The Jewish People Have No Connection to the Lands of the British Mandate

[montelatici]

"B) You have not a shred of evidence to support the idea that NO Arab Muslims colonized Judea during the Arab Muslim expansion EXACTLY as referenced, also many times. Which you seem desperate to deny once again."

The fact that Arabia, a desert, could support only a tiny population makes it clear that there could not have been many Arabians able to settle any of the conquered lands. As all historians have noted, the Arabians were the leaders that administered the conquered lands the bulk of the troops were Christian converts. The fact is, the Arabians did not have much of a genetic impact anywhere they conquered because of their small numbers. Sicily was ruled by Arabs for as the Emirate of Sicily for nearly 3 centuries Spain for even longer and the Arabian genetic influence is pretty minimal. Why would it be any different in Palestine which was far less attractive to settle than Spain or Sicily.

For some perspective, all of Arabia, prior to the discovery of oil 1938, had a population of less than 2 million people. How many people do you suppose lived in Arabia in the year 650 AD?

Think logically.

 

[montelatici]

The Judaic people obviously have a connection to the land of Judea, all of it.​

Sure they do. So do a lot of other people. What is your point?

Once again your premise is wrong. Yes, Judaic people have a connection with Judea. No, Bronze age and even neolithic people were tribal in nature and highly territorial, so it is unlikely that "a lot" of other people/tribes jointly inhabited this area. What we do know from modern science is that certain haplotypes and their uniqueness show clearly a colonization of the Judaic area during the Arab Muslim expansion. Which has been pointed out previously numerous times, which lends one to wonder why this simple fact must be pointed out again and again.

There was no "Judaic" area during the Muslim conquests of Roman (Byzantine) Palaestina Prima, the area of Palestine and the surrounding lands were 100% Christian, and the Muslim expansion was almost exclusively through conversion, not a transfer of population.

LOL another outright lie. I'm sorry but you have not one shred of evidence to support this ludicrous assertion.

Clearly not only do you have not a shred of evidence to support this latest lie in a string of lies but you are once again denying the scientific evidence to the contrary and ignore the references provided.

The evidence for denial similar to the denial of climate science is becoming overwhelming

Factual, historical evidence is put before you and you accuse others of being "deniers"?

Awesome!

I believe the questions in the OP to be loaded...

However, suffice to say....

Jews have a "connection" with MANY countries throughout the world... Afterall, most Jews do not come from just Israel! Most Jews have never been to Israel...

In the same way that Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and on and on and on have a "connection" to MANY countries throughout the world...

Nonsense, the data presented clearly noted between the years considered, starting with about 20% and ending with roughly 60% of immigration came from "other" countries than those European countries listed.

Other European countries. The data is included in the volume which you can read for yourself for all countries by year and 95% of the Jewish migration is from Europe.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

On another thread, it was claimed that the Jewish people have no connection to the lands in question in this conflict.

This thread is intended for all those of similar mind to defend this claim.

Do the Jewish people have connections to the lands in question? I would challenge defenders to respond based on cultural attributes such as language, religion, stories, history, clothing, food, laws, celebrations, holidays, etc.

Initially, my question would be: Do you believe that the Jewish people NEVER inhabited the land in question?

It depends...

The Yiddish of Europe most likely not but those of Jewish blood that occupied small sections of the region that have been there since the time of David, then yes.

 

[Boston1]

"B) You have not a shred of evidence to support the idea that NO Arab Muslims colonized Judea during the Arab Muslim expansion EXACTLY as referenced, also many times. Which you seem desperate to deny once again."

The fact that Arabia, a desert, could support only a tiny population makes it clear that there could not have been many Arabians able to settle any of the conquered lands. As all historians have noted, the Arabians were the leaders that administered the conquered lands the bulk of the troops were Christian converts. The fact is, the Arabians did not have much of a genetic impact anywhere they conquered because of their small numbers. Sicily was ruled by Arabs for as the Emirate of Sicily for nearly 3 centuries Spain for even longer and the Arabian genetic influence is pretty minimal. Why would it be any different in Palestine which was far less attractive to settle than Spain or Sicily.

For some perspective, all of Arabia, prior to the discovery of oil 1938, had a population of less than 2 million people. How many people do you suppose lived in Arabia in the year 650 AD?

Think logically.

Well its entertaining I'll give it that.

OK then if you refuse to review the detailed genetic analysis of people within this region then I guess I'll have to post that link for the fifth or sixth time and this time refute your assertions by presenting the information to the group even if you refuse to consider it.

PS your opinion piece is unfounded within the scientific literature

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.

 

[Boston1]

Once again your premise is wrong. Yes, Judaic people have a connection with Judea. No, Bronze age and even neolithic people were tribal in nature and highly territorial, so it is unlikely that "a lot" of other people/tribes jointly inhabited this area. What we do know from modern science is that certain haplotypes and their uniqueness show clearly a colonization of the Judaic area during the Arab Muslim expansion. Which has been pointed out previously numerous times, which lends one to wonder why this simple fact must be pointed out again and again.

There was no "Judaic" area during the Muslim conquests of Roman (Byzantine) Palaestina Prima, the area of Palestine and the surrounding lands were 100% Christian, and the Muslim expansion was almost exclusively through conversion, not a transfer of population.

LOL another outright lie. I'm sorry but you have not one shred of evidence to support this ludicrous assertion.

Clearly not only do you have not a shred of evidence to support this latest lie in a string of lies but you are once again denying the scientific evidence to the contrary and ignore the references provided.

The evidence for denial similar to the denial of climate science is becoming overwhelming

Factual, historical evidence is put before you and you accuse others of being "deniers"?

Awesome!

I believe the questions in the OP to be loaded...

However, suffice to say....

Jews have a "connection" with MANY countries throughout the world... Afterall, most Jews do not come from just Israel! Most Jews have never been to Israel...

In the same way that Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and on and on and on have a "connection" to MANY countries throughout the world...

Nonsense, the data presented clearly noted between the years considered, starting with about 20% and ending with roughly 60% of immigration came from "other" countries than those European countries listed.

Other European countries. The data is included in the volume which you can read for yourself for all countries by year and 95% of the Jewish migration is from Europe.

LOL

Well thats very interesting. So you wish to prove that 100% of emigration into the mandate area during the mandate years was European so you present a list of ONLY European countries and pretend it represents ALL countries ?

Haven't you by presenting ONLY European countries for consideration biased the data ?

Sounds like your source just shot you in the foot again.

 

[montelatici]

There was no "Judaic" area during the Muslim conquests of Roman (Byzantine) Palaestina Prima, the area of Palestine and the surrounding lands were 100% Christian, and the Muslim expansion was almost exclusively through conversion, not a transfer of population.

LOL another outright lie. I'm sorry but you have not one shred of evidence to support this ludicrous assertion.

Clearly not only do you have not a shred of evidence to support this latest lie in a string of lies but you are once again denying the scientific evidence to the contrary and ignore the references provided.

The evidence for denial similar to the denial of climate science is becoming overwhelming

Factual, historical evidence is put before you and you accuse others of being "deniers"?

Awesome!

I believe the questions in the OP to be loaded...

However, suffice to say....

Jews have a "connection" with MANY countries throughout the world... Afterall, most Jews do not come from just Israel! Most Jews have never been to Israel...

In the same way that Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and on and on and on have a "connection" to MANY countries throughout the world...

Nonsense, the data presented clearly noted between the years considered, starting with about 20% and ending with roughly 60% of immigration came from "other" countries than those European countries listed.

Other European countries. The data is included in the volume which you can read for yourself for all countries by year and 95% of the Jewish migration is from Europe.

LOL

Well thats very interesting. So you wish to prove that 100% of emigration into the mandate area during the mandate years was European so you present a list of ONLY European countries and pretend it represents ALL countries ?

Haven't you by presenting ONLY European countries for consideration biased the data ?

Sounds like your source just shot you in the foot again.

I provided the link to the pages of data for every Mandate year. Posting 30 pages or so of source data does not seem appropriate. I provided the link to the source documentation.

The summary page I provided states what it represents, the major sources of Jewish migration to Palestine. Keep digging.

 

[montelatici]

"B) You have not a shred of evidence to support the idea that NO Arab Muslims colonized Judea during the Arab Muslim expansion EXACTLY as referenced, also many times. Which you seem desperate to deny once again."

The fact that Arabia, a desert, could support only a tiny population makes it clear that there could not have been many Arabians able to settle any of the conquered lands. As all historians have noted, the Arabians were the leaders that administered the conquered lands the bulk of the troops were Christian converts. The fact is, the Arabians did not have much of a genetic impact anywhere they conquered because of their small numbers. Sicily was ruled by Arabs for as the Emirate of Sicily for nearly 3 centuries Spain for even longer and the Arabian genetic influence is pretty minimal. Why would it be any different in Palestine which was far less attractive to settle than Spain or Sicily.

For some perspective, all of Arabia, prior to the discovery of oil 1938, had a population of less than 2 million people. How many people do you suppose lived in Arabia in the year 650 AD?

Think logically.

Well its entertaining I'll give it that.

OK then if you refuse to review the detailed genetic analysis of people within this region then I guess I'll have to post that link for the fifth or sixth time and this time refute your assertions by presenting the information to the group even if you refuse to consider it.

PS your opinion piece is unfounded within the scientific literature

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.

Now for the facts rather than propaganda. Let's start with Egypt.

"Northern Egyptians are a bit more cosmopolitan in their ancestry 64.8% indigenous African. About 20% of the Y chrom0somes are near Eastern in origin, and 10.5 % are R Y chromosomes. However, some of these near eastern and European Y chromosomes show an ancient entry to Africa (G, K2, R1, R1b are 8,000 BP and older) and any historical contribution from foreign men is more likely to be in the 15% area. Divided by two (no recent female contribution to speak of). This makes non-dynastic Egyptian population around the 7% mark in Lower Egypt; and only some of this is Arab.

To sum up, there doesn’t seem to be majority ‘Arab’ genetic component to the Egyptian DNA pool, 20% absolute maximum. And a lot of the non African DNA is traceable to the Neolithic farming expansion that swept across North Africa, so it would be a lot lower in reality."

Egyptians are not Arabs, they are Egyptians.

 

[Boston1]

"B) You have not a shred of evidence to support the idea that NO Arab Muslims colonized Judea during the Arab Muslim expansion EXACTLY as referenced, also many times. Which you seem desperate to deny once again."

The fact that Arabia, a desert, could support only a tiny population makes it clear that there could not have been many Arabians able to settle any of the conquered lands. As all historians have noted, the Arabians were the leaders that administered the conquered lands the bulk of the troops were Christian converts. The fact is, the Arabians did not have much of a genetic impact anywhere they conquered because of their small numbers. Sicily was ruled by Arabs for as the Emirate of Sicily for nearly 3 centuries Spain for even longer and the Arabian genetic influence is pretty minimal. Why would it be any different in Palestine which was far less attractive to settle than Spain or Sicily.

For some perspective, all of Arabia, prior to the discovery of oil 1938, had a population of less than 2 million people. How many people do you suppose lived in Arabia in the year 650 AD?

Think logically.

Well its entertaining I'll give it that.

OK then if you refuse to review the detailed genetic analysis of people within this region then I guess I'll have to post that link for the fifth or sixth time and this time refute your assertions by presenting the information to the group even if you refuse to consider it.

PS your opinion piece is unfounded within the scientific literature

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.

Now for the facts rather than propaganda. Let's start with Egypt.

"Northern Egyptians are a bit more cosmopolitan in their ancestry 64.8% indigenous African. About 20% of the Y chrom0somes are near Eastern in origin, and 10.5 % are R Y chromosomes. However, some of these near eastern and European Y chromosomes show an ancient entry to Africa (G, K2, R1, R1b are 8,000 BP and older) and any historical contribution from foreign men is more likely to be in the 15% area. Divided by two (no recent female contribution to speak of). This makes non-dynastic Egyptian population around the 7% mark in Lower Egypt; and only some of this is Arab.

To sum up, there doesn’t seem to be majority ‘Arab’ genetic component to the Egyptian DNA pool, 20% absolute maximum. And a lot of the non African DNA is traceable to the Neolithic farming expansion that swept across North Africa, so it would be a lot lower in reality."

Egyptians are not Arabs, they are Egyptians.

You are funny

Bait and switch again, I love it.

So now you want to discuss the differences between the Arabs and the Egyptians rather than the colonization of Arabs in the 9th century ce into the area of modern Israel.

 

[montelatici]

There was no colonization by the Arabs, and if there was, it was at the expense of the native Christians. The Arabs, in fact, allowed Jews to enter Jerusalem after they conquered the city.

 

[Shusha]

Even the title of the thread is false. The British Mandate did not have any land.

I know. I struggled with what to call the lands in the title. It was the best I could come up with. Everyone knows what I mean.

 

[Shusha]

There was no colonization by the Arabs.

Of course there was colonization by Arabs. The definitive change in culture, language, religious faith, etc. is proof of that on its own. Native people don't just suddenly change their culture without a strong and numerous influence from others.

 

[Boston1]

There was no colonization by the Arabs, and if there was, it was at the expense of the native Christians. The Arabs, in fact, allowed Jews to enter Jerusalem after they conquered the city.

You have a very narrow view of history, today many tools exist by which we can track the movements to people, cultures and races throughout history as the migrate and colonize various areas.

OK then. Lets review

Quote

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.
End Quote

I might further add from the same citation

Quote
These documented historical events, together with the finding of a particular Eu10 haplotype in Yemenis, Palestinians, and NW Africans, are suggestive of a recent common origin of these chromosomes. (Bosch et al. 2001)
End Quote

 

[montelatici]

There was no colonization by the Arabs.

Of course there was colonization by Arabs. The definitive change in culture, language, religious faith, etc. is proof of that on its own. Native people don't just suddenly change their culture without a strong and numerous influence from others.

Colonization implies the transfer of people to an area and the replacement of the native people with the colonizing people. That just never happened, the populations of the areas invaded by the Arabians were a hundredfold of the available Arabian (Bedouin) population that led the invasions.

"The mainstay of Umayyad dynastic power was the ruling class consisting of
an Arab military aristocracy, who formed a privileged class greatly
outnumbered by non-Arabic converts to Islam - Egyptians, Syrians, Persians,
Berbers, and others...."

Islam, The Spread Of Islam

 

[Boston1]

From
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of t..
www.pnas.org/...
Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a ...

Quote
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.
End Quote

 

[montelatici]

There was no colonization by the Arabs, and if there was, it was at the expense of the native Christians. The Arabs, in fact, allowed Jews to enter Jerusalem after they conquered the city.

You have a very narrow view of history, today many tools exist by which we can track the movements to people, cultures and races throughout history as the migrate and colonize various areas.

OK then. Lets review

Quote

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.
End Quote

I might further add from the same citation

Quote
These documented historical events, together with the finding of a particular Eu10 haplotype in Yemenis, Palestinians, and NW Africans, are suggestive of a recent common origin of these chromosomes. (Bosch et al. 2001)
End Quote

LOL. 9th century BCE? You are out of your mind as are your sources. The Romans conquered all of the area in 63 BCE. There were no "Arab" colonists around.

 

[Boston1]

There was no colonization by the Arabs.

Of course there was colonization by Arabs. The definitive change in culture, language, religious faith, etc. is proof of that on its own. Native people don't just suddenly change their culture without a strong and numerous influence from others.

Colonization implies the transfer of people to an area and the replacement of the native people with the colonizing people. That just never happened, the populations of the areas invaded by the Arabians were a hundredfold of the available Arabian (Bedouin) population that led the invasions.

"The mainstay of Umayyad dynastic power was the ruling class consisting of
an Arab military aristocracy, who formed a privileged class greatly
outnumbered by non-Arabic converts to Islam - Egyptians, Syrians, Persians,
Berbers, and others...."

Islam, The Spread Of Islam

Nonsense. Aside from your ignoring the scientific data in preference of your own unsupported logic you are forgetting that Islam didn't even exist until the 7th century it wasn't until the military expansion of Islam in roughly the 9th that large numbers of Arab speaking peoples colonized the area of modern day Israel.

On the other hand it can be shown that modern Judaic people are closer to their ancient counterparts than any other group within the studies specified thus far.

Once again the revisionists are simply not able to escape modern scientific findings.

Whats funny is that if you were truly following the genetic studies you'd have at least some rational argument to present. But your missing that boat completely. I've been trying to offer you a way out but you are just not finding it.

 

[Boston1]

There was no colonization by the Arabs, and if there was, it was at the expense of the native Christians. The Arabs, in fact, allowed Jews to enter Jerusalem after they conquered the city.

You have a very narrow view of history, today many tools exist by which we can track the movements to people, cultures and races throughout history as the migrate and colonize various areas.

OK then. Lets review

Quote

From

Genetic Evidence for the Expansion of Arabian Tribes into ...

I'll try and keep my quotes short however the paper deserves a complete read

Quote
Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).
End quote

Quote
The highest frequency of Eu10 (30%–62.5%) has been observed so far in various Moslem Arab populations in the Middle East (Semino et al. 2000; Nebel et al. 2001). The most frequent Eu10 microsatellite haplotype in NW Africans is identical to a modal haplotype (DYS19-14, DYS388-17, DYS390-23, DYS391-11, DYS392-11, DYS393-12) of Moslem Arabs who live in a small area in the north of Israel, the Galilee (Nebel et al. 2000). This haplotype, which is present in the Galilee at 18.5%, was termed the modal haplotype of the Galilee (MH Galilee) (Nebel et al. 2000). Notably, it is absent from two distinct non-Arab Middle Eastern populations, Jews and Muslim Kurds
End Quote

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984). Originally referring to nomads of central and northern Arabia, the term “Arabs” later came to include the sedentary population of the south, which had its own language and culture. The term thus covers two different stocks that became linguistically and culturally unified yet retained consciousness of their discrete origins (Grohmann et al. 1960; Rentz 1960; Caskel 1966, pp. 19–47; Goldziher 1967, pp. 45–97, 164–190; Beeston 1995; also see Peters 1999). Migrations of southern Arabian tribes northwards have been recorded mainly since the 3d century ce. These tribes settled in various places in central and northern Arabia, as well as in the Fertile Crescent, including areas that are now part of Israel (Dussaud 1955; Ricci 1984).
End Quote

Quote
It is very difficult to trace the tribal composition of the Muslim armies, but it is known that tribes of Yemeni origin formed the bulk of those Muslim contingents that conquered Egypt in the middle of the 7th century ce. Egypt was the primary base for raids further west into the Maghrib. The conquest of North Africa was difficult and took a few decades to complete (Abun-Nasr 1987). The region was militarily and administratively attached to Egypt until the beginning of the 8th century ce. Arab tribes of northern origin entered North Africa as well, both as troops and as migrants. A major wave of migration of such tribes, the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym, occurred during the 11th century ce (Abun-Nasr 1987).
End Quote

I could go on but I don't want to disrespect forum rules concerning copy right. Although I'm pretty sure this particular paper is published under public commons

I'd make special note of the following

Quote
The term “Arab,” as well as the presence of Arabs in the Syrian desert and the Fertile Crescent, is first seen in the Assyrian sources from the 9th century bce(Eph'al 1984).
End Quote

Which would indicate that Arab colonization of the areas immediately surrounding modern day Israel occurred some time around the 9th century bce. Whereas Judaic presence in this same area goes back well into the bronze age and likely as far back the neolithic era and beyond.
End Quote

I might further add from the same citation

Quote
These documented historical events, together with the finding of a particular Eu10 haplotype in Yemenis, Palestinians, and NW Africans, are suggestive of a recent common origin of these chromosomes. (Bosch et al. 2001)
End Quote

LOL. 9th century BCE? You are out of your mind as are your sources. The Romans conquered all of the area in 63 BCE. There were no "Arab" colonists around.

Another bait and switch, the topic is if the Israeli's have a connection with ancient Judea. I'm not ( in this conversation at least ) interested in discussing the Roman occupation

However its obvious that you are simply not grasping the ebb and flow of colonizing agents over the centuries within the mandated area.

 

[montelatici]

The mention of Roman conquest and the date highlights the ridiculousness of your assertion that Arabs were colonists in the 9th century BCE. Of course every statement you make is Hasbara propaganda that has been debunked many times here over the years.

 

[Boston1]

There are no Arab colonists. Native people cannot be colonists. Your little word game is just childish.

The Native Americans called America home but there were no countries or states in the Americas.

The only revisionists are the Zionists.

The Palestinians do need a Zionist movement tho.. An organized, visionary, and rational leadership that has the GOAL of establishing a nation-state.. Zionist movement was a ethnic world-wide movement, not really a colonial movement with the sanctions and blessings of an established nation.. Traditionally, you can't be a colony without being a colony of some existing structure. There's no superstructure to the "colony" of Israel.. Unless you're Jim Jones or something like that -- there is no other meaning for the word..

The reality is that endless meaningless dying for an UNORGANIZED resistance is plain stupid.. And those of us who WOULD LIKE to see the Palis gain some autonomy -- are frustrated with the couch muffins who egg on the senseless "resistance" and take every opportunity to degrade the PA -- which is the best chance that Palestine had for serious negotiated gains towards nation-hood in the last 100 years..

Of course Israel was a colonial project, the Zionists self-described themselves as colonists and had the support and "blessing" of Britain and other colonial powers.

There is no longer any possibility of establishing a Palestinian state even if the Israelis were agreeable to it, and they are not.

LMAO laughably incorrect as usual, I'm starting to see your game here.

All genetic evidence suggests that the Judaic people residing in Europe were RETURNING to their NATIVE HOMELAND. As their roots can be traced back something like 4000 years in this area through archaeology and around 40,000 years using genetic studies

 

[pbel]

There are no Arab colonists. Native people cannot be colonists. Your little word game is just childish.

The Native Americans called America home but there were no countries or states in the Americas.

The only revisionists are the Zionists.

The Palestinians do need a Zionist movement tho.. An organized, visionary, and rational leadership that has the GOAL of establishing a nation-state.. Zionist movement was a ethnic world-wide movement, not really a colonial movement with the sanctions and blessings of an established nation.. Traditionally, you can't be a colony without being a colony of some existing structure. There's no superstructure to the "colony" of Israel.. Unless you're Jim Jones or something like that -- there is no other meaning for the word..

The reality is that endless meaningless dying for an UNORGANIZED resistance is plain stupid.. And those of us who WOULD LIKE to see the Palis gain some autonomy -- are frustrated with the couch muffins who egg on the senseless "resistance" and take every opportunity to degrade the PA -- which is the best chance that Palestine had for serious negotiated gains towards nation-hood in the last 100 years..

Of course Israel was a colonial project, the Zionists self-described themselves as colonists and had the support and "blessing" of Britain and other colonial powers.

There is no longer any possibility of establishing a Palestinian state even if the Israelis were agreeable to it, and they are not.

LMAO laughably incorrect as usual, I'm starting to see your game here.

All genetic evidence suggests that the Judaic people residing in Europe were RETURNING to their NATIVE HOMELAND. As their roots can be traced back something like 4000 years in this area through archaeology and around 40,000 years using genetic studies

I'm laughing my ass off because genetic studies have proven that the Palestinians are more closely related to the ancient Jews than the European invaders with german sounding names.

Keep finagling.