> 
> Jews were seen as betrayers of both new religions, and mistreated at every turn.
> 
> Arabs, unlike the Jews, moved outside of Arabia to conquer the land and the people, to colonize every place they took, force Islam and Arabic on the population.
> 
> The History if Christianity is exactly the same with Spain and England making most of the conquest from 1492 on,  forcing Christianity and their languages on the New World populations.
> 
> 
> Insist all you want that the Jews are the ones who have taken land from others and are the colonizers of their own ancient homeland.
> 
> It does not pass the smell test.



So why leave Palestine?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You created enough refugees to flip their demographic in 1948 and in 1967


Al Husseini and his riots and incitement against the Indigenous Jewish people caused the refugee issues on both sides.  Dare to forget how Jews were expelled in 1925, 1929, 1948 from their rightful homes.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> So why leave Palestine?


Jews never left Palestine.  They left Israel and Judea.  Just as the Chinese left China, the Hindus left India.  Because they wanted to, because they could, and they had every right to do so, and they remained Indigenous to the places they left.

Unlike the Arabs, who because of Israel, have decided that they are Indigenous of every place they have invaded,  conquered and colonized.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, name it...
> Majority of Arab refugees and deaths
> are caused under Arab rule.



Yemen has been overrun with terrorists from Afghanistan and Sudan. Libya was dominated by Gaddafi who was very much like Trump for 40 years. The invasion of Iraq was the top priority for Bibi Netanyahu.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Al Husseini and his riots and incitement against the Indigenous Jewish people caused the refugee issues on both sides.  Dare to forget how Jews were expelled in 1925, 1929, 1948 from their rightful homes.








						Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
					

Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online



					www.theatlantic.com
				




You have a very twisted history.





Sixties Fan said:


> Jews never left Palestine.  They left Israel and Judea.  Just as the Chinese left China, the Hindus left India.  Because they wanted to, because they could, and they had every right to do so, and they remained Indigenous to the places they left.
> 
> Unlike the Arabs, who because of Israel, have decided that they are Indigenous of every place they have invaded,  conquered and colonized.


Lol that's a lie.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You have a very twisted history.
> Lol that's a lie.


You have no knowledge of history, period.  And that is not a laughing matter.

Let me put the question back to you.

Why did the Arabs leave the Arabian Peninsula, especially after the 7th century?  Why did the Al Husseini clan leave Arabia around the 10th, 11th century CE?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
> 
> 
> Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have a very twisted history.
> Lol that's a lie.


Which is a lie, you do not make it clear.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> You have a very twisted history.
> Lol that's a lie.


No lie.  Everything he said is true.


----------



## surada

Open Bolt said:


> No lie.  Everything he said is true.








						Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
					

Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online



					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
> 
> 
> Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have a very twisted history.
> Lol that's a lie.


You believe history as told by an article which says that the Jews were "Almost a Nation". ?????


You are the rewriting of history that you read.

And that is all on you.  Your choices make the beliefs you want to have at all costs.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Yemen has been overrun with terrorists from Afghanistan and Sudan. Libya was dominated by Gaddafi who was very much like Trump for 40 years. The invasion of Iraq was the top priority for Bibi Netanyahu.



With Arab supremacists the failures and mass degradation,
are always someone else fault, no one needs this,
its becoming increasingly irrelevant,
not to say morally unjust to the
people in the region under
the Arab hegemony.









						A Note on Arabic Literacy and Translation - ALTA Language Services
					

Greece annually translates five times more books from English than the entire Arab world, and currently, 65 million Arab adults are illiterate. These



					www.altalang.com


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> With Arab supremacists failures and mass degradation,
> are always someone else fault, no one needs this,
> its becoming increasingly irrelevant,
> not to say morally unjust to the
> people in the region under
> the Arab yoke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Note on Arabic Literacy and Translation - ALTA Language Services
> 
> 
> Greece annually translates five times more books from English than the entire Arab world, and currently, 65 million Arab adults are illiterate. These
> 
> 
> 
> www.altalang.com



Yes, the European Zionists always considered themselves superior.






						Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
					

Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online



					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Yes, the European Zionists always considered themselves superior.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
> 
> 
> Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com


Neither European nor Middle Easter Zionists
ever claimed title to exclusive domination
over the entire Middle East and Africa.

There's no merit to mass illiteracy,
result of Arab hegemony.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Yes, the European Zionists always considered themselves superior.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zionist Aspirations in Palestine - 20.07
> 
> 
> Atlantic Unbound: The Atlantic Monthly Magazine Online
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com


You want to believe that European Jews thought of themselves as being superior, when all they were doing was responding to the increasing attacks on Jews, taking of their rights, etc, and decided that it was enough and they got the legal chance to rebuild their Nation ON their ancient homeland.  That is not land stealing, grabbing, etc as all Arabs and Europeans have done with Arabia, Asia, African and the Americas.

And that article was written by a hater of Jews, in 1920, one who could care less to give the Jews the respect they deserved to have.

A Christian writes a hateful essay on Jews and the lack of rights he believes Jews have, and you believe every word of it.

He cared about Jews just as much as Al Husseini did in 1920, and both did their bit to keep the Jews from rebuilding their Nation on their ancient homeland .

Shame of them and on you, follower of those who have no brains, no heart, no decency .


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You want to believe that European Jews thought of themselves as being superior, when all they were doing was responding to the increasing attacks on Jews, taking of their rights, etc, and decided that it was enough and they got the legal chance to rebuild their Nation ON their ancient homeland.  That is not land stealing, grabbing, etc as all Arabs and Europeans have done with Arabia, Asia, African and the Americas.
> 
> And that article was written by a hater of Jews, in 1920, one who could care less to give the Jews the respect they deserved to have.
> 
> A Christian writes a hateful essay on Jews and the lack of rights he believes Jews have, and you believe every word of it.
> 
> He cared about Jews just as much as Al Husseini did in 1920, and both did their bit to keep the Jews from rebuilding their Nation on their ancient homeland .
> 
> Shame of them and on you, follower of those who have no brains, no heart, no decency .



 Nope. He didn't hate Jews either. Aren't you disappointed? The European immigrants always told the Arabs they were superior. First to organize and complain about the flood of socialists was Palestinian Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. He didn't hate Jews either. Aren't you disappointed disappointed?


How can you tell?  Did you meet him, speak to him?  Did you bother to read the article at all?  Everything he writes is correct based on what?


----------



## rylah

*Vineyards and Judean Indigenous Struggle

*


----------



## rylah

Ever wonder why Islam doesn't
celebrate harvest festivals?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. He didn't hate Jews either. Aren't you disappointed? The European immigrants always told the Arabs they were superior. First to organize and complain about the flood of socialists was Palestinian Jews.


Nonsense .  You have no proof of it except for someone wanting others to believe that.
More nonsense about Indigenous Jews complaining about their fellow European Jews.  And you do insist in calling European Jews socialists.
Well learned.  Well trained.


----------



## Roudy

rylah said:


> Everyone had trade relations with India,
> does it mean Africa and Mecca belong to them?


Speaking of India, here Is what Arab Muslims did to the indigenous Sikhs and Hindus.









						Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History | SikhNet
					

The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the ISIS, Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India.




					www.sikhnet.com
				




*Quotes from modern historians*

Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:

“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.

The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).“

He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:

“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”  

Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):

“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”

Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:

“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”

Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:

“From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”​


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Nope. He didn't hate Jews either. Aren't you disappointed? The European immigrants always told the Arabs they were superior. First to organize and complain about the flood of socialists was Palestinian Jews.


Written by A Brit positioned with the Mandate for Palestine

_ Zionist Aspirations in Palestine_, by H. Anstruther Mackay (Military Governor of Ramleh, Palestine); The Atlantic Monthly, July 1920.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> How can you tell?  Did you meet him, speak to him?  Did you bother to read the article at all?  Everything he writes is correct based on what?



I practically know if by heart. You found sanctuary in Palestine when no one else would take you in and then proceeded to demonize and abuse the natives.


----------



## rylah

Sixties Fan said:


> How can you tell?  Did you meet him, speak to him?  Did you bother to read the article at all?  Everything he writes is correct based on what?



What do you expect from Arab supremacists
marching into Jihad under a British invented flag...


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> I practically know if by heart. You found sanctuary in Palestine when no one else would take you in and then proceeded to demonize and abuse the natives.


The Arabs are not Natives to Palestine, and the abuse was from Colonizing Arabs towards the Indigenous Jews, from everywhere outside Arabia to North Africa.

Change it all you want.   European Jews are bad.  Nobody wanted them.
(You are confusing when ZIonism started with post Holocaust as most do )

Yes, you devoured that nonsense a Jew hater wrote in 1920, because he did not agree with Jews having the right to their own nation, and believed that the Arabs, not the Jews, had Native  calling rights.

And never mind the Native Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews who lived on the land.  And all the Jews from Europe and elsewhere who migrated back to their homeland in the previous decades, actually centuries.

Not ONE group of Jews had the right to rebuild their Nation ON their ancient homeland.

If one Brit says it, it must be true.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> I practically know if by heart. You found sanctuary in Palestine when no one else would take you in and then proceeded to demonize and abuse the natives.



Was it 'giving a sanctuary' when Arabs who can't even pronounce P - alestine,
expelled all the local Jewish communities from their holy cities?

Arabs should thank Israelis for no doing to them
what Arabs would do to other Arabs
in response to that.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> The Arabs are not Natives to Palestine, and the abuse was from Colonizing Arabs towards the Indigenous Jews, from everywhere outside Arabia to North Africa.
> 
> Change it all you want.   European Jews are bad.  Nobody wanted them.
> (You are confusing when ZIonism started with post Holocaust as most do )
> 
> Yes, you devoured that nonsense a Jew hater wrote in 1920, because he did not agree with Jews having the right to their own nation, and believed that the Arabs, not the Jews, had Native  calling rights.
> 
> And never mind the Native Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews who lived on the land.  And all the Jews from Europe and elsewhere who migrated back to their homeland in the previous decades, actually centuries.
> 
> Not ONE group of Jews had the right to rebuild their Nation ON their ancient homeland.
> 
> If one Brit says it, it must be true.



Oh yes poor Herzl. What a tragic family. The Jewish population of Palestine was tiny in 1870 according to the Ottoman census... And they didn't bother counting the Bedouin.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Oh yes poor Herzl. What a tragic family. The Jewish population of Palestine was tiny in 1870 according to the Ottoman census... And they didn't bother counting the Bedouin.


You are bulldozing the conversation with this nonsense.

Nothing to do with Herzl's family.
Nothing to do with the number of Jews.

It was about the Right, as the indigenous people of the land, the Jews had to legally acquire the rights to rebuild THEIR nation, ON their ancient homeland.

And many Arab clans were for it.  But were defeated by the Al Huseini clan.

A peaceful co existence would have happened, if only those Arab clans had prevailed over the Al Husseinis.

Keep counting sheep, if that makes you happy, but it has never been about numbers.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Was it 'giving a sanctuary' when Arabs who can't even pronounce P - alestine
> expelled all the local Jewish communities from their holy cities?



The Arab Jews left in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. They weren't exactly expelled... There were some Zionists agitators. Jews were still in Libya in 73. Too bad really. Bad for everyone.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Arab Jews left in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. They weren't exactly expelled... There were some Zionists agitators. Jews were still in Libya in 73. Too bad really. Bad for everyone.


There is no such thing as an Arab Jew, unless they were ethically Arabs who converted to Judaism .

And you keep changing the conversation.

Let us go back to WHO is indigenous to the land of Israel/Palestine.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You are bulldozing the conversation with this nonsense.
> 
> Nothing to do with Herzl's family.
> Nothing to do with the number of Jews.
> 
> It was about the Right, as the indigenous people of the land, the Jews had to legally acquire the rights to rebuild THEIR nation, ON their ancient homeland.
> 
> And many Arab clans were for it.  But were defeated by the Al Huseini clan.
> 
> A peaceful co existence would have happened, if only those Arab clans had prevailed over the Al Husseinis.
> 
> Keep counting sheep, if that makes you happy, but it has never been about numbers.



You guys have changed tactics. Now you blame the Mufti instead of Hitler for the Holocaust.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You guys have changed tactics. Now you blame the Mufti instead of Hitler for the Holocaust.


Who the heck is discussing the Holocaust here?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> The Arab Jews left in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. They weren't exactly expelled... There were some Zionists agitators. Jews were still in Libya in 73. Too bad really. Bad for everyone.



Those whom Arab supremacists call now 'Arab Jews',
were never enough 'Arab' for them, and they were the ones
who's plight during Arab pogroms initiated the Zionist movement.

Loss to Arab supremacist ambitions,
and a gain for progress of civilization.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> There is no such thing as an Arab Jew, unless they were ethically Arabs who converted to Judaism .
> 
> And you keep changing the conversation.
> 
> Let us go back to WHO is indigenous to the land of Israel/Palestine.



Lol so now you're an ethnicity?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Arab Jews left in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. They weren't exactly expelled... There were some Zionists agitators. Jews were still in Libya in 73. Too bad really. Bad for everyone.


No, some were not expelled.  They ran for their lives, as well as they could, in operations especially created to save Jews who did not have how to get out of those Arab conquered lands.

Jews who had lived on those lands longer than any Arab, or the Arab invasion of the 7th Century.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Lol so now you're an ethnicity?


You really know nothing.

You do not know the difference between a Race and an Ethnicity.
You do not know what Jews are.

Wait, you continue to know nothing.  How does that happen?  Why?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Lol so now you're an ethnicity?



And earth is a sphere...

Of course, by definition, an ethnic minority.
Simply shows you know zilch about the subject.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You guys have changed tactics. Now you blame the Mufti instead of Hitler for the Holocaust.


And your definition of tactics is .....?


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> I practically know if by heart. You found sanctuary in Palestine when no one else would take you in and then proceeded to demonize and abuse the natives.


Hah?  Palestine was controlled by the Ottoman Muslims, who invited the Jews back to what they considered as their ancestral and religious homeland, and then then by the Brits, who then agreed to create a Jewish homeland, and then another one called Transjordan for the fake Palestinians who were really Arab nomads and squatters.  So nobody “took us in”.  Speaking of demonizing,  there was a Mufti who was Nazi and on Hitler’s payroll who wanted to do a second Holocaust on the Jews in their religious, cultural and ancestral homeland. He then instigated riots and genocides by demonizing the Jews using Nazi blood libel techniques.  Of course your Islaminazi Mufti was also a murderer of Christians in the region, and he did pronounce that once they were done killing all the Saturday people, they would continue with the Sunday people, aka Christians.  You really need to stop repeating Islamonazi prpoganda rooted in antisemitism.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Oh yes poor Herzl. What a tragic family. The Jewish population of Palestine was tiny in 1870 according to the Ottoman census... And they didn't bother counting the Bedouin.


I proved to you that Jews enjoyed a majority in Jerusalem during the Ottoman era,  and you keep repeating the same lie. The Ottomans weren't necessarily fans of the Arabs until very late since they considered them competition and did fight with them.


----------



## Open Bolt

surada said:


> I practically know if by heart. You found sanctuary in Palestine when no one else would take you in and then proceeded to demonize and abuse the natives.


That is exactly backwards.  The only natives of the West Bank area are the Jews.




surada said:


> The Arab Jews left


No such thing.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Oh yes poor Herzl. What a tragic family. The Jewish population of Palestine was tiny in 1870 according to the Ottoman census... And they didn't bother counting the Bedouin.


There was no place Palestine in the Ottoman Empire. There were no Palestinians. Jewish population was indigenous.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> There was no place Palestine in the Ottoman Empire. There were no Palestinians. Jewish population was indigenous.



In the 12th century BC it was called  P.alashu .



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/28/dueling-histories-debate-over-historic-palestine/


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> There was no place Palestine in the Ottoman Empire. There were no Palestinians. Jewish population was indigenous.



The Jews are just as indigenous to Palestine as the Assyrians and the Canaanites.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> The Jews are just as indigenous to Palestine as the Assyrians and the Canaanites.



Know what _'Palestine'_ means in the native language?







Indigenous means a *distinct civilization *in its specific place of origin.
Neither Assyria a Levantene civilization, nor Canaanites were even Semites.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> The Jews are just as indigenous to Palestine as the Assyrians and the Canaanites.


Um, Assyrians and Canaanites are extinct. Except, Jews, who are living links to Canaanites, as Israelites were Canaanites.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> In the 12th century BC it was called  P.alashu .
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/28/dueling-histories-debate-over-historic-palestine/


Assyrians called the area between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea “Bit Humri,” referring to Israelite King Omri.

Expedition Magazine - Penn Museum


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Um, Assyrians and Canaanites are extinct. Except, Jews, who are living links to Canaanites, as Israelites were Canaanites.



They aren't extinct. They're the ancestors of the Palestinians


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> In the 12th century BC it was called  P.alashu .
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/28/dueling-histories-debate-over-historic-palestine/





surada said:


> They aren't extinct. They're the ancestors of the Palestinians


No. Rashid Khalidi acknowledges palestinians have no links to ancient peoples…


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> Know what _'Palestine'_ means in the native language?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indigenous means a *distinct civilization *in its specific place of origin.
> Neither Assyria a Levantene civilization, nor Canaanites were even Semites.



Palestine has nothing to do with the philistines..  They were there before the Sea people. It's reference is Palashu.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> No. Rashid Khalidi acknowledges palestinians have no links to ancient peoples…
> 
> View attachment 691936



DNA says he's wrong.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> In the 12th century BC it was called  P.alashu .
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/28/dueling-histories-debate-over-historic-palestine/


Assyrians referred to Philistines as Palastu. Philistines were raiders from the Greek world known as Sea Peoples, and Palastu designated the Mediterranean coast inhabited by Philistines. Not Palestine and not Palestinians.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Palestine has nothing to do with the philistines..  They were there before the Sea people. It's reference is Palashu.


Philistines gave the name Palestine to the area, specifically the Mediterranean coast they occupied.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> DNA says he's wrong.


Philistines were related to Greeks and were Sea Peoples. Scholars say Philistine genes help solve biblical mystery


----------



## Uncensored2008

MartyNYC said:


> There was no place Palestine in the Ottoman Empire. There were no Palestinians. Jewish population was indigenous.



Oh, Hezbollah Hannah knows that. She's just a Muslim Supremacist who will - and does - tell any lie to further the dream of a Caliphate.

Palestine under the Ottomans was a REGION, like the mid-West the South.

As you noted, there has never in the history of the world been a nation or country of Palestine, and never have their been Palestinian people - until Arafat invented them as part of the Muslim supremacist movement.

What liars for Allah like Hezbollah Hannah  - that is surada distort is that Ottoman Palestine included all of Jordan, all of Israel, all of Lebanon, and southern Syria. Muslim supremacists focus on Israel simply because it isn't under Muslim rule. 

That Balfour declaration gave Lebanon to the Christians, Israel to the Jews, Jordan to the Arabs, and carved out modern Syria for the Arabs as well - since Muslims long since murdered all the actual Assyrians.

Muslim supremacists like Hezbollah Hannah engaged in a terrorist war to overthrow Christian Lebanon - leaving only tiny Israel not under the dominion of Islam. Muhammad is an angry and jealous god - he will not abide even one grain of sand that is not ruled by Muslims.

Surada and other Muslim supremacists like her, will lie, murder, cheat, and wage war to impose Muslim dominance on any land that was ever invaded by the Caliphate. That includes Spain, Portugal, France, etc. 

If the Muslim supremacists were to ever conquer Israel, they will turn their efforts to Europe - where they already have millions of fighters ready to die for their filthy god Muhammad and the two-bit Djin Allah.


----------



## MartyNYC

Uncensored2008 said:


> Oh, Hezbollah Hannah knows that. She's just a Muslim Supremacist who will - and does - tell any lie to further the dream of a Caliphate.
> 
> Palestine under the Ottomans was a REGION, like the mid-West the South.
> 
> As you noted, there has never in the history of the world been a nation or country of Palestine, and never have their been Palestinian people - until Arafat invented them as part of the Muslim supremacist movement.
> 
> What liars for Allah like Hezbollah Hannah  - that is surada distort is that Ottoman Palestine included all of Jordan, all of Israel, all of Lebanon, and southern Syria. Muslim supremacists focus on Israel simply because it isn't under Muslim rule.
> 
> That Balfour declaration gave Lebanon to the Christians, Israel to the Jews, Jordan to the Arabs, and carved out modern Syria for the Arabs as well - since Muslims long since murdered all the actual Assyrians.
> 
> Muslim supremacists like Hezbollah Hannah engaged in a terrorist war to overthrow Christian Lebanon - leaving only tiny Israel not under the dominion of Islam. Muhammad is an angry and jealous god - he will not abide even one grain of sand that is not ruled by Muslims.
> 
> Surada and other Muslim supremacists like her, will lie, murder, cheat, and wage war to impose Muslim dominance on any land that was ever invaded by the Caliphate. That includes Spain, Portugal, France, etc.
> 
> If the Muslim supremacists were to ever conquer Israel, they will turn their efforts to Europe - where they already have millions of fighters ready to die for their filthy god Muhammad and the two-bit Djin Allah.





Uncensored2008 said:


> Oh, Hezbollah Hannah knows that. She's just a Muslim Supremacist who will - and does - tell any lie to further the dream of a Caliphate.
> 
> Palestine under the Ottomans was a REGION, like the mid-West the South.
> 
> As you noted, there has never in the history of the world been a nation or country of Palestine, and never have their been Palestinian people - until Arafat invented them as part of the Muslim supremacist movement.
> 
> What liars for Allah like Hezbollah Hannah  - that is surada distort is that Ottoman Palestine included all of Jordan, all of Israel, all of Lebanon, and southern Syria. Muslim supremacists focus on Israel simply because it isn't under Muslim rule.
> 
> That Balfour declaration gave Lebanon to the Christians, Israel to the Jews, Jordan to the Arabs, and carved out modern Syria for the Arabs as well - since Muslims long since murdered all the actual Assyrians.
> 
> Muslim supremacists like Hezbollah Hannah engaged in a terrorist war to overthrow Christian Lebanon - leaving only tiny Israel not under the dominion of Islam. Muhammad is an angry and jealous god - he will not abide even one grain of sand that is not ruled by Muslims.
> 
> Surada and other Muslim supremacists like her, will lie, murder, cheat, and wage war to impose Muslim dominance on any land that was ever invaded by the Caliphate. That includes Spain, Portugal, France, etc.
> 
> If the Muslim supremacists were to ever conquer Israel, they will turn their efforts to Europe - where they already have millions of fighters ready to die for their filthy god Muhammad and the two-bit Djin Allah.



Not all Muslims…


----------



## Uncensored2008

surada said:


> They aren't extinct. They're the ancestors of the Palestinians


There are no "Palestinians."

There are Arabs, who migrated from North Africa.  The Assyrians, Medes, Hittites, Persians - all were white. The Arabs engaged in genocide and killed them all - save a smattering of Persians in Iran - but they are nearly displaced by Arabs as well.


----------



## Uncensored2008

MartyNYC said:


> Not all Muslims…
> View attachment 691942


Not all Muslims - all Muslim supremacists.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Philistines were related to Greeks and were Sea Peoples. Scholars say Philistine genes help solve biblical mystery



Yes, I know that they came from the Greek islands, but they aren't the ancestors of the Palestinians. They were in Canaan much earlier.


----------



## MartyNYC

Uncensored2008 said:


> Not all Muslims - all Muslim supremacists.


Quran wrote about Solomon’s Temple and even synagogues. Denying Jews’ historical ownership of Israel is denying the Quran.


----------



## surada

Uncensored2008 said:


> There are no "Palestinians."
> 
> There are Arabs, who migrated from North Africa.  The Assyrians, Medes, Hittites, Persians - all were white. The Arabs engaged in genocide and killed them all - save a smattering of Persians in Iran - but they are nearly displaced by Arabs as well.



Have you never heard of the Akkadian empire? They migrated from Arabia long before Islam or Judaism.  Arabs are not a race, but they are white especially in the interior where they didn't mix with East Africans.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Have you never heard of the Akkadian empire? They migrated from Arabia long before Islam or Judaism.  Arabs are not a race, but they are white especially in the interior where they didn't mix with East Africans.


Renowned scholar Bernard Lewis: “In recent years a new doctrine has been developed in Arab countries. Arab historiography has extended the Arab identity to all or nearly all Semitic peoples. In terms of scholarship there is no evidence whatsoever that Canaanites were Arabs.”


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Quran wrote about Solomon’s Temple and even synagogues. Denying Jews’ historical ownership of Israel is denying the Quran.
> 
> View attachment 691947



Yes, Muslims revere all the patriarchs including King Solomon.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Have you never heard of the Akkadian empire? They migrated from Arabia long before Islam or Judaism.  Arabs are not a race, but they are white especially in the interior where they didn't mix with East Africans.


There is no such thing as "White".  All are considered to be Caucasians.

And AGAIN, Akkadians were not Arabs, no matter how many millions of times you may repeat that false saying.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Yes, Muslims revere all the patriarchs including King Solomon.


Solomon was an Israelite.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Yes, Muslims revere all the patriarchs including King Solomon.


Islam stole Jewish History .  Period.
2400 years without knowing or caring about Jewish history, and all of a sudden, Mohammad is descended of the Patriarchs.

Stop this useless conversation, which only allows Surada to keep repeating her endless love for the "Palestinians", who are Arabs from Arabia and NOT indigenous of the Land of Canaan, Israel


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Yes, I know that they came from the Greek islands, but they aren't the ancestors of the Palestinians. They were in Canaan much earlier.


Palestinians are Arabs, according to their charter. Their ancestors are Adnan and Qahtan, in the Arabian peninsula.


----------



## MartyNYC

Sixties Fan said:


> There is no such thing as "White".  All are considered to be Caucasians.
> 
> And AGAIN, Akkadians were not Arabs, no matter how many millions of times you may repeat that false saying.


Of course, Akkadians were not Arabs. Modern Arab nationalists claim all ancient civilizations were Arabs.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Renowned scholar Bernard Lewis: “In recent years a new doctrine has been developed in Arab countries. Arab historiography has extended the Arab identity to all or nearly all Semitic peoples. In terms of scholarship there is no evidence whatsoever that Canaanites were Arabs.”



Bernard Lewis is Jewish??





MartyNYC said:


> Of course, Akkadians were not Arabs. Modern Arab nationalists claim all ancient civilizations were Arabs.



The Akkadians

 were Arabs from Arabia.. Arabs began migrating North in waves 10,000 years ago as Arabia became more arid









						Alas, poor Bernard Lewis, a fellow of infinite jest
					

On Bernard Lewis and ‘his extraordinary capacity for getting everything wrong’.




					www.aljazeera.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Bernard Lewis is Jewish??
> 
> The Akkadians
> 
> were Arabs from Arabia.. Arabs began migrating North in waves 10,000 years ago as Arabia became more arid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alas, poor Bernard Lewis, a fellow of infinite jest
> 
> 
> On Bernard Lewis and ‘his extraordinary capacity for getting everything wrong’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aljazeera.com


You do know that what you are AGAIN typing is a lie.  For the sheer fact that there is another thread about the 10,000 years you are repeating, which only started being said a few years ago by Abbas, or another Arab.

Not once have you been able to show any archeological, etc evidence of this mass migration.

Fools believe that.  Because they want to, because they have to.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You do know that what you are AGAIN typing is a lie.  For the sheer fact that there is another thread about the 10,000 years you are repeating, which only started being said a few years ago by Abbas, or another Arab.
> 
> Not once have you been able to show any archeological, etc evidence of this mass migration.
> 
> Fools believe that.  Because they want to, because they have to.



I'm not an Arab. I do know that there's more to the history of Palestine than Jewish history.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> I'm not an Arab. I do know that there's more to the history of Palestine than Jewish history.


Of course there is MORE to the history of Ancient Canaan than Jewish History.

Jews do not deny or destroy any history of other people in the area, no matter how back it goes.

BUT, it is the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians since 1964 CE who have been intent in denying and destroying any history of the land, and claim that there is only Palestinian History on the land.

You cannot deny that the Arabs have been doing that, as there is plenty of evidence of it.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

MartyNYC said:


> Um, Assyrians and Canaanites are extinct. Except, Jews, who are living links to Canaanites, as Israelites were Canaanites.


Canaanites? Yes.  Assyrians?  Not extinct.  There are estimated 2-5 millions Assyrians living in the Middle East.


----------



## Uncensored2008

surada said:


> Have you never heard of the Akkadian empire? They migrated from Arabia long before Islam or Judaism.  Arabs are not a race, but they are white especially in the interior where they didn't mix with East Africans.


Arabs are the nomadic people from North Africa who invaded the Middle East in the 3rd century AD during the great drought. Arabs have zero relationship to the original inhabitants of those lands. Arabs are invaders. The original people were genetically linked to Greeks, Turks, and Persians,

The only claim Arabs have to any of those lands is through conquest


----------



## Uncensored2008

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Canaanites? Yes.  Assyrians?  Not extinct.  There are estimated 2-5 millions Assyrians living in the Middle East.



Those are Arabs living in Syria - the Assyrians are indeed extinct - slaughtered by the Arabs that now occupy what was their homeland.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Uncensored2008 said:


> Arabs are the nomadic people from North Africa who invaded the Middle East in the 3rd century AD during the great drought. Arabs have zero relationship to the original inhabitants of those lands. Arabs are invaders. The original people were genetically linked to Greeks, Turks, and Persians,
> 
> The only claim Arabs have to any of those lands is through conquest


Arabs are from the Arabian Peninsula.  They mostly invaded many parts of the world after Islam was founded in the 7th Century CE.  The first ones to invade and conquer were the Muslim Kurds, not Arabs.  They went from Arabia, all the way west to Southern Spain after a few centuries.

What original people were genetically linked to Greeks, Turks and Persians ?

The Phillistines were originally from the Greek Islands.   Persians were invaders to Canaan, from Iran/ Persia.  The Turks are a much later invader, aka, the Ottomans.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Uncensored2008 said:


> Those are Arabs living in Syria - the Assyrians are indeed extinct - slaughtered by the Arabs that now occupy what was their homeland.


Assyrians are very much around today.  

*Assyrians* (ܣܘܪ̈ܝܐ, _Sūrāyē/Sūrōyē_) are an ethnic group indigenous to Assyria, a region located in the Middle East.[Note 1] Some Assyrians self-identify as Syriacs,[Note 2] Chaldeans,[Note 3] or Arameans.[Note 4] They are speakers of the Neo-Aramaic branch of Semitic languages as well as the primary languages in their countries of residence.[53] Modern Assyrians are Syriac Christians who claim descent from Assyria, one of the oldest civilizations in the world, dating back to 2500 BC in ancient Mesopotamia.[54]









						Assyrian people - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Uncensored2008

Sixties Fan said:


> Arabs are from the Arabian Peninsula.  They mostly invaded many parts of the world after Islam was founded in the 7th Century CE.  The first ones to invade and conquer were the Muslim Kurds, not Arabs.  They went from Arabia, all the way west to Southern Spain after a few centuries.
> 
> What original people were genetically linked to Greeks, Turks and Persians ?
> 
> The Phillistines were originally from the Greek Islands.   Persians were invaders to Canaan, from Iran/ Persia.  The Turks are a much later invader, aka, the Ottomans.


Arabs migrated to the middle east 4 centuries before Islam arose.  They came up from mostly Libya and Egypt.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Stupid debate. My grandparents are from Germany, England, and Scotland.

Does that mean that I am not American?


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> Stupid debate. My grandparents are from Germany, England, and Scotland.
> 
> Does that mean that I am not American?


Last I heard, USA is a sovereign nation. 

Not so with the undefined territory called Pal'istan.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> Last I heard, USA is a sovereign nation.
> 
> Not so with the undefined territory called Pal'istan.


The US can be a nation even though we are from all over the place, but Palestine cannot be a nation because they are from all over the place.

You don't make any sense.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> The US can be a nation even though we are from all over the place, but Palestine cannot be a nation because they are from all over the place.
> 
> You don't make any sense.


You need to keep up.


----------



## Uncensored2008

P F Tinmore said:


> Stupid debate. My grandparents are from Germany, England, and Scotland.
> 
> Does that mean that I am not American?



No, but it does mean you can't demand the American Indians leave because this is your homeland.

And be clear, that is basically what the Arabs are doing in Israel, demanding the original people leave - well die actually - because they invaded in the 11th century and that makes it theirs.

The original people took their homeland back - you still have 99% of all the land - chill.


----------



## Sixties Fan

[ A reminder of  Conquests by Arabs ]

The initial Arab conquests are described and dated: Palestine and Syria (634–6); Persian Mesopotamia (636–40); northern Mesopotamia and south‐west Armenia (640); Khuzistan (640–2); Egypt (641–3); Iran (642–52). The unification of Arabia, achieved in the two years following the Prophet's death in 632, and Meccan organizational capability are identified as key factors in these early successes. Attention then turns to the Mediterranean where both sides dispatched naval expeditions against each other, ending with a grand Arab offensive targeted on Constantinople in 654. Failure there and reverses elsewhere helped trigger civil war in the caliphate (656–61). Mu‘awiya is shown to have imposed his authority with much bloodshed after ‘Ali's assassination in 658. Meanwhile Constans II (641–69) is seen preparing the rump of the Roman empire (customarily called Byzantium) for a long defensive war, and intervening first in Transcaucasia (660–1), then in the central Mediterranean (662–9).









						15 The Middle East in the Seventh Century: Arab Conquests
					

Abstract. The initial Arab conquests are described and dated: Palestine and Syria (634–6); Persian Mesopotamia (636–40); northern Mesopotamia and south‐west Arm




					academic.oup.com


----------



## Uncensored2008

Sixties Fan said:


> [ A reminder of  Conquests by Arabs ]
> 
> The initial Arab conquests are described and dated: Palestine and Syria (634–6); Persian Mesopotamia (636–40); northern Mesopotamia and south‐west Armenia (640); Khuzistan (640–2); Egypt (641–3); Iran (642–52). The unification of Arabia, achieved in the two years following the Prophet's death in 632, and Meccan organizational capability are identified as key factors in these early successes. Attention then turns to the Mediterranean where both sides dispatched naval expeditions against each other, ending with a grand Arab offensive targeted on Constantinople in 654. Failure there and reverses elsewhere helped trigger civil war in the caliphate (656–61). Mu‘awiya is shown to have imposed his authority with much bloodshed after ‘Ali's assassination in 658. Meanwhile Constans II (641–69) is seen preparing the rump of the Roman empire (customarily called Byzantium) for a long defensive war, and intervening first in Transcaucasia (660–1), then in the central Mediterranean (662–9).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 The Middle East in the Seventh Century: Arab Conquests
> 
> 
> Abstract. The initial Arab conquests are described and dated: Palestine and Syria (634–6); Persian Mesopotamia (636–40); northern Mesopotamia and south‐west Arm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> academic.oup.com



I'm curious, you are normally a whackjob, fascist democrat. The democrats are rabid Anti-Semites.

So what the hell are you doing here being all rational and shit?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Arabs get a DNA test​


----------



## Uncensored2008

P F Tinmore said:


> Arabs get a DNA test​



These are all Brits who have intermingled - meaningless.


----------



## MartyNYC

Uncensored2008 said:


> Arabs migrated to the middle east 4 centuries before Islam arose.  They came up from mostly Libya and Egypt.


Earliest Arab tribes date back to about 500 CE. Islamic calendar started in 622 CE. Arabs originated in the Arabian peninsula. Now you know.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Stupid debate. My grandparents are from Germany, England, and Scotland.
> 
> Does that mean that I am not American?



It means you're an American citizen.

There's a difference between citizenship and indigeneity.

Arab supremacists blur the difference to claim entitled to all of Middle East.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Arabs get a DNA test​



Do Arab supremacists intentionally
confuse their racial ideology
with indigeneity?


----------



## Friends2

The land of Israel belongs to the Children of Israel. The non Christian Palestinians should have been deported after Israel's victory in the 1967 Six Day War.


----------



## P F Tinmore

The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
The people who lived there before the Hebrews came up from Egypt.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
> The people who lived there before the Hebrews came up from Egypt.


No.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?​
> The people who lived there before the Hebrews came up from Egypt.



Ironically your definition of indigeneity revolves around
the historic Hebrew association with the land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> Ironically your definition of indigeneity revolves around
> the historic Hebrew association with the land.


Or lack thereof.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Or lack thereof.



When Hebrew arrival is the sole determination of indigeneity,
how is that lack of historic association?


----------



## MartyNYC

Jews have among the longest histories—if not the longest—as a distinct people with a continuous identity.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> Or lack thereof.


Ancient Jewish community who created the Dead Sea Scrolls almost 300 years before the birth of Jesus… 

The Dead Sea Scrolls | PBS LearningMedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

MartyNYC said:


> Jews have among the longest histories—if not the longest—as a distinct people with a continuous identity.


So have almost everyone else living there.

Virtually none of today's Israelis have any ancestors from the Holy Land.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Jews have among the longest histories—if not the longest—as a distinct people with a continuous identity.



Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .


How stupid can you be?
It's obvious people were living before Jews.
Sometimes I wonder about you.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .



Is that a scholarly analysis?


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> So have almost everyone else living there.
> 
> Virtually none of today's Israelis have any ancestors from the Holy Land.



I suggest you read JVL. You might learn something.


----------



## Mindful

Indeependent said:


> How stupid can you be?
> It's obvious people were living before Jews.
> Sometimes I wonder about you.



Only sometimes?


----------



## surada

Mindful said:


> Is that a scholarly analysis?



Nope. It's just the truth.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> Nope. It's just the truth.



Non answer.


----------



## surada

Friends2 said:


> The land of Israel belongs to the Children of Israel. The non Christian Palestinians should have been deported after Israel's victory in the 1967 Six Day War.



On the word of Abraham who was likely a fictional character.


----------



## surada

Mindful said:


> Non answer.



Arabs existed long before Islam. Is that what's hanging you up?


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Arabs existed long before Islam. Is that what's hanging you up?


You always come up with false similarities. 

Akkadians were not Arabs.  Too many times told.  But you do not care. Coming from a semi Peninsula does not make all who live there the same people.

What was Zipporah's Arab name?

On the words of all people until Israel was legally re-created, rebuilt, reconstructed,  and then Christians and Muslims decided that the Land of Israel could NOT ever ......belong to the Jews again.  AGAIN.


You continue to have nothing.  Continue to want to prove what cannot be proven.  Palestinians are Arabs whose indigenous homeland is the Arabian Peninsula and not the land which brought the world , unfortunately, Christianity and Islam.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You always come up with false similarities.
> 
> Akkadians were not Arabs.  Too many times told.  But you do not care. Coming from a semi Peninsula does not make all who live there the same people.
> 
> What was Zipporah's Arab name?
> 
> On the words of all people until Israel was legally re-created, rebuilt, reconstructed,  and then Christians and Muslims decided that the Land of Israel could NOT ever ......belong to the Jews again.  AGAIN.
> 
> 
> You continue to have nothing.  Continue to want to prove what cannot be proven.  Palestinians are Arabs whose indigenous homeland is the Arabian Peninsula and not the land which brought the world , unfortunately, Christianity and Islam.



Zipporah is an Arab name. The Akkadians migrated from the Arabian peninsula.

Zipporah was a Midianite.









						Midianite | Definition & Facts
					

Midianite,  in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to the Israelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main...



					www.britannica.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Zipporah is an Arab name. The Akkadians migrated from the Arabian peninsula.
> 
> Zipporah was a Midianite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midianite | Definition & Facts
> 
> 
> Midianite,  in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to the Israelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main...
> 
> 
> 
> www.britannica.com


You are reading too many Arabian Nights stories:

Zipporah, a *Hebrew name*, appears in the Christian Old Testament and Jewish Bible as the wife of Moses. It's a variation of the names Zippora and Tzipporah and means "bird," so it's perfect for a little girl with a free spirit.
---------------------------
*Zipporah*, or *Tzipora* (/ˈzɪpərə, zɪˈpɔːrə/; Hebrew: צִפּוֹרָה, _Ṣīppōrā_, "bird"),[a]is mentioned in the Book of Exodus as the wife of Moses, and the daughter of Reuel/Jethro, the priest and prince of Midian.[2]

She is the mother of Moses' two sons: Eliezer, and Gershom.

In the Book of Chronicles, two of her grandsons are mentioned: Shebuel, son of Gershom; and Rehabiah, son of Eliezer (1 Chronicles 23:16–17).

--------------
Are the Midianites Arabs now, too?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> You are reading too many Arabian Nights stories:
> 
> Zipporah, a *Hebrew name*, appears in the Christian Old Testament and Jewish Bible as the wife of Moses. It's a variation of the names Zippora and Tzipporah and means "bird," so it's perfect for a little girl with a free spirit.
> ---------------------------
> *Zipporah*, or *Tzipora* (/ˈzɪpərə, zɪˈpɔːrə/; Hebrew: צִפּוֹרָה, _Ṣīppōrā_, "bird"),[a]is mentioned in the Book of Exodus as the wife of Moses, and the daughter of Reuel/Jethro, the priest and prince of Midian.[2]
> 
> She is the mother of Moses' two sons: Eliezer, and Gershom.
> 
> In the Book of Chronicles, two of her grandsons are mentioned: Shebuel, son of Gershom; and Rehabiah, son of Eliezer (1 Chronicles 23:16–17).
> 
> --------------
> Are the Midians Arabs now, too?



The Midianites were Arabs thru Ishmael.









						Midianite | Definition & Facts
					

Midianite,  in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to the Israelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main...



					www.britannica.com


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Midianites were Arabs thru Ishmael.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midianite | Definition & Facts
> 
> 
> Midianite,  in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to the Israelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main...
> 
> 
> 
> www.britannica.com


Ishmael's mother was Egyptian and he married an Egyptian.

Deal with it.

Arabs suddenly discovered a relation to Jews 2400 years after the fact?

No.  They appropriated everything from Judaism, just as Christianity did, in order to he the 3rd and "final" religion "chosen" by the god they decided to follow.

How slow are the people from the Arabian Peninsula that it takes them 2400 years, and Christians from Europe converting people in Arabia to "find" a relation to Judaism?


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> Zipporah is an Arab name. The Akkadians migrated from the Arabian peninsula.
> 
> Zipporah was a Midianite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midianite | Definition & Facts
> 
> 
> Midianite,  in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), member of a group of nomadic tribes related to the Israelites and most likely living east of the Gulf of Aqaba in the northwestern regions of the Arabian Desert. They engaged in pastoral pursuits, caravan trading, and banditry, and their main...
> 
> 
> 
> www.britannica.com


Tzippora means Bird in Hebrew, you nitwit.


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> So have almost everyone else living there.
> 
> Virtually none of today's Israelis have any ancestors from the Holy Land.


Jews are genetically linked and linked to the Middle East: Published in the American Journal of Human Genetics, the primary journal of the American Society of Human Genetics, the leading society for genetics in the world.

https://www.cell.com/ajhg/pdf/S0002-9297(10)00246-6.pdf

“This study demonstrates that the studied Jewish populations represent a series of geographical isolates or clusters with genetic threads that weave them together. Over the past 3000 years, both the flow of genes and the flow of religious and cultural ideas have contributed to Jewishness.”


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .


Um, no. Earliest Arab tribes date to around 500 CE, according to Arab historians. Arab self-identity did not form until the Islamic period. Middle Ages, not ancient history. Jewish self-identity and Jews identified by other people as Jews date back 1,500+ years earlier.

Sennacherib Prism, 7th century BCE: “King Hezekiah The Jew”

ANE TODAY - 201808 - Why Did Sennacherib Create Two Accounts of His Siege of Lachish? - American Society of Overseas Research (ASOR)


----------



## DGS49

For all practical purposes, the people who had lived in "Palestine" (never an actual country) in, say, 1947, would reasonably be considered "indigenous," regardless of their ethnic/racial background.  The unfortunate fact is that most of the Arab-indigenous people fled those lands in or around 1947, and now fit into the bizarre category of "Palestinian refugees," even though they are mostly several generations removed from those who initially fled.  And the flight was entirely voluntary; the Jewish State did not expel them, they just left.

The more important question is, so what?  What rights should indigenous people have that are superior to the rights of those who came later and are now citizens of Israel?  The land of Palestine before 1947 was a part of the Ottoman Empire, was it not? And the Ottoman Empire no longer exists.  I see no legitimate rights attached to indigenous status.  If you are in that category, I suggest you take it up with Turkey.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .


If Abraham had an Arab family, that would be a big deal recorded in Arabian records including Arabs’ Quran which mentions Abraham: But, no.


----------



## MartyNYC

DGS49 said:


> For all practical purposes, the people who had lived in "Palestine" (never an actual country) in, say, 1947, would reasonably be considered "indigenous," regardless of their ethnic/racial background.  The unfortunate fact is that most of the Arab-indigenous people fled those lands in or around 1947, and now fit into the bizarre category of "Palestinian refugees," even though they are mostly several generations removed from those who initially fled.  And the flight was entirely voluntary; the Jewish State did not expel them, they just left.
> 
> The more important question is, so what?  What rights should indigenous people have that are superior to the rights of those who came later and are now citizens of Israel?  The land of Palestine before 1947 was a part of the Ottoman Empire, was it not? And the Ottoman Empire no longer exists.  I see no legitimate rights attached to indigenous status.  If you are in that category, I suggest you take it up with Turkey.


Arafat was born and educated in Egypt.


----------



## MartyNYC

Indeependent said:


> How stupid can you be?
> It's obvious people were living before Jews.
> Sometimes I wonder about you.


Only Jews have survived to today.


----------



## Sixties Fan

DGS49 said:


> For all practical purposes, the people who had lived in "Palestine" (never an actual country) in, say, 1947, would reasonably be considered "indigenous," regardless of their ethnic/racial background.  The unfortunate fact is that most of the Arab-indigenous people fled those lands in or around 1947, and now fit into the bizarre category of "Palestinian refugees," even though they are mostly several generations removed from those who initially fled.  And the flight was entirely voluntary; the Jewish State did not expel them, they just left.
> 
> The more important question is, so what?  What rights should indigenous people have that are superior to the rights of those who came later and are now citizens of Israel?  The land of Palestine before 1947 was a part of the Ottoman Empire, was it not? And the Ottoman Empire no longer exists.  I see no legitimate rights attached to indigenous status.  If you are in that category, I suggest you take it up with Turkey.


Palestinians are NOT indigenous of the Land of Israel/Palestine.

Your first part is totally wrong, and belongs on the other thread about the creation of Israel.

Polish people living in Germany are not indigenous of Germany, but of Poland.


Arabs/Palestinians living in the Land of Israel are indigenous of the Arabian Peninsula, and not from the Land of Israel, or any other part outside of that Peninsula.

Do not confuse being indigenous with being born on any part of the world and living there .


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

MartyNYC said:


> If Abraham had an Arab family, that would be a big deal recorded in Arabian records including Arabs’ Quran which mentions Abraham: But, no.


There is no such thing as an Arab Quran.  The Quran is Muslim, not Arab.  Egyptian Coptic Christians are Arab and not Muslim.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> Arabs existed long before Islam. Is that what's hanging you up?



Arabs and Islam. Is that an oxymoron?

Nothing’s hanging me up. It seems to be the case with you.

Maybe the word Jew?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Indeependent said:


> Sometimes I wonder about you.





			idf shooting children - Google Search
		

-


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .


“Arabs” were moon worshipping lizard eaters from the Saudi Arabian peninsula that became civilized, when they invaded other peoples and lands and hijacked their history and culture as their own. Sure, there was an an Islamic Golden Age at some point where many contributions were made, but that is after they were done invading, conquering and raping.  They are no different than the barbarian European crusaders and inquisitors, who were in essence a reaction to the Arab / Islamic invasions of Europe.


----------



## MartyNYC

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> There is no such thing as an Arab Quran.  The Quran is Muslim, not Arab.  Egyptian Coptic Christians are Arab and not Muslim.


Quran was originally written in Arabic, it boasts of being in Arabic, published in Arabia intended for an Arab audience by an Arab religious figure. Most Muslims are not Arabs and are not fluent in Arabic, and read translations of the Quran which Islamic scholars say are inauthentic.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> idf shooting children - Google Search


3,000th palestinian child has free heart surgery provided by Israeli charity. “Everyone here in Gaza talks about how Israeli doctors are the most professional in the world and that they can be trusted completely.”









						3,000th Palestinian child has heart operation in Israel through Save a Child’s Heart
					

At 5, Amir Yichya Mabchuch receives heart surgery through organization on Sunday; child's mother says Gazans know Israeli doctors 'can be trusted completely'




					www.timesofisrael.com


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> idf shooting children - Google Search


Arab commentator acknowledges Israeli military is careful to avoid civilian casualties

Al-Jazeera TV Host: Syrian Army Should Take Lesson from Israel in Protecting Civilians


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> idf shooting children - Google Search


Arab commentator: Hamas uses Gazans as human shields and targets Israeli civilians, and they steal the foreign aid 

Vienna-Based Syrian Journalist Thaer Al-Nashef: Hamas Uses Civilians As Human Shields; Hamas Leaders Split Gaza Rehabilitation Aid Among Themselves


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> idf shooting children - Google Search
> 
> 
> -


Prominent Muslim physician and human rights activist Dr. Qanta Ahmed: IDF‘s humanity is an example for the Islamic world 
Lessons From the IDF in Haiti: Opportunities in Global Health Diplomacy for the Muslim World

.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> “Arabs” were moon worshipping lizard eaters from the Saudi Arabian peninsula that became civilized, when they invaded other peoples and lands and hijacked their history and culture as their own. Sure, there was an an Islamic Golden Age at some point where many contributions were made, but that is after they were done invading, conquering and raping.  They are no different than the barbarian European crusaders and inquisitors, who were in essence a reaction to the Arab / Islamic invasions of Europe.



Have you ever been outside the US?


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Have you ever been outside the US?


Arabs were worshipping rocks and burying babies alive when Jews had the 10 Commandments.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Arabs were worshipping rocks and burying babies alive when Jews had the 10 Commandments.



Just about every culture exposed baby girls. Judaism was a gradual thing up until about 500 BC.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Just about every culture exposed baby girls. Judaism was a gradual thing up until about 500 BC.


Jewish Bible prohibits murder, in general, and child sacrifice in particular.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Jewish Bible prohibits murder, in general, and child sacrifice in particular.



I know. So does Islam. Sargon was an Arab.


----------



## Indeependent

watchingfromafar said:


> idf shooting children - Google Search
> 
> 
> -


Shooting children wearing bombs!!!


----------



## surada

Indeependent said:


> Shooting children wearing bombs!!!



That's a myth.


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> That's a myth.


It's a myth that it's a myth.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> I know. So does Islam. Sargon was an Arab.


Can you show me even 1 legitimate history book saying Sargon was an Arab? No, I didn’t think so.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Have you ever been outside the US?


I have been and know far more than you can imagine.  I can speak six languages.  Besides, the point I made does not require one to have gone outside of the US.  You just disqualify yourself when you respond with whining instead of facts.


----------



## Roudy

MartyNYC said:


> Can you show me even 1 legitimate history book saying Sargon was an Arab? No, I didn’t think so.


Her Arab friends and the imam and the mosque told her so it must be true.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> I have been and know far more than you can imagine.  I can speak six languages.  Besides, the point I made does not require one to have gone outside of the US.  You just disqualify yourself when you respond with whining instead of facts.



Cool. Sargon was Sargon of Akkad.. the Akkadians were Arabs from the Arabian peninsula. They were semites. Do you recall that Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria around 500 BC?


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Cool. Sargon was Sargon of Akkad.. the Akkadians were Arabs from the Arabian peninsula. They were semites. Do you recall that Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria around 500 BC?


Arabs from Arabia were moon god worshipping savages. Before Islam came. Mohammad broke their idols and made them wash their hands before they ate and prayed because they ate with the same hands that they had just wiped their asses with, which by the way were religious hygiene laws that Mohammad stole from the ancient Jews of Arabia, before he betrayed and massacred them and used their stolen wealth  to fund his invasions and pillaging of other peoples and nations, which you people then called “ Arab”.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> Arabs from Arabia were moon god worshipping savages. Before Islam came. Mohammad broke their idols and made them wash their hands before they ate and prayed because they ate with the same hands that they had just wiped their asses with, which by the way were religious hygiene laws that Mohammad stole from the ancient Jews of Arabia, before he betrayed and massacred them and used their stolen wealth  to fund his invasions and pillaging of other peoples and nations, which you people then called “ Arab”.



There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


----------



## MartyNYC

Roudy said:


> Her Arab friends and the imam and the mosque told her so it must be true.


The imam also believes an Arab caravan hijacker with 11+ wives was the greatest prophet.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Oil is a natural resource. Arab countries are among the most backward and illiterate in the world, while Israel is among the most highly educated and technologically advanced.

“Israel The Economic Miracle”: “Israel is the fastest-growing and one of the most dynamic, entrepreneurial, and innovation-based economies on the planet.”


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Saudi investor is the largest shareholder in Israeli mobility intelligence company. “We like the innovation and technology culture of Israel,” said Muhammad Asif Seemab…

Saudi Family Office Builds Largest Stake in Israel’s Otonomo


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Arab commentator: Israel has made miracles happen out of the impossible, becoming an advanced country, as the Arab world is stuck in failure!

Syrian Journalist Thaer Al-Nashef: Israel Does Not Groom Arab Dictators; Arab Societies Are Responsible for Their Own Fate


----------



## MartyNYC

MartyNYC said:


> Arab commentator: Israel has made miracles happen out of the impossible, becoming an advanced country, as the Arab world is stuck in failure!
> 
> Syrian Journalist Thaer Al-Nashef: Israel Does Not Groom Arab Dictators; Arab Societies Are Responsible for Their Own Fate





surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Thaer Al Nashef: “When we Arabs look at Israel, an advanced country, we must ask ourselves, ‘How come the Jews have excelled?’ They proved to the world they are a people able to make miracles out of the impossible.”

Syrian Journalist Thaer Al-Nashef: Israel Does Not Groom Arab Dictators; Arab Societies Are Responsible for Their Own Fate


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Arab writer: Arabs are backward and constitute nothing in achievement. …

Algerian Author Anwar Malek: The Arabs Have Lost Their Worth, Their Humanity, and Their Culture


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Lebanese commentator: Arabs are a backward people wallowing in backwardness. Not even Third World—Tenth World! 

Lebanese TV Host Juomana Haddad on Racism in the Arab World: We Are Tenth, not Third, World; We're Wallowing in Our Own Backwardness


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


“Israel Technology Capital Of The World” 

What makes Israel the tech capital of the world? - CapX


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Dr. Ritesh Malik: How Israel has become one of the most advanced countries in the world


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Google CEO: Israel Second Only To Silicon Valley 

Google chief says Israeli tech second only to Silicon Valley


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Ahmad Al-Sarraf: “Israel has outdone us in everything: Democracy, human rights & freedom, science & technology, economics, military, becoming an advanced, respected country.”

The day we failed to learn from it - Kuwait Times


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


“Execs from Facebook, Google, & Microsoft Explain Why They Use Israel For Their R&D”

Execs from Facebook, Google, and Microsoft explain why they use Israel for their R&D


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Israel Third Most-Educated Country In The World
https://cnbc.com/2018/02/07/the-10-most-educated-countries-in-the-world.html…

Arab countries among the most poorly educated and even illiterate. Average Arab reads just 6 pages a year
https://alarabiya.net/articles/2012%2F07%2F14%2F226290…

Nearly half of all Muslims are illiterate https://ummid.com/news/2015/February/11.02.2015/literacy-in-muslim-world.html


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Cool. Sargon was Sargon of Akkad.. the Akkadians were Arabs from the Arabian peninsula. They were semites. Do you recall that Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria around 500 BC?


Can you show me 1 legitimate history book saying Akkadians were Arabs? No, you cannot. Does the Arab Quran say so? No, it doesn’t.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Cool. Sargon was Sargon of Akkad.. the Akkadians were Arabs from the Arabian peninsula. They were semites. Do you recall that Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria around 500 BC?


Renowned scholar Bernard Lewis, author of the classic book, “Arabs In History,” translated into 25 languages: “In recent years a new doctrine has been developed in Arab countries. Arab historiography has extended the Arab identity to all or nearly all Semitic peoples.“


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

MartyNYC said:


> Quran was originally written in Arabic, it boasts of being in Arabic, published in Arabia intended for an Arab audience by an Arab religious figure. Most Muslims are not Arabs and are not fluent in Arabic, and read translations of the Quran which Islamic scholars say are inauthentic.



The Bible was originally written in Aramaic and intended for Jews, and written by Christians.  The Bible was not written in English, so how do you know it is authentic?

Your post is irrelevant from start to finish.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

MartyNYC said:


> Renowned scholar Bernard Lewis, author of the classic book, “Arabs In History,” translated into 25 languages: “In recent years a new doctrine has been developed in Arab countries. *Arab historiography has extended the Arab identity to all or nearly all Semitic peoples.“*


So Jews are Arabs????????


----------



## MartyNYC

Roudy said:


> Arabs from Arabia were moon god worshipping savages. Before Islam came. Mohammad broke their idols and made them wash their hands before they ate and prayed because they ate with the same hands that they had just wiped their asses with, which by the way were religious hygiene laws that Mohammad stole from the ancient Jews of Arabia, before he betrayed and massacred them and used their stolen wealth  to fund his invasions and pillaging of other peoples and nations, which you people then called “ Arab”.





Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> The Bible was originally written in Aramaic and intended for Jews, and written by Christians.  The Bible was not written in English, so how do you know it is authentic?
> 
> Your post is irrelevant from start to finish.


Hebrew, you moron. It’s called the Hebrew Bible. Dead Sea Scrolls verify its authenticity.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

MartyNYC said:


> Hebrew, you moron. It’s called the Hebrew Bible.


Let me guess!  Yo are Jewish, right?

Did you enjoy all of the Bible readings in temple?


----------



## MartyNYC

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> So Jews are Arabs????????





Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Let me guess!  Yo are Jewish, right?
> 
> Did you enjoy all of the Bible readings in temple?


Hebrew Bible, you dunce.


----------



## Uncensored2008

surada said:


> Nope the Arabs have been around since the Akkadian Empire. Long before Judaism. If you take Genesis and Exodus literally, you'd know Abraham had six sons by his Arab wife Keturah. You'd also know Moses had an Arab wife named Zipporah .



Bullshit Hezbollah Hannah.

The Arabs of today invaded in the 3rd Century AD. The migrated from North Africa and slaughtered the Meads, Hittites and others who were the indigenous peoples.

The Arabs are north Africans who invaded the Middle East and stole it from the original people.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> There weren't many Jews in Arabia. In fact the whole population of Arabia never exceeded 700,000 until 1950. Ultimately the Jews returned to Jericho or moved on to Yemen. You're a serious hater, aren't you? How sad. Are you pissed because the Arabs have oil while Israel is still getting US foreign aid after 70 years?


Is this what your handlers told you respond with?  Pathetic.  Doesn‘t really matter what the population of Arabia was at the time, but it seems like you are having a hard time admitting the historical fact that Mohammed and his followers did commit genocide on the ancients Jews of Medina.  These are the bloody roots of Islam. Deal with it.

Is that all you have, bragging about having oil?  And it isn’t even shared with the people.  Israel’s wealth is above ground, it’s people.  It is now the center of science, technology, medicine, engineering and innovation.  And all you have is oil, dictatorships, lack of freedom and oppressing women. Wonderful.


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Arab countries are among the most backward and illiterate in the world


Only if you say so my sweet pee


MartyNYC said:


> , while Israel is among the most highly educated and technologically advanced


Only if you say so my sweet pee


MartyNYC said:


> “Israel The Economic Miracle”:


The only thing Israel exports are flowers.


MartyNYC said:


> “Israel is the fastest-growing and one of the most dynamic, entrepreneurial, and innovation-based economies on the planet.”


..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."





						Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



*Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*

_Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel

*Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago

*Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
Jewish Population on the Decline in America

*World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
going, going, gone
-


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> Is this what your handlers told you respond with?  Pathetic.  Doesn‘t really matter what the population of Arabia was at the time, but it seems like you are having a hard time admitting the historical fact that Mohammed and his followers did commit genocide on the ancients Jews of Medina.  These are the bloody roots of Islam. Deal with it.
> 
> Is that all you have, bragging about having oil?  And it isn’t even shared with the people.  Israel’s wealth is above ground, it’s people.  It is now the center of science, technology, medicine, engineering and innovation.  And all you have is oil, dictatorships, lack of freedom and oppressing women. Wonderful.



I don't have handlers. There weren't many Jews in Medina and they were judged by their own laws. The story is grossly exaggerated by Jewish people.. Justification?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Just to make my point, once and for all
Chart and table of the Israel birth rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.

The current birth rate for Israel in 2022 is *19.248* births per 1000 people, a *1.49% decline* from 2021.
The birth rate for Israel in 2021 was *19.539* births per 1000 people, a *1.47% decline* from 2020.
The birth rate for Israel in 2020 was *19.830* births per 1000 people, a *1.45% decline* from 2019.
The birth rate for Israel in 2019 was *20.121* births per 1000 people, a *1.43% decline* from 2018.
_Chart and table of the Israel birth rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.

The current birth rate for Israel in 2022 is 19.248 births per 1000 people, a 1.49% decline from 2021.
The birth rate for Israel in 2021 was 19.539 births per 1000 people, a 1.47% decline from 2020.
The birth rate for Israel in 2020 was 19.830 births per 1000 people, a 1.45% decline from 2019.
The birth rate for Israel in 2019 was 20.121 births per 1000 people, a 1.43% decline from 2018._
Israel Birth Rate 1950-2022
-


----------



## surada

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone
> -



I'm pretty sure they export apples from the Golan heights, citrus fruits, olive oil and dates.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> I'm pretty sure they export apples from the Golan heights, citrus fruits, olive oil and dates.


And this whole conversation has WHAT to do with Indigenous people, as per this thread?


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> And this whole conversation has WHAT to do with Indigenous people, as per this thread?


Ask watchingfromafar.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> Ask watchingfromafar.


No need to answer that poster.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone
> -




Israel Third Most-Educated Country In The World
https://cnbc.com/2018/02/07/the-10-most-educated-countries-in-the-world.html…

Arab countries among the most poorly educated and even illiterate. Average Arab reads just 6 pages a year
https://alarabiya.net/articles/2012%2F07%2F14%2F226290…

Nearly half of all Muslims are illiterate https://ummid.com/news/2015/February/11.02.2015/literacy-in-muslim-world.html


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


“Israel Technology Capital Of The World” 
What makes Israel the tech capital of the world? - CapX


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Just to make my point, once and for all
> Chart and table of the Israel birth rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
> 
> The current birth rate for Israel in 2022 is *19.248* births per 1000 people, a *1.49% decline* from 2021.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2021 was *19.539* births per 1000 people, a *1.47% decline* from 2020.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2020 was *19.830* births per 1000 people, a *1.45% decline* from 2019.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2019 was *20.121* births per 1000 people, a *1.43% decline* from 2018.
> _Chart and table of the Israel birth rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
> 
> The current birth rate for Israel in 2022 is 19.248 births per 1000 people, a 1.49% decline from 2021.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2021 was 19.539 births per 1000 people, a 1.47% decline from 2020.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2020 was 19.830 births per 1000 people, a 1.45% decline from 2019.
> The birth rate for Israel in 2019 was 20.121 births per 1000 people, a 1.43% decline from 2018._
> Israel Birth Rate 1950-2022



60 Most Innovative Countries In The World: Israel is Number 5

Here Are The 60 Most Innovative Countries In The World For 2019 - CEOWORLD magazine


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone
> -




“Israeli Innovations That Have Changed The World”

Israeli Inventions That Changed the World


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


“Israel The Economic Miracle” “Israel produces more start-up companies than Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the United Kingdom”

Israel – The Economic Miracle - Diplomacy&Commerce


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Google CEO: Israel Second Only To Silicon Valley 

Google chief says Israeli tech second only to Silicon Valley


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Google developer partner advocate: "My job at Google is to travel all over the world & talk to developers, startups & investors. I've been to every corner of the earth. There is no other country that thinks the same way that Israel does.”
Execs from Facebook, Google, and Microsoft explain why they use Israel for their R&D


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Wharton Business School: Israel Land Of Innovation  
From Haifa to Herzliya, the Fertile Ground of Israeli Innovation


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone
> -


Wharton Business School: Israel World Leader In Water Technology What Other Nations Can Learn from Israel's Solutions to the Scarce Water Challenge


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Wharton Business School: Israel World Leader In Medical Technology Growth Strategies of Israel’s Burgeoning Medical Device Sector


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Wharton Business School: Israel Startup Nation  ‘Start-up Nation’ 2.0: Israeli Firms Mature as Solo Acts


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


World Economic Forum: Israel Among World’s Most Innovative Economies
These are the world’s most innovative economies


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Global Innovation Index: Israel among 10 most innovative countries in the world
Global Innovation Index 2019: India Makes Major Gains as Switzerland, Sweden, U.S., Netherlands, U.K. Top Ranking; Trade Protectionism Poses Risks for Future Innovation


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


“Microsoft Backs Israel As Silicon Valley Jr For Innovation”

Microsoft Backs Israel as ‘Silicon Valley Junior’ for Innovation


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


Google CEO: “For a relatively small country, Israel has a super role in technological innovation. I can't think of a place where you could see this diversity and the collection of initiatives aside from Silicon Valley. That is a pretty strong statement."
Google chief says Israeli tech second only to Silicon Valley


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> Only if you say so my sweet pee
> 
> The only thing Israel exports are flowers.
> 
> ..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish population by country - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who is pushing the hardest to ban abortions?*
> 
> _Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> Close to the establishment of the state, the Jewish percentage of the population stood at 82.1%, while today it stands at only 73.9%._
> Jewish population at lowest percentage since founding of Israel
> 
> *Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago*
> Europe’s Jewish population down 60% since 1970, as low as it was 1,000 years ago
> 
> *Jewish Population on the Decline in America*
> Jewish Population on the Decline in America
> 
> *World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million
> World Jewish population drops by 300,000 to 12.9 million*
> going, going, gone


“Israel Big Success Story”


----------



## P F Tinmore

Is this the "brand Israel" thread?


----------



## watchingfromafar

Sixties Fan said:


> And this whole conversation has WHAT to do with Indigenous people, as per this thread?


*The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?*

I thought it was important to recognize that if the Jewish people are “_indigenous_” to Palestine (which many Jewish people say never existed); that these “_indigenous_” people are on the way to extension.
-


----------



## MartyNYC

P F Tinmore said:


> Is this the "brand Israel" thread?





P F Tinmore said:


> Is this the "brand Israel" thread?





watchingfromafar said:


> *The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?*
> 
> I thought it was important to recognize that if the Jewish people are “_indigenous_” to Palestine (which many Jewish people say never existed); that these “_indigenous_” people are on the way to extension.


*The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?*


watchingfromafar said:


> I thought it was important to recognize that if the Jewish people are “_indigenous_” to Palestine (which many Jewish people say never existed); that these “_indigenous_” people are on the way to extension.


Abdullah al-Hadlaq, writer, Al-Watan, Kuwait: “When the state of Israel was established in 1948 there was no state called palestine. Where did we get that name which we have been defending? It didn’t exist.” Kuwaiti Writer Abdullah Al-Hadlaq: Israel Is a Legitimate State, Not an Occupier; There Was No Palestine; I Support Israel-Gulf-U.S. Alliance to Annihilate Hizbullah


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> there was no state called palestine.


*The word Palestine derives from Philistia*_, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the __Philistines__, who in the 12th century BCE occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern __Tel Aviv–Yafo__ and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century CE in “Syria *Palaestina*,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after __World War I__ and the end of rule by the __Ottoman Empire__, when it was adopted for one of the regions __mandated__ to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the __mandate__ included the territory east of the Jordan River now __constituting__ the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of *Palestine* immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory._
_Palestine | History, People, & Religion | Britannica_

*Palestine's*_ Early Roots
Throughout *history*, *Palestine* has been ruled by numerous groups, including the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Fatimids, Seljuk Turks, Crusaders, Egyptians and Mamelukes. From about 1517 to 1917, the Ottoman Empire ruled much of the region.May 11, 2021_
_Palestine - History, Religion & Conflicts - HISTORY_

_Palestine’s Early Roots
Scholars believe the name “*Palestine*” originally comes from the word “*Philistia*,” which refers to the Philistines who occupied part of the region in the 12th century B.C.

Throughout history, *Palestine* has been ruled by numerous groups, including the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, __Greeks__, __Romans__, Arabs, Fatimids, Seljuk Turks, __Crusaders__, __Egyptians__ and Mamelukes.

From about 1517 to 1917, the __Ottoman Empire__ ruled much of the region.

When __World War I__ ended in 1918, the British took control of *Palestine*. The __League of Nations__ issued a British mandate for *Palestine*—a document that gave Britain administrative control over the region, and included provisions for establishing a Jewish national homeland in *Palestine*—which went into effect in 1923._
_Palestine - History, Religion & Conflicts - HISTORY_

*Palestine*_ (Arabic: فلسطين‎, romanized: Filasṭīn), *officially recognized as the State of Palestine* (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎, romanized: Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia officially governed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital.
State of Palestine - Wikipedia

*The history of Palestine* is the study of the past in the region of Palestine, defined as the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
*The region was among the earliest in the world to see human habitation*, agricultural communities and civilization._
_History of Palestine - Wikipedia_
*next*_ -_


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> *The word Palestine derives from Philistia*_, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the __Philistines__, who in the 12th century BCE occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern __Tel Aviv–Yafo__ and Gaza. The name was revived by the Romans in the 2nd century CE in “Syria *Palaestina*,” designating the southern portion of the province of Syria, and made its way thence into Arabic, where it has been used to describe the region at least since the early Islamic era. After Roman times the name had no official status until after __World War I__ and the end of rule by the __Ottoman Empire__, when it was adopted for one of the regions __mandated__ to Great Britain; in addition to an area roughly comprising present-day Israel and the West Bank, the __mandate__ included the territory east of the Jordan River now __constituting__ the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, which Britain placed under an administration separate from that of *Palestine* immediately after receiving the mandate for the territory._
> _Palestine | History, People, & Religion | Britannica_
> 
> *Palestine's*_ Early Roots
> Throughout *history*, *Palestine* has been ruled by numerous groups, including the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Fatimids, Seljuk Turks, Crusaders, Egyptians and Mamelukes. From about 1517 to 1917, the Ottoman Empire ruled much of the region.May 11, 2021_
> _Palestine - History, Religion & Conflicts - HISTORY_
> 
> _Palestine’s Early Roots
> Scholars believe the name “*Palestine*” originally comes from the word “*Philistia*,” which refers to the Philistines who occupied part of the region in the 12th century B.C.
> 
> Throughout history, *Palestine* has been ruled by numerous groups, including the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, __Greeks__, __Romans__, Arabs, Fatimids, Seljuk Turks, __Crusaders__, __Egyptians__ and Mamelukes.
> 
> From about 1517 to 1917, the __Ottoman Empire__ ruled much of the region.
> 
> When __World War I__ ended in 1918, the British took control of *Palestine*. The __League of Nations__ issued a British mandate for *Palestine*—a document that gave Britain administrative control over the region, and included provisions for establishing a Jewish national homeland in *Palestine*—which went into effect in 1923._
> _Palestine - History, Religion & Conflicts - HISTORY_
> 
> *Palestine*_ (Arabic: فلسطين‎, romanized: Filasṭīn), *officially recognized as the State of Palestine* (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎, romanized: Dawlat Filasṭīn) by the United Nations and other entities, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia officially governed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the designated capital.
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia
> 
> *The history of Palestine* is the study of the past in the region of Palestine, defined as the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
> *The region was among the earliest in the world to see human habitation*, agricultural communities and civilization._
> _History of Palestine - Wikipedia_
> *next*


Palestine: Fictional Western term for Israel. Palestine never actually existed…


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Global Innovation Index: Israel among 10 most innovative countries


*innovation*
_noun
1: a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY
2: the introduction of something new_

Ok, I agree, they are a novelty.
*innovation*

noun
1_: a new idea, method, or device :* NOVELTY*
2: the introduction of something new

*novelty*
noun
nov·el·ty ˈnä-vəl-tē 
pluralnovelties
1
: something new or unusual_

Yes, I agree, they are unusual
*NEXT*
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Palestine: Fictional Western term for Israel. Palestine never actually existed…


Denial is not a river in Egypt.
-


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Palestine: Fictional Western term for Israel. Palestine never actually existed…


What really never existed was a place called “Israel”. Israel was a person, not a place.
_*King James Bible*
And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: *thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name:* and he called his name Israel._
*NEXT* -


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Palestine: Fictional Western term


It is best for you to not respond to my posts.
While I am here, visit this site instead,
https://tinyurl.com/2p8a3s9n

-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> What really never existed was a place called “Israel”. Israel was a person, not a place.
> _*King James Bible*
> And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: *thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name:* and he called his name Israel._
> *NEXT*


You’re dumb.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Denial is not a river in Egypt.


Renowned archaeologist William Dever: “Facts matter and some facts matter a great deal. The reality of ancient Israel is such a fact. The ancient Israelites were a real people, in a real time and place.”

Bernard Lewis, “Dean of Middle East historians”: “This, I need hardly remind you, is a region of ancient civilization and of deep-rooted, often complex identities. But Palestine was not one of them. Even the adjective Palestinian is comparatively new.”


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> You’re dumb.


Oh sweet pee, if that is your intellectual response, one unsupported article that uses the term, then who am I to call you a racist, one who defends Israel but refuses to live there?
So be it sweet pee

-


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Palestine was not one of them. Even the adjective Palestinian is comparatively new.


bla, bla, bla. 
Please entertain yourself here--
While I am here, visit this site instead,
https://tinyurl.com/2p8a3s9n
-


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Oh sweet pee, if that is your intellectual response, one unsupported article that uses the term, then who am I to call you a racist, one who defends Israel but refuses to live there?
> So be it sweet pee


Did I mention you’re dumb?

Louvre: Mesha Stele (referencing Kingdom of Israel) “Treasure of the Eastern Mediterranean”
Treasures of the Eastern Mediterranean

“The Mesha Stele is the longest extant text in the Moabite language and celebrates the building projects and military accomplishments of King Mesha of Moab, most notably the king's expulsion of Israealite overlords from the territory of Moab.”
Mesha Stele


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> *innovation*
> _noun
> 1: a new idea, method, or device : NOVELTY
> 2: the introduction of something new_
> 
> Ok, I agree, they are a novelty.
> *innovation*
> 
> noun
> 1_: a new idea, method, or device :* NOVELTY*
> 2: the introduction of something new
> 
> *novelty*
> noun
> nov·el·ty ˈnä-vəl-tē
> pluralnovelties
> 1
> : something new or unusual_
> 
> Yes, I agree, they are unusual
> *NEXT*


“Israel The Economic Miracle”: “Israel is the fastest-growing and one of the most dynamic, entrepreneurial, and innovation-based economies on the planet.”


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> bla, bla, bla.
> Please entertain yourself here--
> While I am here, visit this site instead,
> https://tinyurl.com/2p8a3s9n


Princeton University: “Bernard Lewis has been called the most eminent living historian of the Middle East. Sukru Hanioglu, Chairman of the Department of Near Eastern Studies, said Lewis is “considered one of the deans of the field. He is the author of numerous pathbreaking scholarly works that set academic standards all over the world. This latest recognition (National Endowment For The Humanities Medal) follows a long list of sterling academic accomplishments, and we commend our distinguished colleague for his brilliant and most productive academic career.”

Fagles, Lewis awarded National Humanities Medal - 11/20/2006 - PWB - Princeton

National Endowment for the Humanities: “Bernard Lewis famed scholar of the Middle East, 1990 Jefferson Lecturer, 2006 National Humanities Medalist. As a humanist he had few peers; as a scholar of the Middle East his contributions were foundational.”

Statement from National Endowment for the Humanities on the Death of Bernard Lewis


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> National Endowment for the Humanities:


Google "IDF shooting children"
Nov 23, 2004 - Radio exchange contradicts army version of Gaza killing.
*https://tinyurl.com/ybk8lvmq** 

Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months*
Twenty-five Palestinian children were killed in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-Israeli attacks and the number detained was the highest in seven years, according to the UNICEF.
*https://tinyurl.com/y92tvluh** 

2016 'deadliest year' for West Bank children in decade
Israeli forces killed 32 Palestinian children* in the West Bank in 2016, the highest number in 10 years.

The organisation's chapter in the occupied Palestinian territories recorded the *killings of 32 Palestinian children (under 18), *making 2016 "the deadliest year of the past decade" for them, the group said in a recent report.
*https://tinyurl.com/y85ctr7v*

* 12 yr old boy SHOT DEAD* in front of your eyes
Updated 9.48 p.m., 3rd Oct 2000
http://www.themodernreligion.com/jihad/sniper.html

Gaza girl said killed
By Amos Harel and Nir Hasson, Haaretz Correspondents,
and Haaretz Service

*IDF troops shot and killed an 8-year-old Palestinian girl* who was on her way to school in a Gaza Strip refugee camp
*http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/494672.html*

* UN officials: Girl hit by IDF gunfire in UN school in Gaza*
By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent and AP

* An 11-year-old Palestinian girl was shot in the stomach* and critically wounded *by Israel Defense Forces gunfire*. IDF troops fired two shots, one of the shots hit a fifth-grade student at the school. Last month, a *10-year-old girl was killed by IDF gunfire while sitting at her desk at the same school.*
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/487788.html

United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) 7 September 2004 At 07:45 *10-year old Raghda Adnan Al-Assar was struck in the head* by Israeli fire while sitting at her desk in UNRWA's Elementary

Girl's School On June 1 this year *two ten-year old children* in UNRWA's

Al-Umariye Elementary Boys' School in Rafah were hit by a bullet from a Israeli tank

*12-year old Hoda Darwish was hit in the head* by a bullet fired *Two 10 year-old schoolchildren* were shot in the al-Omaria school run by UNRWA in Rafah, when an *Israeli tank fired into their classroom.*
Bullets fired from the tank flew through the classroom window, hitting Mahmoud Hamad in the neck and Hisham al Habil in the head. The boys had not even been sitting by the windows but in the middle of the room. (this was an assassination of specific children by the IDF)

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/index.html

Photos of a *12 year old palestinian boy being shot by Israeli soldiers *and the ambulance driver who tried to save him also being shot and killed.
palestine-net.com

T*hree-year-old *Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends.

The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails

*An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends
http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk

*Boy of 17, shot by Israeli soldiers, left bleeding overnight to die*

The bullet ridden corpse of Mohammad Abdullah Abu al-Husni, was found yesterday morning near the town of Jabaliya, where he lived in Gaza.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/left_to_die.htm

Haneen, who was *eight years old, had been shot twice in the head* by an Israeli soldier as she walked down the street in Khan Yunis refugee camp with her mother.
She was coming down the street and ran to me and hugged me, crying,

'Mother, mother'. *Two bullets hit her in the head, one straight after the other*.

She was still in my arms and she died."

'I can't imagine anyone who considers himself a human being can do this'

*This boy* was in his own house and an IDF soldier barges into the house and *shoots him dead Mohammed a 7-year-old boy fell dead, still clutching his piece of bread.*
Israel Army action breeds fresh hatred

* Israel Baby is born then dies*
Birth and death at the checkpoint
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/338937.html

* Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers, one a 15-year-old boy
15 year old boy who was shot while standing in front of his house.* The sniper bulet hit Amjad in the back. He died on his way to the hospital. The *second is Amer Kathym Arafat who was also shot* in the back by a sniper bullet. The *third is Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25, who was also shot in the* back by a sniper.
http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm

* Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head *while buying candy with her friends.
The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails
*The US news never covered these murders
Please tell me why?*​


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> I don't have handlers. There weren't many Jews in Medina and they were judged by their own laws. The story is grossly exaggerated by Jewish people.. Justification?


Wow, really. is that all you got? “there weren’t that many Jews in Medina”? So it must have been ok to kill them. No big deal.  

Medina was a Jewish city and the center of Jewish life in Saudi Arabia, until Mohammad arrived and threatened thme to submit to him as the final messenger or else. And when they bravely refused, Mohammad and his Jihadi goons that were promised virgins in heaven and justified rape and theft as Hallal during any conquest in the name of Islam committed genocide and ethnic cleansing upon the Jews of Medina.

At least tell your imam to tell you the truth as opposed to this Neanderthal Islamic response “meh there weren’t that many Jews, what’s a few dead Jews here and there to us IslamoNazis, it’s all a gross exaggeration!”  

So tell us, did Mohammad commit genocide upon those “few Jews” or not? You might want to ask your handler for a straight answer.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> Wow, really. is that all you got? “there weren’t that many Jews in Medina”? So it must have been ok to kill them. No big deal.
> 
> Medina was a Jewish city and the center of Jewish life in Saudi Arabia, until Mohammad arrived and threatened thme to submit to him as the final messenger or else. And when they bravely refused, Mohammad and his Jihadi goons that were promised virgins in heaven and justified rape and theft as Hallal during any conquest in the name of Islam committed genocide and ethnic cleansing upon the Jews of Medina.
> 
> At least tell your imam to tell you the truth as opposed to this Neanderthal Islamic response “meh there weren’t that many Jews, what’s a few dead Jews here and there to us IslamoNazis, it’s all a gross exaggeration!”
> 
> So tell us, did Mohammad commit genocide upon those “few Jews” or not? You might want to ask your handler for a straight answer.



Nope. Medina wasn't a Jewish city. The Jews who lived there betrayed Muhammad and their agreements. You forget this came after the Jewish king burned the Christians of Najran because they wouldn't convert. That event wasn't good for the Jewish people.

It was 90 men, not 900.

I'm neither a Muslim nor an Arab. I'm an Episcopalian.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> Do you recall that Sargon 2 settled four Arab tribes in Samaria around 500 BC?



No, l don’t recall it. I wasn’t around back then.


----------



## surada

Mindful said:


> No, l don’t recall it. I wasn’t around back then.



It's the reason that Samaritans we're considered half breeds and not real Jews.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> It's the reason that Samaritans we're considered half breeds and not real Jews.



The reason being: l wasn’t around back then?


----------



## JoeB131




----------



## surada

Mindful said:


> The reason being: l wasn’t around back then?



So you dismiss history.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> So you dismiss history.



Do l?


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Google "IDF shooting children"
> Nov 23, 2004 - Radio exchange contradicts army version of Gaza killing.
> *https://tinyurl.com/ybk8lvmq**
> 
> Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months*
> Twenty-five Palestinian children were killed in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-Israeli attacks and the number detained was the highest in seven years, according to the UNICEF.
> *https://tinyurl.com/y92tvluh**
> 
> 2016 'deadliest year' for West Bank children in decade
> Israeli forces killed 32 Palestinian children* in the West Bank in 2016, the highest number in 10 years.
> 
> The organisation's chapter in the occupied Palestinian territories recorded the *killings of 32 Palestinian children (under 18), *making 2016 "the deadliest year of the past decade" for them, the group said in a recent report.
> *https://tinyurl.com/y85ctr7v*
> 
> * 12 yr old boy SHOT DEAD* in front of your eyes
> Updated 9.48 p.m., 3rd Oct 2000
> http://www.themodernreligion.com/jihad/sniper.html
> 
> Gaza girl said killed
> By Amos Harel and Nir Hasson, Haaretz Correspondents,
> and Haaretz Service
> 
> *IDF troops shot and killed an 8-year-old Palestinian girl* who was on her way to school in a Gaza Strip refugee camp
> *http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/494672.html*
> 
> * UN officials: Girl hit by IDF gunfire in UN school in Gaza*
> By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent and AP
> 
> * An 11-year-old Palestinian girl was shot in the stomach* and critically wounded *by Israel Defense Forces gunfire*. IDF troops fired two shots, one of the shots hit a fifth-grade student at the school. Last month, a *10-year-old girl was killed by IDF gunfire while sitting at her desk at the same school.*
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/487788.html
> 
> United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) 7 September 2004 At 07:45 *10-year old Raghda Adnan Al-Assar was struck in the head* by Israeli fire while sitting at her desk in UNRWA's Elementary
> 
> Girl's School On June 1 this year *two ten-year old children* in UNRWA's
> 
> Al-Umariye Elementary Boys' School in Rafah were hit by a bullet from a Israeli tank
> 
> *12-year old Hoda Darwish was hit in the head* by a bullet fired *Two 10 year-old schoolchildren* were shot in the al-Omaria school run by UNRWA in Rafah, when an *Israeli tank fired into their classroom.*
> Bullets fired from the tank flew through the classroom window, hitting Mahmoud Hamad in the neck and Hisham al Habil in the head. The boys had not even been sitting by the windows but in the middle of the room. (this was an assassination of specific children by the IDF)
> 
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/index.html
> 
> Photos of a *12 year old palestinian boy being shot by Israeli soldiers *and the ambulance driver who tried to save him also being shot and killed.
> palestine-net.com
> 
> T*hree-year-old *Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends.
> 
> The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails
> 
> *An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends
> http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk
> 
> *Boy of 17, shot by Israeli soldiers, left bleeding overnight to die*
> 
> The bullet ridden corpse of Mohammad Abdullah Abu al-Husni, was found yesterday morning near the town of Jabaliya, where he lived in Gaza.
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/left_to_die.htm
> 
> Haneen, who was *eight years old, had been shot twice in the head* by an Israeli soldier as she walked down the street in Khan Yunis refugee camp with her mother.
> She was coming down the street and ran to me and hugged me, crying,
> 
> 'Mother, mother'. *Two bullets hit her in the head, one straight after the other*.
> 
> She was still in my arms and she died."
> 
> 'I can't imagine anyone who considers himself a human being can do this'
> 
> *This boy* was in his own house and an IDF soldier barges into the house and *shoots him dead Mohammed a 7-year-old boy fell dead, still clutching his piece of bread.*
> Israel Army action breeds fresh hatred
> 
> * Israel Baby is born then dies*
> Birth and death at the checkpoint
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/338937.html
> 
> * Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers, one a 15-year-old boy
> 15 year old boy who was shot while standing in front of his house.* The sniper bulet hit Amjad in the back. He died on his way to the hospital. The *second is Amer Kathym Arafat who was also shot* in the back by a sniper bullet. The *third is Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25, who was also shot in the* back by a sniper.
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> * Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head *while buying candy with her friends.
> The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails
> *The US news never covered these murders
> Please tell me why?*​


“3,000th Palestinian Child Receives Free Heart Surgery By Israeli Charity” “When the doctors told us there was a possibility for Israeli doctors to carry out the complicated operation Amir needed, we were so happy. Everyone here in Gaza talks about how Israeli doctors are the most professional in the world and that they can be trusted completely,” Amir’s mother said.”

3,000th Palestinian child has heart operation in Israel through Save a Child’s Heart


----------



## MartyNYC

Mindful said:


> No, l don’t recall it. I wasn’t around back then.


Sargon was not an Arab nor did he settle Arabs.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Nope. Medina wasn't a Jewish city. The Jews who lived there betrayed Muhammad and their agreements. You forget this came after the Jewish king burned the Christians of Najran because they wouldn't convert. That event wasn't good for the Jewish people.
> 
> It was 90 men, not 900.
> 
> I'm neither a Muslim nor an Arab. I'm an Episcopalian.


Medina was predominantly Jewish before Muhammad would have arrived. If he even existed, which scholars are skeptical about. Jews had inhabited Arabia since at least the 6th century BCE, many centuries before Arabians identified as Arabs, a generic word that designated nomads.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Medina was predominantly Jewish before Muhammad would have arrived. If he even existed, which scholars are skeptical about. Jews had inhabited Arabia since at least the 6th century BCE, many centuries before Arabians identified as Arabs, a generic word that designated nomads.



2nd century BC.

Most Arabs lived in villages. They had a symbiotic relationship with the Bedouin which was essential to the survival of both. When you understand the details of that mutual dependency, you will also know more about the Jews.

You have no claim to Saudi Arabia.









						History of the Jews in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> 2nd century BC.
> 
> Most Arabs lived in villages. They had a symbiotic relationship with the Bedouin which was essential to the survival of both. When you understand the details of that mutual dependency, you will also know more about the Jews.
> 
> You have no claim to Saudi Arabia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of the Jews in Saudi Arabia - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


You know less than nothing.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> Google "IDF shooting children"
> Nov 23, 2004 - Radio exchange contradicts army version of Gaza killing.
> *https://tinyurl.com/ybk8lvmq**
> 
> Israel 'killed 25 Palestinian children' in three months*
> Twenty-five Palestinian children were killed in the last three months of 2015 during a wave of anti-Israeli attacks and the number detained was the highest in seven years, according to the UNICEF.
> *https://tinyurl.com/y92tvluh**
> 
> 2016 'deadliest year' for West Bank children in decade
> Israeli forces killed 32 Palestinian children* in the West Bank in 2016, the highest number in 10 years.
> 
> The organisation's chapter in the occupied Palestinian territories recorded the *killings of 32 Palestinian children (under 18), *making 2016 "the deadliest year of the past decade" for them, the group said in a recent report.
> *https://tinyurl.com/y85ctr7v*
> 
> * 12 yr old boy SHOT DEAD* in front of your eyes
> Updated 9.48 p.m., 3rd Oct 2000
> http://www.themodernreligion.com/jihad/sniper.html
> 
> Gaza girl said killed
> By Amos Harel and Nir Hasson, Haaretz Correspondents,
> and Haaretz Service
> 
> *IDF troops shot and killed an 8-year-old Palestinian girl* who was on her way to school in a Gaza Strip refugee camp
> *http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/494672.html*
> 
> * UN officials: Girl hit by IDF gunfire in UN school in Gaza*
> By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent and AP
> 
> * An 11-year-old Palestinian girl was shot in the stomach* and critically wounded *by Israel Defense Forces gunfire*. IDF troops fired two shots, one of the shots hit a fifth-grade student at the school. Last month, a *10-year-old girl was killed by IDF gunfire while sitting at her desk at the same school.*
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/487788.html
> 
> United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) 7 September 2004 At 07:45 *10-year old Raghda Adnan Al-Assar was struck in the head* by Israeli fire while sitting at her desk in UNRWA's Elementary
> 
> Girl's School On June 1 this year *two ten-year old children* in UNRWA's
> 
> Al-Umariye Elementary Boys' School in Rafah were hit by a bullet from a Israeli tank
> 
> *12-year old Hoda Darwish was hit in the head* by a bullet fired *Two 10 year-old schoolchildren* were shot in the al-Omaria school run by UNRWA in Rafah, when an *Israeli tank fired into their classroom.*
> Bullets fired from the tank flew through the classroom window, hitting Mahmoud Hamad in the neck and Hisham al Habil in the head. The boys had not even been sitting by the windows but in the middle of the room. (this was an assassination of specific children by the IDF)
> 
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/index.html
> 
> Photos of a *12 year old palestinian boy being shot by Israeli soldiers *and the ambulance driver who tried to save him also being shot and killed.
> palestine-net.com
> 
> T*hree-year-old *Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head while buying candy with her friends.
> 
> The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails
> 
> *An eight-year-old Palestinian girl shot dead* by Israeli troops in the central Gaza Strip was killed while showing off her new school uniform to friends
> http://tinyurl.com/99kh8zk
> 
> *Boy of 17, shot by Israeli soldiers, left bleeding overnight to die*
> 
> The bullet ridden corpse of Mohammad Abdullah Abu al-Husni, was found yesterday morning near the town of Jabaliya, where he lived in Gaza.
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/updates/left_to_die.htm
> 
> Haneen, who was *eight years old, had been shot twice in the head* by an Israeli soldier as she walked down the street in Khan Yunis refugee camp with her mother.
> She was coming down the street and ran to me and hugged me, crying,
> 
> 'Mother, mother'. *Two bullets hit her in the head, one straight after the other*.
> 
> She was still in my arms and she died."
> 
> 'I can't imagine anyone who considers himself a human being can do this'
> 
> *This boy* was in his own house and an IDF soldier barges into the house and *shoots him dead Mohammed a 7-year-old boy fell dead, still clutching his piece of bread.*
> Israel Army action breeds fresh hatred
> 
> * Israel Baby is born then dies*
> Birth and death at the checkpoint
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/338937.html
> 
> * Three shot in the back by Israeli snipers, one a 15-year-old boy
> 15 year old boy who was shot while standing in front of his house.* The sniper bulet hit Amjad in the back. He died on his way to the hospital. The *second is Amer Kathym Arafat who was also shot* in the back by a sniper bullet. The *third is Rouhi Hazem Shouman, 25, who was also shot in the* back by a sniper.
> http://www.palestinemonitor.org/appeals/lift_the_siege.htm
> 
> * Three-year-old Rawan Abu Zeid, who took bullets in the neck and head *while buying candy with her friends.
> The New Yorker’s Israel: Where Objectivity Fails
> *The US news never covered these murders
> Please tell me why?*​


Son of Hamas founder: Hamas wants death of palestinians 


United Arab Emirates: Israel is a peace-seeking nation


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> You know less than nothing.



It's alright. Stay stupid.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> So you dismiss history.





surada said:


> It's alright. Stay stupid.


Your picture is in the dictionary for the word “stupid.”


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Son of Hamas founder: Hamas wants death of palestinians
> 
> 
> United Arab Emirates: Israel is a peace-seeking nation



A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.



Pestilinians: “Our goal has never been peace”


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


Arabs, Muslims themselves are sick and tired of pestilinians. Saudi calls pestilinians gangsters, urges Israel to “release the world of their presence!”


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


Editor of Arab Times calls pestilinians fools & encourages relations with
Israel: “Peace with this most advanced country is the right thing to do. Let the foolish fend for themselves.”

Normalize, let insulters fend for themselves - ARAB TIMES - KUWAIT NEWS


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


Arabs side with Israel, pray that pestilinians disappear

Abd Al-Bari Atwan: The Arab Leaders Are Praying That Israel Will Get Rid of the Palestinians Once and for All


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


Khaled Abu Toameh: Arabs cutting funding for pestilinians, “fed up“ with the “bloodlust for Jews” and rejection of peace with Israel 

https://gatestoneinstitute.org/18694/arabs-fed-up-with-palestinians…


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> A just peace with the Palestinians is important. The Saudi Peace initiative is 20 years old.. consider the wasted years.


Egyptian commentator Hussein Aboubakr: Arab world fed up with the “Palestinian cause”: “Perpetual refugeedom and appalling acts of violence”

https://www.husseinaboubakr.com/blog/the-pitfalls-of-palestinian-exceptionalism


----------



## Uncensored2008

MartyNYC said:


> Israel Third Most-Educated Country In The World
> https://cnbc.com/2018/02/07/the-10-most-educated-countries-in-the-world.html…
> 
> Arab countries among the most poorly educated and even illiterate. Average Arab reads just 6 pages a year
> https://alarabiya.net/articles/2012%2F07%2F14%2F226290…
> 
> Nearly half of all Muslims are illiterate https://ummid.com/news/2015/February/11.02.2015/literacy-in-muslim-world.html



Muslims oppose education for women - that's half the population right there. Unlike Christians and Jews, women as forbidden to attend the main worship services. An illiterate woman with no access to what the Iman tells the men is truly helpless.

Such is the face of Islam, created as a reflection of the Muslim god Muhammad.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Nope. Medina wasn't a Jewish city. The Jews who lived there betrayed Muhammad and their agreements. You forget this came after the Jewish king burned the Christians of Najran because they wouldn't convert. That event wasn't good for the Jewish people.
> 
> It was 90 men, not 900.
> 
> I'm neither a Muslim nor an Arab. I'm an Episcopalian.


Like I said, Mohammad was a barbarian desert savage as were the rest of the population at the time.  After he fled, the Jews gave him harbor and civilized the barbarian to a certain extent, educated him, taught him about their faith way of life and hygiene. Then the barbarian Saudi Arabian lizard eater who couldn’t even read or write became full of hot air and thought he was special and “the final messenger”. When the Jews did not submit to his demands, or as you Muslims say “betrayed” because they refused to accept the Arab desert barbarian who had hijacked their religion, as a prophet, Mohammad turned on the hand that sheltered, fed and civilized him and called for the murder of every Jew. The moral of the story is you can only domesticate wild creatures to a certain extent.









						What Happened to the Jews of Arabia? - Aish.com
					

A story that should make every Jew shudder.




					aish.com
				




“When Mohammed fled from Mecca in 622, he went to Medina. At first, he entered into an alliance with the Jews. He studied in their study halls and adopted many of their customs into his incipient religion (e.g. not eating pork). But when, after two years, Mohammed could not convince the Jews to accept him as a prophet and convert to his religion, his attitude turned toward open hostility. He instructed his friends to murder and decapitate Ka’b Ibn al-Ashraf, a renowned Jewish poet and chief of the Banu Nadir (date farmers tribe), and ordered his followers, “Kill every Jew you can.” 2

Mohammed’s forces laid siege to the strongholds of the Jewish date farmers in 625. Like the previous Jewish tribe, they succumbed to the siege. Again Abdullah Ibn Ubayyy intervened, and instead of slaughtering the vanquished Jews, Mohammed exiled them to the city of Khaybar, which, according to Muslim tradition, was inhabited by descendants of the Jewish priestly tribe.

Three years later Mohammed conquered Khaybar, the wealthiest city in northern Arabia. Because the Muslims did not know agriculture, Mohammed permitted most of the Jews to live as _dhimmis, _officially second-class citizens who had to pay exorbitant taxes. Eventually the second Caliph banished the Jews of Khaybar, in obedience to Mohammed’s policy that permitted no religion other than Islam to be practiced in Arabia.


----------



## Roudy

MartyNYC said:


> Arabs, Muslims themselves are sick and tired of pestilinians. Saudi calls pestilinians gangsters, urges Israel to “release the world of their presence!”


They treat women as they do non Muslims, as second class citizens not deserving of the same rights and equal justice.  But you can’t blame them, they are simply following Sharia law.


----------



## surada

Roudy said:


> Like I said, Mohammad was a barbarian desert savage as we’re the rest of the population at the time.  The Jews gave him harbor and civilized the barbarian to a certain extent, educated him, taught him about their faith and hygiene. Then the barbarian became full of Saudi Arabian lizard eater who couldn’t even read or write  became full of hot air and thought he was special and “the final messenger”. When the Jews did not submit, or as you Muslims say “betrayed” because they refused to accept the Arab desert barbarian who had hijacked their religion, as a prophet, Mohammad turned on the hand that sheltered and fed him and called for the murder of every Jew. You can only domesticate wild creatures to a certain extent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Happened to the Jews of Arabia? - Aish.com
> 
> 
> A story that should make every Jew shudder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aish.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “When Mohammed fled from Mecca in 622, he went to Medina. At first, he entered into an alliance with the Jews. He studied in their study halls and adopted many of their customs into his incipient religion (e.g. not eating pork). But when, after two years, Mohammed could not convince the Jews to accept him as a prophet and convert to his religion, his attitude turned toward open hostility. He instructed his friends to murder and decapitate Ka’b Ibn al-Ashraf, a renowned Jewish poet and chief of the Banu Nadir (date farmers tribe), and ordered his followers, “Kill every Jew you can.” 2
> 
> Mohammed’s forces laid siege to the strongholds of the Jewish date farmers in 625. Like the previous Jewish tribe, they succumbed to the siege. Again Abdullah Ibn Ubayyy intervened, and instead of slaughtering the vanquished Jews, Mohammed exiled them to the city of Khaybar, which, according to Muslim tradition, was inhabited by descendants of the Jewish priestly tribe.
> 
> Three years later Mohammed conquered Khaybar, the wealthiest city in northern Arabia. Because the Muslims did not know agriculture, Mohammed permitted most of the Jews to live as _dhimmis, _officially second-class citizens who had to pay exorbitant taxes. Eventually the second Caliph banished the Jews of Khaybar, in obedience to Mohammed’s policy that permitted no religion other than Islam to be practiced in Arabia.



Muhammad married a wealthy widow in the business of caravan trade. He ran caravan all over Mesopotamia, Syria and the Levant.

Jizya was less tax than Muslims paid.. and it was only paid by able-bodied men who didn't want to fight to defend the community.

Muhammad defended the Nestorian Christians and waived jizya.


----------



## Roudy

surada said:


> Muhammad married a wealthy widow in the business of caravan trade. He ran caravan all over Mesopotamia, Syria and the Levant.
> 
> Jizya was less tax than Muslims paid.. and it was only paid by able-bodied men who didn't want to fight to defend the community


No actually Mohammad got engaged to a six year old and then married and had sex with her when she was 9.  He forced her father to allow this, of course, back then Mohammad got what he wanted, or your head gets chopped off By the peaceful prophet.

You put up such a defense of a religion and prophet with your lies and propaganda,  and you claim not be Muslim.  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy

Speaking of betrayals, it is also interesting that Mohammad and his followers would RAID, LOOT, RAPE and PILLAGE caravans during the “holy“ month of Ramadan Which believers are supposed to be peaceful and engage in prayer and worship.  By the way Ramadan predated Islam, it was part of the moon god worshippers religion and culture, which he also hijacked and adopted into the new so called faith. Mohammad just found it very convenient that people were usually off guard during  this period, they certainly didn’t expect criminals and animals to conduct surprise attacks.  

Look it up.


----------



## watchingfromafar

MartyNYC said:


> Saudi calls pestilinians gangsters,


The Israeli IDF sniper teams have murdered hundreds of Palestinian children.

The Israeli navy sank an American ship in international waters.

The Israelis demolish Palestinian villages and then build “settlements” over them.

*Israel should be classified as a terrorist sponsor.
The USA should cut off all aid
-*​


----------



## Roudy

watchingfromafar said:


> The Israeli IDF sniper teams have murdered hundreds of Palestinian children.
> 
> The Israeli navy sank an American ship in international waters.
> 
> The Israelis demolish Palestinian villages and then build “settlements” over them.
> 
> *Israel should be classified as a terrorist sponsor.
> The USA should cut off all aid
> -*​


Do you have a link for Israelis murdering hundreds of “children” for no reason?  

I’m sure you do, you would never post Islamist propaganda or Leftist radical gibberish.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> The Israeli IDF sniper teams have murdered hundreds of Palestinian children.
> 
> The Israeli navy sank an American ship in international waters.
> 
> The Israelis demolish Palestinian villages and then build “settlements” over them.
> 
> *Israel should be classified as a terrorist sponsor.
> The USA should cut off all aid
> -*​


Son of Hamas founder: Hamas wants death of palestinians


----------



## MartyNYC

surada said:


> Muhammad married a wealthy widow in the business of caravan trade. He ran caravan all over Mesopotamia, Syria and the Levant.
> 
> Jizya was less tax than Muslims paid.. and it was only paid by able-bodied men who didn't want to fight to defend the community.
> 
> Muhammad defended the Nestorian Christians and waived jizya.


Muhammad banned Christians from Arabia. Quran, allegedly written by  Muhammad, curses Christians for believing Jesus is the son of God.


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> The Israeli IDF sniper teams have murdered hundreds of Palestinian children.
> 
> The Israeli navy sank an American ship in international waters.
> 
> The Israelis demolish Palestinian villages and then build “settlements” over them.
> 
> *Israel should be classified as a terrorist sponsor.
> The USA should cut off all aid
> -*​


Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi in Israel: “The greatest political achievement of the 20th century was the establishment of the State of Israel. I am very proud that America is Israel's oldest ally with shared democratic values.”

https://main.knesset.gov.il/EN/News/PressReleases/Pages/press16222q.aspx


----------



## MartyNYC

watchingfromafar said:


> The Israeli IDF sniper teams have murdered hundreds of Palestinian children.
> 
> The Israeli navy sank an American ship in international waters.
> 
> The Israelis demolish Palestinian villages and then build “settlements” over them.
> 
> *Israel should be classified as a terrorist sponsor.
> The USA should cut off all aid
> -*​


Arab commentator acknowledges Israeli military is careful to avoid civilian casualties
Al-Jazeera TV Host: Syrian Army Should Take Lesson from Israel in Protecting Civilians

Arab commentator: Hamas uses Gazans as human shields and targets Israeli civilians, and they steal foreign aid 
Vienna-Based Syrian Journalist Thaer Al-Nashef: Hamas Uses Civilians As Human Shields; Hamas Leaders Split Gaza Rehabilitation Aid Among Themselves


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Herodotus called it Syria -Palestine in 500 BC. Both Shakespeare and Chaucer wrote about Palestine.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


>



The Greek historian Herodotus was 500 years before Rome conquered Palestine.


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> The Greek historian Herodotus was 500 years before Rome conquered Palestine.


Every nation on Earth is living on conquered land.
You want someone's land...go to war...if you get your ass kicked...eat shit.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Greek historian Herodotus was 500 years before Rome conquered Palestine.


And you do know that Herodotus called ONLY the area where the Greek Phillistines had lived, Palestinia
He called the region, and not the Phillistines that name.  He did not recognize anyone at all as a Palestinian.

A region, area, is a region.
A People, like the Phillistines, with a history in the area, are a people .

No Palestinians of any kind lived in the area.


----------



## surada

Indeependent said:


> Every nation on Earth is living on conquered land.
> You want someone's land...go to war...if you get your ass kicked...eat shit.



The European Zionists we're given land.. they just wanted more.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> And you do know that Herodotus called ONLY the area where the Greek Phillistines had lived, Palestinia
> He called the region, and not the Phillistines that name.  He did not recognize anyone at all as a Palestinian.
> 
> A region, area, is a region.
> A People, like the Phillistines, with a history in the area, are a people .
> 
> No Palestinians of any kind lived in the area.



All of Palestine was a province of Syria.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> The Greek historian Herodotus was 500 years before Rome conquered Palestine.



This explains why people who can't even pronounce 'P-alestine'
rely their narrative on how foreign empires called the place.

Is that why Arab supremacists call it Nablus, 
because they're indigenous to it?


----------



## surada

rylah said:


> This explains why people who can't even pronounce 'P-alestine'
> rely their narrative on how foreign empires called the place.
> 
> Is that why Arab supremacists call it Nablus,
> because they're indigenous to it?



They say fellahin.


----------



## Indeependent

surada said:


> The European Zionists we're given land.. they just wanted more.


Ok, moron, most of the Eastern Hemisphere changed post WWII.
Any other bullshit you'd care to share?


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> They say fellahin.


They also say fellahin in Morroco, Egypt, and Iraq.

Do Arabs say Nablus, because they're indigenous,
or because they identify with names
imposed by foreign empires?


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> The European Zionists we're given land.. they just wanted more.



More of what? 

They settled for MUCH less than they were promised.


----------



## surada

Mindful said:


> More of what?
> 
> They settled for MUCH less than they were promised.



Have you forgotten the Sykes Picot agreement? The Arabs fought with the British to push the Ottomans out.


----------



## Mindful

surada said:


> Have you forgotten the Sykes Picot agreement? The Arabs fought with the British to push the Ottomans out.



Why is this topic such an intense issue for you?

Maybe you have a thing about Jews?


----------



## Indeependent

Mindful said:


> Why is this topic such an intense issue for you?
> 
> Maybe you have a thing about Jews?


She grew up watching her parents suck Arab Dick.


----------



## rylah

surada said:


> Have you forgotten the Sykes Picot agreement? The Arabs fought with the British to push the Ottomans out.




Ottomans were defeated by the British and Arab imperialists...

Who were the biggest winners?


----------



## Uncensored2008

surada said:


> The Greek historian Herodotus was 500 years before Rome conquered Palestine.



Rome never conquered "Palestine" Hezbollah Hannah, 

Can't conquer what doesn't exist.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Mindful said:


> Why is this topic such an intense issue for you?
> 
> Maybe you have a thing about Jews?



She is Hezbollah.

Hezbollah Hannah.


----------



## surada

MartyNYC said:


> Muhammad banned Christians from Arabia. Quran, allegedly written by  Muhammad, curses Christians for believing Jesus is the son of God.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 731583



Nope . There were Christians in Najran and in Tarout . Muhammad protected them and waived jizya... Especially after the Jewish king of Yemen burned so many of them to death.


----------



## surada

rylah said:


>


The Romans didn't conquer Palestine until 63 BC. Herodotus called it Syria -Palestine in 500 BC.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> The Romans didn't conquer Palestine until 63 BC. Herodotus called it Syria -Palestine in 500 BC.


Herodotus called the Coastal Philistine areas PALESTINIA.  Nowhere else.

The Romans, after defeating Bar Kochba, called the area Syria PALESTINIA, for the two people who had defeated the Jews before the Romans.


----------



## surada

Sixties Fan said:


> Herodotus called the Coastal Philistine areas PALESTINIA.  Nowhere else.
> 
> The Romans, after defeating Bar Kochba, called the area Syria PALESTINIA, for the two people who had defeated the Jews before the Romans.



You might want to read up on Syria.


----------



## Sixties Fan

surada said:


> You might want to read up on Syria.


Post a link as to where it says that.
Israel or Judea were not known as PALESTINIA, or Syria Palestinia before Herodotus or the Romans changing the name after the Bar Kochba defeat.

What was the name of the Raman Province? Judea.  Not Syria Palestinia.

During the Maccabees?  Judea

I do not know which historian would have written that Judea, the Greek name for the Judah tribal territory, would have been called what  you say before the 2nd century CE AT that time in history.


----------

