Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[JoelT1]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Arabs laugh: When were there any “palestinians?”

 

[JoelT1]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Funny: “Palestinians” who are Arabs identify with “palestine” an English/Latin/Greek word referring to Philistines who were Greek LOL

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

 

[Coyote]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Funny: “Palestinians” who are Arabs identify with “palestine” an English/Latin/Greek word referring to Philistines who were Greek LOL

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

 

[JoelT1]

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.


All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Funny: “Palestinians” who are Arabs identify with “palestine” an English/Latin/Greek word referring to Philistines who were Greek LOL

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

 

[Coyote]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

Agree.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.


All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Funny: “Palestinians” who are Arabs identify with “palestine” an English/Latin/Greek word referring to Philistines who were Greek LOL

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

So you are talking about forced deportationn of millions of people? That is what you support?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Funny: “Palestinians” who are Arabs identify with “palestine” an English/Latin/Greek word referring to Philistines who were Greek LOL

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

So you are talking about forced deportationn of millions of people? That is what you support?

Coyote, Joel is not Jewish. Nor Israeli.
He is speaking for himself and what he believes in.
That is not the Israeli or Jewish position, and you need to consider that.

Reacting to what one poster or another says, instead of looking at the facts on the ground, and what the history has been since 1920 needs to be the starting point of thinking and discussing about this.

One cannot sweep before 1948 or before 1967 under the rug.

Or the Muslim, Arab culture and mentality in regards to the Jewish people, either.

The previous 1300 years tell a lot about how Muslims were taught about the Jewish people and how they should be treated.

And, yes, that matters a lot and is at the bottom of this conflict, and why the Arab leaders (not the population) have refused a State in 1937, 1947 and after that.

 

[JoelT1]

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

So you are talking about forced deportationn of millions of people? That is what you support?

Coyote, Joel is not Jewish. Nor Israeli.
He is speaking for himself and what he believes in.
That is not the Israeli or Jewish position, and you need to consider that.

Reacting to what one poster or another says, instead of looking at the facts on the ground, and what the history has been since 1920 needs to be the starting point of thinking and discussing about this.

One cannot sweep before 1948 or before 1967 under the rug.

Or the Muslim, Arab culture and mentality in regards to the Jewish people, either.

The previous 1300 years tell a lot about how Muslims were taught about the Jewish people and how they should be treated.

And, yes, that matters a lot and is at the bottom of this conflict, and why the Arab leaders (not the population) have refused a State in 1937, 1947 and after that.

Birdbrain, you don’t know me, so STFU

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ Sixties Fan, Coyote, et al,

The names we use as placeholders for the various parties is, in the final analysis, really unimportant.

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?

And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."

You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

(COMMENT)

The greater questions here are about political contentment of the 366 million Arab People in the world; and the preservation of the Jewish People ≈ 15 million in number (24 times smaller by comparison). You can call them Brand "X" and Brand "Y" the effect is still the same.

If we examine Brand "X" we find a huge cultural difference with that of Brand "Y".

• One (in the 21st Century) embraces the concept that humanity must care for the Planet -- to preserve that which has been created. It was once called the Principle of Bal Tashchit (do not destroy), which forbids needless destruction both that living and that of treasure.

• One embraces destruction of the world’s heritage and artifacts. It is not uncommon to discover the burning ancient manuscripts, stealing art --- and --- demolishing ancient architecture that is not in keeping with a particular interpretation of a code.

• One Brand forbids a destructive act that will cause the extinction of a species. The other encourages the elimination of alternative Brands.
​

The identity names means nothing. What the values and morals are do. Theoretically, both Brands should be valued the same and both should have similar ideals. BUT! They don't. Violent extremism grows in the vacuum of an identity crisis between brands.

Just My Thought,
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[JoelT1]

“Palestinians” are Arabs, so how come there are no histories of them in Arabic nor any mention of them in Arab history?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Chomsky on how Hamas policies are more conducive to peace than the U.S.'s or Israel's

 

[JoelT1]

Who are the “palestinians”? Do they speak “palestinian”? Is their religion “palestinian”?

 

[Shusha]

Chomsky on how Hamas policies are more conducive to peace than the U.S.'s or Israel's

Seriously? So a temporary promise not to use violence while demanding the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel and proposing to resurrect violence at any time it feels the need is PREFERABLE to a permanent pact of peaceful mutual recognition and co-operation? Get bent.

 

[Shusha]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

 

[Coyote]

Ok...now I'm in a position to better answer (ie type ) - so I'll try to answer the various posts.

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLcriteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

I think there are multiple questions:
When does a people become a people?
When does a people cease to be a people?
When does a people cease to belong to a broader cultural group (a people)?

No clear answers.

We have the European Union and the common label of "Europeans" and European values.
Then we have the Germans, British, French, Spanish etc.
Then we have the Catalonians, Basquess, Scots, Welsh, Shetland Islanders, Cornish....
The Basques straddle both France and Spain.
You have the Kurds but - despite being Kurds there are huge cultural differences between Iranian Kurds, Turkish Kurds and Iraqi Kurds.
You have the so-called Arabs...but are Moroccan Arabs the same as Saudi Arabs? What are the Lebonese?

Self identification is not the only criteria, but it's a one. I think other criteria would be a shared heritage, common values and culture and traditions. I don't think they need to be unique from all others to be valid.

Where does it end? Any country can make that argument. This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights. The Palestinians were not invented - no more than the Jews. Every people has to start somewhere. Just because they coalesced as a distinct group later doesn't invalidate them.

And the issue of sovereign rights does not necessarily follow. There are many people's recognized as people's, without individual sovereignty and there are many sovereign countries comprised of multiple peoples.

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?

Do they have roots there? Have they or their families lived there? What ties do they have to those regions that would justify such a claim?

And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

I know...you are totally cool Shusha

 

[thetor]

Ok...now I'm in a position to better answer (ie type ) - so I'll try to answer the various posts.

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLcriteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

I think there are multiple questions:
When does a people become a people?
When does a people cease to be a people?
When does a people cease to belong to a broader cultural group (a people)?

No clear answers.

We have the European Union and the common label of "Europeans" and European values.
Then we have the Germans, British, French, Spanish etc.
Then we have the Catalonians, Basquess, Scots, Welsh, Shetland Islanders, Cornish....
The Basques straddle both France and Spain.
You have the Kurds but - despite being Kurds there are huge cultural differences between Iranian Kurds, Turkish Kurds and Iraqi Kurds.
You have the so-called Arabs...but are Moroccan Arabs the same as Saudi Arabs? What are the Lebonese?

Self identification is not the only criteria, but it's a one. I think other criteria would be a shared heritage, common values and culture and traditions. I don't think they need to be unique from all others to be valid.

Where does it end? Any country can make that argument. This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights. The Palestinians were not invented - no more than the Jews. Every people has to start somewhere. Just because they coalesced as a distinct group later doesn't invalidate them.

And the issue of sovereign rights does not necessarily follow. There are many people's recognized as people's, without individual sovereignty and there are many sovereign countries comprised of multiple peoples.

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?

Do they have roots there? Have they or their families lived there? What ties do they have to those regions that would justify such a claim?

And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

I know...you are totally cool Shusha

You may think so Coyote,I and others do not

 

[thetor]

Around 2,000 pilgrims from the Palestinian territories, Israel and Jordan, some waving Palestinian flags, attend the mass as well as Abbas, who had a private audience with the pope on Saturday.

How can the so-called "Evangelical Christians" support the Anti-Christian Zionists in their fight against Palestinians, be these Palestinians Christians or Muslims?

Both

 

[thetor]

How does anyone or any nation even begin to negotiate peace with a people who prefer death over life?

Well, it seems that Zionists threaten with the death of our entire planet, if their regime is in danger:

Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch(2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.'

I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third.

We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[30]


Samson Option - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How can you negotiate with people who have chosen to behave like "mad dogs"?
How can you negotiate with people who threaten to destroy the entire planet?

Why do countries with nuclear weapons have them? Are they all mad dogs? Is Iran a mad dog? Their war against Sunni Islam could well endanger the planet.

Israel included

 

[JoelT1]

Ok...now I'm in a position to better answer (ie type ) - so I'll try to answer the various posts.

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLcriteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

I think there are multiple questions:
When does a people become a people?
When does a people cease to be a people?
When does a people cease to belong to a broader cultural group (a people)?

No clear answers.

We have the European Union and the common label of "Europeans" and European values.
Then we have the Germans, British, French, Spanish etc.
Then we have the Catalonians, Basquess, Scots, Welsh, Shetland Islanders, Cornish....
The Basques straddle both France and Spain.
You have the Kurds but - despite being Kurds there are huge cultural differences between Iranian Kurds, Turkish Kurds and Iraqi Kurds.
You have the so-called Arabs...but are Moroccan Arabs the same as Saudi Arabs? What are the Lebonese?

Self identification is not the only criteria, but it's a one. I think other criteria would be a shared heritage, common values and culture and traditions. I don't think they need to be unique from all others to be valid.

Where does it end? Any country can make that argument. This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights. The Palestinians were not invented - no more than the Jews. Every people has to start somewhere. Just because they coalesced as a distinct group later doesn't invalidate them.

And the issue of sovereign rights does not necessarily follow. There are many people's recognized as people's, without individual sovereignty and there are many sovereign countries comprised of multiple peoples.

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?

Do they have roots there? Have they or their families lived there? What ties do they have to those regions that would justify such a claim?

And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

I know...you are totally cool Shusha

Arabs entered “palestine” during the British Mandate, called “palestine” from Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, N. Africa etc. Arafat was Egyptian.

But, they’re magically “palestinians’? Amazing!