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

[Slyhunter]

Leave the land of the Israelites to the Jews.

 

[Shusha]

Seriously? Please document the earliest known Arab artifact from the place. I'll compare it with the earliest known Jewish one. Good luck with that.

Yeah. I'M the one arguing that they BOTH have rights to return.

From the Balfour Declaration...

• 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.'

Nothing will be done to prejudice the existing non-Jewish communities.

Do you know what "existing" means.

From a famous Zionist humanist...

• "... Ahad Ha'am warned that the settlers must under no circumstances arouse the wrath of the natives ... 'Yet what do our brethren do in Palestine? Just the very opposite! Serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and suddenly they find themselves in unrestricted freedom and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination ...'

Enter Susha and her empathy brigade.

Do you know what "civil" and "religious" rights mean?

Again, I'm arguing for the rights of both people. Equally. You are not.


How's that ancient 3000 year old Arab artifact coming along? Need more time?

 

[Shusha]

Yep.

Never let it be said I never gave you anything, so here it is.

If you want a country...

We have a country. So that message must be for the Arab Palestinians.

 

[Shusha]

Yep.

And the majority of those people were Arab.

So only majorities get to have rights and self-determination and nations?

 

[rylah]

This is 46 years before the 1st Zionist immigration,
another Arab Pogrom against Jews of Sefad happened 3 years later.

Apparently Arabs didn't think Jews would rise arms against this Disneyland.
Just to think that they themselves gave push to Zionism and even helped Britain invade the land...

You got that ass-backwards. Zionists migrated in with their racist, apartheid policies.

You can't do simple math, or prove any of those delusions without succumbing to compulsive lying and call me backwards?

Fact is - the first political tools of Zionism were created as a response to Arab pogroms against their Jewish neighbors in Syria-Palestine. Then Arabs helped Britain invade... now they whine and blame it all on the Jews.

Palestinian mentality.

 

[montelatici]

Seriously? Please document the earliest known Arab artifact from the place. I'll compare it with the earliest known Jewish one. Good luck with that.

Yeah. I'M the one arguing that they BOTH have rights to return.

From the Balfour Declaration...

• 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.'

Nothing will be done to prejudice the existing non-Jewish communities.

Do you know what "existing" means.

From a famous Zionist humanist...

• "... Ahad Ha'am warned that the settlers must under no circumstances arouse the wrath of the natives ... 'Yet what do our brethren do in Palestine? Just the very opposite! Serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and suddenly they find themselves in unrestricted freedom and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination ...'

Enter Susha and her empathy brigade.

Do you know what "civil" and "religious" rights mean?

Again, I'm arguing for the rights of both people. Equally. You are not.


How's that ancient 3000 year old Arab artifact coming along? Need more time?

Arab is a linguistic denomination. A Moroccan can be an Arab though ethnically a Berber. The Palestinians are decendants of the people that have always lived in the area and through the ages converted to various religions. Canaanites, Arameans and yes, Jews, Samaritans and others are all ancestors of the Palestinians but not of the European Jews.

"A rare cache of gold and silver items dated to 3,600 years ago were found in Gezer – and figurines of the Canaanite counterparts for Ishtar, goddess of love, and Sin, god of the moon. The gods and money were found inside a clay vessel within the foundations of a building, leading to the theory that the pot was placed there as an offering to the gods to bless the building."

And, an Aramean dedication found in Abel Beth Maacah.

 

[Shusha]

Arabs are not Canaanites. Arab culture originated elsewhere and was imported (invasion and conquest). It would be inaccurate to claim that Arabs have been there as long as the Jewish people. Arabs in Israel/Palestine are a mixture of thousands of years of migration and conquest.

Some may very well have been there since ancient times but if so they are formerly people of Jewish ethnicity whose culture was replaced with that of invading cultures.

If you equate Arab with Caananites you are stripping Arabs of everything that makes them Arab. As you correctly point out "Arab" is a linguistic and cultural term. It describes a culture which originated outside the territory in question and not one which indigenous. That is how indigenous is measured.

Just so, a person who carries with them Jewish culture remains Jewish no matter where that person currently resides. Or how long they reside there. That Jewishness is passed down generationally through the culture. Being Jewish does not depend on holding a residence on a particular territory. It does depend on the maintenance and transference of the culture. And Jewishness can easily be identified by the possession of that culture. The place where Jewish culture originated is in Israel around 3000 years ago. Every Jew has ties to that original culture.

However, this does not hold true for Arab Palestinians. There is no way to culturally differentiate between Syrians, Jordanians and Palestinians. And in some aspects the culture is broadly similar over an even wider area. Certainly, in terms of language and religion which are two of the most common markers. (And yes, I realize there are linguistic differences as well as other specific cultural differences between different Arab nations).

The same thing is largely happening in the US and Canada. I am Scots/Irish and German. I know this not because of my culture but because we have evidence of where my direct ancestors came from. But sit me down at a dinner table in Canada with my husband (British) and my friends (Norwegian, Indian, Mexican and Spanish) and culturally you would not be able to tell one from the other. We've all been assimilated to a large degree.

That said, the fact that Arab culture is not indigenous to Israel/Palestine in no way compromises Arab Palestinian claim to the territory. But neither does a large diaspora compromise Jewish claim.


Please don't bother posting any more Khazar nonsense or trying to claim that white Jews aren't really Jews. I've seen it all a dozen times from you. And it misses the point. Which is that the culture is the marker for belonging to a group.

 

[Billo_Really]

The rest of the planet is not all on your side.

Israel will remain. If the Arabs overrun Israel, their major cities from Medina and Mecca to Damascus and Tehran et al will die in nuclear fire.

Either Israel lives, or the Middle East dies.

You're funny!

 

[Billo_Really]

The Palis clearly do not love their children as much as death. Your second statement is shit.

Your first statement is shit. As for my second, international law was created, in part, as a way to prevent another Holocaust. So by thumbing your nose at international law, you are, in effect, shitting on all those whose lives were taken in WWII.

 

[Billo_Really]

Do you know what "civil" and "religious" rights mean?

Again, I'm arguing for the rights of both people. Equally. You are not.


How's that ancient 3000 year old Arab artifact coming along? Need more time?

You cannot be for the occupation and for the rights of both people. The occupation takes away the rights of one side.

 

[Billo_Really]

So only majorities get to have rights and self-determination and nations?

Stop being so obtuse.

 

[Billo_Really]

You can't do simple math, or prove any of those delusions without succumbing to compulsive lying and call me backwards?

Fact is - the first political tools of Zionism were created as a response to Arab pogroms against their Jewish neighbors in Syria-Palestine. Then Arabs helped Britain invade... now they whine and blame it all on the Jews.

Palestinian mentality.

Are you saying there was no Zionist migration?

 

[montelatici]

Arabs are not Canaanites. Arab culture originated elsewhere and was imported (invasion and conquest). It would be inaccurate to claim that Arabs have been there as long as the Jewish people. Arabs in Israel/Palestine are a mixture of thousands of years of migration and conquest.

Some may very well have been there since ancient times but if so they are formerly people of Jewish ethnicity whose culture was replaced with that of invading cultures.

If you equate Arab with Caananites you are stripping Arabs of everything that makes them Arab. As you correctly point out "Arab" is a linguistic and cultural term. It describes a culture which originated outside the territory in question and not one which indigenous. That is how indigenous is measured.

Just so, a person who carries with them Jewish culture remains Jewish no matter where that person currently resides. Or how long they reside there. That Jewishness is passed down generationally through the culture. Being Jewish does not depend on holding a residence on a particular territory. It does depend on the maintenance and transference of the culture. And Jewishness can easily be identified by the possession of that culture. The place where Jewish culture originated is in Israel around 3000 years ago. Every Jew has ties to that original culture.

However, this does not hold true for Arab Palestinians. There is no way to culturally differentiate between Syrians, Jordanians and Palestinians. And in some aspects the culture is broadly similar over an even wider area. Certainly, in terms of language and religion which are two of the most common markers. (And yes, I realize there are linguistic differences as well as other specific cultural differences between different Arab nations).

The same thing is largely happening in the US and Canada. I am Scots/Irish and German. I know this not because of my culture but because we have evidence of where my direct ancestors came from. But sit me down at a dinner table in Canada with my husband (British) and my friends (Norwegian, Indian, Mexican and Spanish) and culturally you would not be able to tell one from the other. We've all been assimilated to a large degree.

That said, the fact that Arab culture is not indigenous to Israel/Palestine in no way compromises Arab Palestinian claim to the territory. But neither does a large diaspora compromise Jewish claim.


Please don't bother posting any more Khazar nonsense or trying to claim that white Jews aren't really Jews. I've seen it all a dozen times from you. And it misses the point. Which is that the culture is the marker for belonging to a group.

Arabs are people that have adopted the language and culture of the Arabians. Mexicans identify as Hispanics because they speak Spanish and have adopted the Spanish culture, but they certainly are not Spaniards. And, recognizing that they are also Indio, does nothing to harm their heritage. Just as recognizing that the ancestors of the Arab speaking people in Palestine were Caananites (and Edomites and others) does nothing to harm their Arab heritage. Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians are just as different between each other as are Peruvians, Argentines and Mexicans. So your dog won't hunt.

I have never brought up anything to do with Khazar. The European Jews are converts to Judaism and have little to know ancestral ties to Palestine. The Europeans are simply invaders that expelled a large part of the indigenous population, who happened to have descended from the various indigenous people of the area, Jews included, that eventually converted to Christianity and subsequently a great number to Islam.

"A detailed look at thousands of genomes finds that Ashkenazim—who make up roughly 80% of the world’s Jews, including 90% of those in America and half of those in Israel—ultimately came not from the Middle East, but from Western Europe, perhaps Italy."

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/10/did-modern-jews-originate-italy

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Jewish people and their state will remain, Billo, long after you and I are in the cemetery.

 

[Indeependent]

Arabs are not Canaanites. Arab culture originated elsewhere and was imported (invasion and conquest). It would be inaccurate to claim that Arabs have been there as long as the Jewish people. Arabs in Israel/Palestine are a mixture of thousands of years of migration and conquest.

Some may very well have been there since ancient times but if so they are formerly people of Jewish ethnicity whose culture was replaced with that of invading cultures.

If you equate Arab with Caananites you are stripping Arabs of everything that makes them Arab. As you correctly point out "Arab" is a linguistic and cultural term. It describes a culture which originated outside the territory in question and not one which indigenous. That is how indigenous is measured.

Just so, a person who carries with them Jewish culture remains Jewish no matter where that person currently resides. Or how long they reside there. That Jewishness is passed down generationally through the culture. Being Jewish does not depend on holding a residence on a particular territory. It does depend on the maintenance and transference of the culture. And Jewishness can easily be identified by the possession of that culture. The place where Jewish culture originated is in Israel around 3000 years ago. Every Jew has ties to that original culture.

However, this does not hold true for Arab Palestinians. There is no way to culturally differentiate between Syrians, Jordanians and Palestinians. And in some aspects the culture is broadly similar over an even wider area. Certainly, in terms of language and religion which are two of the most common markers. (And yes, I realize there are linguistic differences as well as other specific cultural differences between different Arab nations).

The same thing is largely happening in the US and Canada. I am Scots/Irish and German. I know this not because of my culture but because we have evidence of where my direct ancestors came from. But sit me down at a dinner table in Canada with my husband (British) and my friends (Norwegian, Indian, Mexican and Spanish) and culturally you would not be able to tell one from the other. We've all been assimilated to a large degree.

That said, the fact that Arab culture is not indigenous to Israel/Palestine in no way compromises Arab Palestinian claim to the territory. But neither does a large diaspora compromise Jewish claim.


Please don't bother posting any more Khazar nonsense or trying to claim that white Jews aren't really Jews. I've seen it all a dozen times from you. And it misses the point. Which is that the culture is the marker for belonging to a group.

Arabs are people that have adopted the language and culture of the Arabians. Mexicans identify as Hispanics because they speak Spanish and have adopted the Spanish culture, but they certainly are not Spaniards. And, recognizing that they are also Indio, does nothing to harm their heritage. Just as recognizing that the ancestors of the Arab speaking people in Palestine were Caananites (and Edomites and others) does nothing to harm their Arab heritage. Syrians, Palestinians and Jordanians are just as different between each other as are Peruvians, Argentines and Mexicans. So your dog won't hunt.

I have never brought up anything to do with Khazar. The European Jews are converts to Judaism and have little to know ancestral ties to Palestine. The Europeans are simply invaders that expelled a large part of the indigenous population, who happened to have descended from the various indigenous people of the area, Jews included, that eventually converted to Christianity and subsequently a great number to Islam.

"A detailed look at thousands of genomes finds that Ashkenazim—who make up roughly 80% of the world’s Jews, including 90% of those in America and half of those in Israel—ultimately came not from the Middle East, but from Western Europe, perhaps Italy."

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/10/did-modern-jews-originate-italy

Why not write a complaint letter to Jeezus?

 

[montelatici]

The Jewish people and their state will remain, Billo, long after you and I are in the cemetery.

Why would the Jewish people not remain? Now, a Jewish state is another matter. It will eventually become a secular state with no particular religion favored. Apartheid states seem to have a short shelf-life.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Jewish people and their state will remain, Billo, long after you and I are in the cemetery.

Why would the Jewish people not remain? Now, a Jewish state is another matter. It will eventually become a secular state with no particular religion favored. Apartheid states seem to have a short shelf-life.

There is no apartheid state is the point.

The Jewish state will simply say that Gaza and the PLA are not their concern, cede the territory to the UN, and secure her borders.

 

[montelatici]

The Jewish people and their state will remain, Billo, long after you and I are in the cemetery.

Why would the Jewish people not remain? Now, a Jewish state is another matter. It will eventually become a secular state with no particular religion favored. Apartheid states seem to have a short shelf-life.

There is no apartheid state is the point.

The Jewish state will simply say that Gaza and the PLA are not their concern, cede the territory to the UN, and secure her borders.

Of course Israel is an Apartheid state. The Jews are, like the whites in Rhodesia and South Africa, separated from the non-Jews, either through different laws for Jews and/or through the pseudo-Bantustans created to house the non-Jews that are completely controlled by the Jews.

Israel could have ceded territory but it hasn't because it will never relinquish control of Gaza's air space, borders and territorial sea and will never relinquish complete control of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. So it is and will remain an Apartheid state until it becomes to difficult to control the growing majority of non-Jews under Jewish rule. Much like what happened to the Eurpeans in Rhodesia and South Africa.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Israel, of course, is not such a state.

The fallacy of false equivalency used by montelatici is risible.

The Chief Justice of Israel is an Arab, as are many in the LEO and the military and the legislature and in the courts and in the schools.

When the militants in Gaza and the PLA stop terrorism against Israel, once they love their children move than death, then peace can come to Gaza and PLA. That is up to them.

 

[Shusha]

Do you know what "civil" and "religious" rights mean?

Again, I'm arguing for the rights of both people. Equally. You are not.


How's that ancient 3000 year old Arab artifact coming along? Need more time?

You cannot be for the occupation and for the rights of both people. The occupation takes away the rights of one side.

You grievously misunderstand my position if you think I am "for" the "occupation". I am for the creation of two other States, for the Arab Palestinian people, with them having full sovereignty, self-determination and self-governance, based loosely on the 1949 Armistice Lines, with land swaps, as negotiated by Israel and the Arab Palestinians in a mutual agreement and enduring peace treaty.

While we are waiting for that to occur, Israel's security and the safety of her people takes priority over ALL ELSE. Without exception. Security measures must be in place until the Arab Palestinians stop trying to destroy the State of Israel and murder her citizens. This will be evident when -- the governments of the Arab Palestinians stop inciting hatred and violence, stop calling for the murder of Jews and Israelis, stop pay for slay and the celebration of dead Arab Palestinians, and when all attacks, riots, "protests", intifada, and instigation of war have ceased for a good long amount of time -- a year is a good starting place.

The problem with your idea of the "occupation" and the need for Israel to unilaterally "end the occupation" is that you want none of the prerequisites for peace and security to be in place prior to the withdrawal. No peace treaty, no recognition, no end of hostilities, no agreement of what is considered "occupation", no security guarantees, no formal border, no infrastructure, no proper government, no economic discussions, nothing.

We tried it your way. And 62 people died because of it yesterday.