'Palestinian'

[abu afak]

"Palestinians" [are an] Arab people No one heard of before 1967 before Israeli governments certified this piece of Propaganda...
As has been noted many times before, prior to 1948, that is before Jews had begun to call themselves Israelis,
the ONLY persons known as "Palestinians" were Jews, with the Arabs much preferrring to identify themselves as part of the great Arab nation.
- David Basch


"...Palestine does not belong to the "Palestinians" and never did. They did not even call themselves Palestinians until the middle 1960s.
Before that, the word "Palestinian" meant "Jewish," while the local Arabs called themselves simply "Arabs."
The creation of the PLO by Gamal Abdul Nasser in 1964 was a brilliant ploy to distort the parameters of the dispute, largely for propaganda purposes.
It was inconvenient to have a conflict between 20-odd Arab states with an area 530 times greater than Israel, a population more than 30 times greater than Israel's and enormously richer natural resources.
Far better to Invent a "Palestinian" nation that would be the eternal "underdog," -
a nation consisting partly of Immigrants from Syria and other Arab countries who came to benefit from the rapidly growing economy Zionist Jews created..."
- westerndefense.org


"There is NO language known as Palestinian. - There is NO distinct Palestinian culture.
There has NEVER been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians.
Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another Recent Invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.
Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9% of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1% of the landmass.
But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. Greed. Pride. Envy. Covetousness.
No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough....""
- Joseph Farah, Arab-American journalist


So before the creation of the State of Israel, who were the Palestinians?
ANSWER:
Until 1950, the name of the Jerusalem Post was THE PALESTINE POST;
the journal of the Zionist Organization of America was NEW PALESTINE;
Bank Leumi was the ANGLO-PALESTINE BANK;
the Israel Electric Company was the PALESTINE ELECTRIC COMPANY;
there was the PALESTINE FOUNDATION FUND and.... the PALESTINE PHILHARMONIC.
All these were JEWISH organizations.
In America, Zionist youngsters sang "PALESTINE, MY PALESTINE", "PALESTINE SCOUT SONG" and "PALESTINE SPRING SONG"
In general, the terms Palestine and Palestinian referred to the region of Palestine as it was. Thus "Palestinian Jew" and "Palestinian Arab" are straightforward expressions.
"Palestine Post" and "Palestine Philharmonic" refer to these bodies as they existed in a place then known as Palestine.
The adoption of a Palestinian identity by the Arabs of Palestine is a Recent phenomenon.
Until the establishment of the State of Israel, and for another Decade or so, the term Palestinian applied almost exclusively to the Jews.
- 'Palestinians' - The Peace FAQ
-
-

 

[P F Tinmore]

They did not even call themselves Palestinians until the middle 1960s.

Al Hambra Theatre, Jaffa 1937, flying Palestinian flag.

You need to get off that propaganda.

 

[abu afak]

Filealestine-Mandate-Ensign-1927-1948.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

File: Palestine-Mandate-Ensign-1927-1948.svg

 

[P F Tinmore]

Filealestine-Mandate-Ensign-1927-1948.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

File: Palestine-Mandate-Ensign-1927-1948.svg

Foreigners!

Is there a point here?

 

[Jos]

 

[Jos]

The Red Ensign is used for Merchant ships, Not on land. Maybe Palestine had a Merchent Navy in 1927?
Red Ensign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[abu afak]

http://reviews.ebay.com/Palestine-C...or-eBay-collectors_W0QQugidZ10000000000770353

What are "Palestine coins"?

The only world coins minted for general circulation that bear the name 'Palestine' were issued from 1927 to 1947 under the British Mandate to govern Palestine,
which was granted to Great Britain by the League of Nations in 1923.

Under the auspices of the Palestine Currency Board, 59 different coins were minted for circulation in Palestine during the period from 1927 through 1946.
[......]
Each coin is tri-lingual, bearing legends in three languages: English, Arabic, and Hebrew.
[......]
What dates and denominations are available to collect?

The denominations of the 59 Palestine coins issued for circulation from 1927 to 1946 range from 1 Mil to 100 Mils.
Each Mil represents 1/1000th of a Palestine Pound, equivalent to one British Pound Sterling, thus the 100 Mils coins was equivalent in value to 1/10 of a Pound, or to a British Florin or Two Shillings coin.
[.....]

What's the history of the period when these coins were issued?

Here's a very, very brief history:

The empire of the Ottoman Turks ruled the area of historic Palestine for 400 years, until their military defeat by the British in 1917.

In turn, the British occupation, and subsequent Mandate - which led to the issuance of these coins - occurred from 1917 to 1947.

This period ended with the United Nations vote to partition Palestine in 1947, the formal departure of the British in 1948, and the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-49,
variously known as the War of Independence (or Liberation) or 'The Catastrophe' ('al Nakba' in transliterated Arabic).​

 

[abu afak]

File:Half Shekel.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

500 Years before the Birth of Big Mo.

JUDAEA, First Jewish War. 66-70 CE. AR Shekel (22mm, 13.19 g, 12h). Dated year 3 (68/9 CE).
"Shekel of Israel," Omer cup with pearled rim; date above / "Jerusalem the Holy," (That's ancient Hebrew) sprig of three pomegranates.
Meshorer 202; Hendin 662.
-
-

 

[Epsilon Delta]

"Palestinians" [are an] Arab people No one heard of before 1967

"There is NO language known as Palestinian. - There is NO distinct Palestinian culture.
There has NEVER been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians.
Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another Recent Invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.
Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9% of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of 1% of the landmass.
But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today. Greed. Pride. Envy. Covetousness.
No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough....""
- Joseph Farah, Arab-American journalist

Yeah, yeah "Palestinians don't exist" argument. It's irrelevant when the name "Palestinian" began to be used. "Israelis" didn't exist either before 1948 - how does that make them any less "real"? The assertion that a "Palestinian is indistinguishable from Jordanians (another Recent Invention)" is retarded, and wouldn't hold up anywhere else - What's the difference between an American and a Canadian? Mexico and Central America were all one spanish viceroyalty in colonial times, then balkanizing into different states, there was no such thing as a Salvadoran or a Honduran, but that was 190 years ago so now they're "real" - or maybe you think they're not real, so I guess it'd be legitimate to take over one of them and tell them all to move over, since they speak the same language and have the same "ethnic makeup."

And I'm assuming Austrians are "just Germans" right? Hitler probably should have had his Anschluss, then, eh? I mean, really, what is the difference between a German and an Austrian? Taking Poland was probably ok too, I mean, the Slavs have a huge percentage of the land of Europe, compared to Germany =/, and Poland didn't even exist for hundreds of years until 1919.

No, obviously none of this would be ok, it's no different with the Palestinians. The name Palestinian may be new, but it nevertheless denotes Arab inhabitants of the region in question, in which every historical single census ever taken were a ridiculously vast majority of the population. That a properly "Palestinian" identity is new doesn't mean anything, and it's not up to you to say to say whose identities are legitimate or not. The fact that 13 million people identify themselves as "Palestinian" is what gives the identity legitimacy - who are iyou to claim what culture is "distinct enough" or not? It's the same thing as when people try to "delegtimize" Jews by claiming most are converts, or they sneak into Israel pretending to be Jews or whatever. It's irrelevant whether this is true or not - the fact that another 13 million people consider themselves Jews make the identity legitimate regardless and if somebody claims to be a Jew, who the fuck am I to say otherwise? If someone claims to be a Palestinian, who the fuck am I to say otherwise?

In any case, identity is not a static thing and it's not mutually exclusive. A Palestinian is usually also an Arab, just like an Israeli is usually also a Jew, but he's not "just a Jew." Just because there's a larger group of people who think of themselves as Arab doesn't make "Palestinian" any less real - by the same logic, most people who consider themselves Jews don't even live in Israel - so what? This doesn't make an Israel identity any less "legitimate" or compromised. But of course that's "us," not "them" so the standards don't apply.

 

[alexa]

I think the name Palestinian is a red herring. It is queried to confuse. My own country is quietly changing it's name back to Alba. The name is not important. Having your feet on the ground is. Recent genetic research suggests that Palestinian arabs are probably the closest descendants of the original Jews...so I think if anyone has the right to claim historic Palestine, it is them. Not only are they the closest descendants of the original Jews, they have stayed there - and many may be descended from people prior to even that.

So the problem is on the one hand we have a people who have lived there for over 3000 years and so believe it is their land and on the other hand we have a people who believe they used to live there 3000 years ago and because of this believe they have the right to throw the people who always have lived there off their land.

That's the argument. I understand the area has quite a history of being called Palestine. I have also heard the people were not very nationalistic but that certainly does not mean they do not feel that where they have their roots, where they have lived for thousands of years, where there ancestors have worked, played, lived and died is not their home whatever they choose to call it and for the meantime that is Palestine.

 

[Douger]

None of this follows the script.
Go get the script and focus closely on The Chosen going back Home to IsNtReal.
You're going to make your masters mad with this rhetoric.

 

[docmauser1]

Recent genetic research suggests that Palestinian arabs are probably the closest descendants of the original Jews...

Monsanto research suggested DDT was harmless too, of course.

 

[peach174]

Until Palestinians acknowledge the right to live for Israeli's nothing is going to be solved.

 

[abu afak]

Yeah, yeah "Palestinians don't exist" argument. It's irrelevant when the name "Palestinian" began to be used. "Israelis" didn't exist either before 1948 - how does that make them any less "real"?
The assertion that a "Palestinian is indistinguishable from Jordanians (another Recent Invention)" is retarded, and wouldn't hold up anywhere else -

Zionism was 100 Year old Nationalist revival Movement of the Jews. Reviving one of 3200 years and existed for 1400 years,
'Palestinianism' was NOT.
Not only did they Not accept the partition creating 'Palestine' in 1948, but for 20 years subsequent the land was Annexed by Jordan and there was NO 'Palestine' nor even really 'palestinians',
as Arabs never really bought that crap until about the time they lost the WB to Israel in the 1967 War. Otherwise there would still be passport-carrying Jordanians.
Jordan is 70% 'Palestinian' (whatever that is) as it's Queen.
In fact, in 'Black September' (1970), Arafat & co. tried to Make Jordan the Palestinian state it is/was by overthrowing King Hussein.
But they lost-- and it was back to 'Israel' and wanting the West Bank which was renounced in the 1964 PLO Charter.

What's the difference between an American and a Canadian? Mexico and Central America were all one spanish viceroyalty in colonial times, ..

Very Little between American and Canadian.. perhaps except Shared 300+ years histories of each.
Much bigger between Americans and Mexicans who are a different ethnicity/language/culture (which is why you Didn't make THAT comparison) and part of whose Land we Americans now sit.
Jews are Just Jews, while Arabs have 22 states, many arbitrarily bordered by the Ottoman Break up.
'Iraqis', 'Jordanians', 'Palestinians' were conqueror constructs, NOT peoples.
Re-read what you quoted.
Of course people only whine about one tiny part of this giant allocation in which Arabs were the big winners.

No, obviously none of this would be ok, it's no different with the Palestinians. The name Palestinian [Imay [/I]be new, but it nevertheless denotes Arab inhabitants of the region in question, in which every historical single census ever taken were a ridiculously vast majority of the population.

And they, those local-and-Transient-left-over-non-Jordan-arabs got/were offered the vast majority of the Land.
The Jews only got 13% of British Mandate 'Palestine'.
Jordan (Given to a Hashemite SAUDI Prince as spoils) was/is 77%; 'Palestine 10%. Meaning Arabs/Palestinians got 87% of the Mandate.
And Half of the Jews 13% was the thought-useless Negev Desert. (and 2/3 including the Half of Israel that is the Negev Desert was Ottoman/British STATE LAND, owned by NO Arab)

That a properly "Palestinian" identity is new doesn't mean anything, and it's not up to [Iyou[/I] to say to say whose identities are legitimate or not.
The fact that 13 million people identify themselves as "Palestinian" is what gives the identity legitimacy -

It does but only now. But let's not kid ourselves about "some great country called Palestine being overrun by the Jews".
What makes a 'people' is Culture, Language, Ethnicity/Race, shared History, etc and they know it.
Jews know they are a people. Tibetans, Mongols, Turks, Kurds... and Arabs. (Nicht Palestinians, until lately)

In any case, identity is not a static thing and it's not mutually exclusive. A Palestinian is usually also an Arab, just like an Israeli is usually also a Jew, but he's not "just a Jew."
Just because there's a larger group of people who think of themselves as Arab doesn't make "Palestinian" any less real - by the same logic, most people who consider themselves Jews don't even live in Israel - so what?
This doesn't make an Israel identity any less "legitimate" or compromised. But of course that's "us," not "them" so the standards don't apply.

Continuing...
Jews only have and have had only/"Just" One national movement, Zionism/Israel for 3200 years.
Arabs are indeed a People. Thus Pan-Arabism.
'Palestinian' like 'Jordanian' (or 'Iraqi') Not so historically.
And Arabs under various new, made-up, misgrouped (ie 'Iraq'), and old names got 99% of the Ottoman Break up.

The problem, as you unwitting quoted above, was they wanted 100%.
But Arabs overall did very well in the Break-up. Perhaps ruling 110% of their 'original Range'.
The only real loser the Larger True People (Culture, Language, Ethicity) KURDS.
But you don't here much about that, and certainly You aren't/haven't going to make an issue of that.
-
-

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yeah, yeah "Palestinians don't exist" argument. It's irrelevant when the name "Palestinian" began to be used. "Israelis" didn't exist either before 1948 - how does that make them any less "real"? The assertion that a "Palestinian is indistinguishable from Jordanians (another Recent Invention)" is retarded, and wouldn't hold up anywhere else -

Zionism was 100 Year old Nationalist revival Movement of the Jews. Reviving one of 3200 years and existed for 1400 years,
'Palestinianism' was NOT.
Not only did they Not accept the partition creating 'Palestine' in 1948, but for 20 years subsequent the land was Annexed by Jordan and there was NO 'Palestine' nor even really 'palestinians', as Arabs never really bought that crap until app they lost the WB to Israel in the 1967 War. Otherwise there would still be Jordainians.
Jordan is 70% 'Palestinian' (whatever that is)
In fact, in 'Black September' (1970), Arafat and co tried to Make Jordan the Palestinian state it is/as by overthrowing King Hussein. But they lost-- and it was back to 'Israel' and wanting the West Bank which was renounced in the 1964 PLO Charter.

What's the difference between an American and a Canadian? Mexico and Central America were all one spanish viceroyalty in colonial times, ..

Very Little between American and Canadian.. perhaps except Shared 300+ years histories of each.
Much bigger between Americans and Mexicans who are a different Race and part of whose Land Americans now sit.
Jews are Just Jews, while Arabs have 22 states, many arbitrarily bordered by the Ottoman Break up.
'Iraqis', 'Jordanians', 'Palestinians' were conqueror constructs, NOT peoples.


And they got/were offered the vast majority of the Land.
The Jews only got 13% of British Mandate 'Palestine'.
Jordan (Given to a Hashemite SAUDI Prince as spoils) was/is 77%,'Palestine 10%. Meaning Arabs/Palestinians got 87% of the Mandate.
And half of the Jews 13% was the Negev Desert. (and 2/3 including the Half of Israel that is the Negev Desert was Ottoman/British STATE LAND, owned by NO Arab)

That a properly "Palestinian" identity is new doesn't mean anything, and it's not up to [Iyou[/I] to say to say whose identities are legitimate or not. The fact that 13 million people identify themselves as "Palestinian" is what gives the identity legitimacy -

It does but only now. But let's not kid ourselves about "some great country called Palestine being overrun by the Jews".
What makes a 'people' is culture, Language, Race, shared History, etc and they know it.
Jews know they are a people. Tibetans, Mongols, Turks, Kurds... and Arabs. (Nicht Palestinians)

In any case, identity is not a static thing and it's not mutually exclusive. A Palestinian is usually also an Arab, just like an Israeli is usually also a Jew, but he's not "just a Jew." Just because there's a larger group of people who think of themselves as Arab doesn't make "Palestinian" any less real - by the same logic, most people who consider themselves Jews don't even live in Israel - so what? This doesn't make an Israel identity any less "legitimate" or compromised. But of course that's "us," not "them" so the standards don't apply.

Continuing...
Arabs are indeed a People. Thus Pan-Arabism.
'Palestinian' like 'Jordanian' were Not.
And Arabs under various new, made-up, misgrouped (ie 'Iraq'), and old names got 99% of the Ottoman Break up.

The problem,as you unwitting quoted above was they wanted 100%.
But Arabs overall did very well in the Break-up. Perhaps ruling 110% of their original 'Range'.
The only real loser the Larger True People (Culture, Language, Ethicity) KURDS.
But you don't here much about that, and certainly You aren't/haven't going to make an issue of that.
-
-

(and was Ottoman/British STATEE LAND, owned by NO Arab)

Britain administered Palestine it did not take possession.

The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.

State of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[abu afak]

Tinhead.
This is how it's done.
You don't have to 'quote' my whole comprehensive post to add your Dumb 8 words.
One assumes you are responding to the post immediately above.
(altho I could quote you here, but only because of page change/continuity)

If unlikely, someone should intervene in between then you can edit in the quote.
Quoting a Long Muliquote reply you are Not going to do the same with is a giant waste of space and makes the string needlessly long and UNREADABLE.
Got it Tinhead?

Many boards wisely only quote the post of one/last poster--preventing the 6 or 8 quote-within-quote-within-quote disasters here.
-
-

 

[docmauser1]

They did not even call themselves Palestinians until the middle 1960s.

Al Hambra Theatre, Jaffa 1937, flying Palestinian flag.

Then Jordan is "palestine" for all intents and purposes, a palistani vaterland to drum and trumpet a return to, that is, because the flag is the jordanian al Urdun, adopted in 1928, while the palistanian das plagiat rag flag originates in 1994.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

You seem to have entirely missed the point. =/ But I'll go through it again anyway.

Zionism was 100 Year old Nationalist revival Movement of the Jews. Reviving one of 3200 years and existed for 1400 years,
'Palestinianism' was NOT.
Not only did they Not accept the partition creating 'Palestine' in 1948, but for 20 years subsequent the land was Annexed by Jordan and there was NO 'Palestine' nor even really 'palestinians',
as Arabs never really bought that crap until about the time they lost the WB to Israel in the 1967 War. Otherwise there would still be passport-carrying Jordanians.
Jordan is 70% 'Palestinian' (whatever that is) as it's Queen.
In fact, in 'Black September' (1970), Arafat & co. tried to Make Jordan the Palestinian state it is/was by overthrowing King Hussein.
But they lost-- and it was back to 'Israel' and wanting the West Bank which was renounced in the 1964 PLO Charter.
Very Little between American and Canadian.. perhaps except Shared 300+ years histories of each.

Again, the main point of this is LAND. Palestinians are linguistically and culturally "Arab" peoples, the key point of their identity is the fact that they or their ancestors lived in the region of historic Palestine. All that you can claim is that they're "just Arabs," which is false and, frankly, stupid - a Yemeni is an Arab too, so is a Moroccan, yet they're not the same, and they live thousands of miles from each other. Again, someone from Canada might have the exact same language, exact same skin color, exact same white anglo-protestant ethno-religious background as someone from the US, it doesn't give anybody the right to come to Canada and cleanse it because "they're the same as Americas [according to me]." What separates a Canadian from an American is the fact that one LIVES in the LAND of Canada and another LIVES in the LAND of America, hence they subscribe to different national identities and are not the same - a Canadian does not consider himself an American, just like Palestinians don't consider themselves Iraqis. Even WITHIN countries the culture varies - New York has a different "culture" from Texas, even if they both share American culture.

And just because America became a country 200 years ago but most Arab countries became countries 70 years ago doesn't make a difference, unless you're willing to sit down now and explain to everyone here at what arbitrary point in time (in years) does an identity become "legitimate" enough for you - is it 20 years? 40 years? 200 years? 2000 years? And WHY?

That half of Jordan identifies itself as Palestinian is, again, irrelevant. Most Jews live in the US, so I guess Israel is not needed right? Or what, is it because it's not ruled by Jews that it's not appropriate? Neither is Jordan, so I guess it's not appropriate either. That is, if we're being honest and holding everyone to the same standard.

Much bigger between Americans and Mexicans who are a different ethnicity/language/culture (which is why you Didn't make THAT comparison) and part of whose Land we Americans now sit.

Don't see the relevance. Explain.

Jews are Just Jews, while Arabs have 22 states, many arbitrarily bordered by the Ottoman Break up.
'Iraqis', 'Jordanians', 'Palestinians' were conqueror constructs, NOT peoples. Of course people only whine about one tiny part of this giant allocation in which Arabs were the big winners.

Nearly every country in the world today, including most of the Americas, Africa, and Oceania are based on conqueror constructs thanks to a history of imperialism and colonialism. There is absolutely no "ethnic" differences between New Zealanders and Australians and Britons and Canadians, yet they're not all the same [again] or any less legitimate. In reality, all borders are illegitimate arbitrary creations that don't follow any real logic, but that is the way the world is ordered and hence the reality we have to deal with. I don't know if you have ever seen a map of the US, but there's a suspiciously long straight line running from the great lakes to the pacific that surely respects no ethnic, linguistic, or cultural divisions and resulted from the US bargaining with Britain, and is the only reason people in norther Minnesota and N Dakota today aren't Canadian. That's the way it is and it doesn't make it any more or less legitimate. The fact is that TODAY Iraqis, Jordanians, and Palestinians are people, specifically Arab people who live in the land spaces that today are called those names, no different from any other country.

And they, those local-and-Transient-left-over-non-Jordan-arabs got/were offered the vast majority of the Land.
The Jews only got 13% of British Mandate 'Palestine'.
Jordan (Given to a Hashemite SAUDI Prince as spoils) was/is 77%; 'Palestine 10%. Meaning Arabs/Palestinians got 87% of the Mandate.
And Half of the Jews 13% was the thought-useless Negev Desert. (and 2/3 including the Half of Israel that is the Negev Desert was Ottoman/British STATE LAND, owned by NO Arab)

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The British Mandate of Palestine itself was entirely arbitrarily constructed in the 1920s by a caretaker colonial administration. During Ottoman times what is now Jordan was entirely a different province and what is now Israel/OPTs were separated into three or four Ottoman Seljuks, all of which had a huge majority of Arabs and only a tiny percentage of Jews. And that's what the point is - whether they were there, they LIVED there, not in Algeria or in Kuwait, but THERE. That's why they're not "just Arabs." That's why Israelis are not "just Jews" anymore, because they live THERE.

That's why it's irrelevant how you frame it, what it comes down to is advocating ethnic cleansing: you want to claim that there is no such thing as palestinians so that you can legitimize your belief that Israel is justified in kicking every Palestinian out of where they've always lived and their ancestors lived because they're "just Arabs" and so they can go live in any other Arab place. Until you go ahead and explain that this would be legitimate for any other country - that anybody can walk into Austria because theyre "just Germans" or that anybody can take over Singapore because they're "just Chinese" we know that you're just fulfilling the role of a propagandist for one side's violence.

It does but only now. But let's not kid ourselves about "some great country called Palestine being overrun by the Jews".
What makes a 'people' is Culture, Language, Ethnicity/Race, shared History, etc and they know it.
Jews know they are a people.

No, actually they're not, by YOUR own arbitrary standards they would not qualify as a people for most of the past 2000 years. This is just sad. By your own arbitrary definition of what makes a "people", not mine (I don't have one, I'm so naive that I assume that when millions of people define themselves as something, I should be inclined to believe them).

Jews did not have the same language until the 1900s. Hebrew was a dead language only used for liturgical purposes, just like Latin, for over 1500 years. The vast majority of Jews did not speak Hebrew. Jews are not all of the same race or ethnicity - there's Slavic Jews, Western European Jews, Black Ethiopian Jews, Arab Jews. They did not have a shared history - there was a hugely spread out diaspora living all over the world with their own individual histories - and there still are to a degree. That's why all your "parameters" are useless. The only relevant thing is that Jews KNOW they are a people. Hence, they are a people - like Palestinians feel that they are a people. Whether they speak different languages, have different histories, or are of different races is entirely irrelevant.

And Arabs under various new, made-up, misgrouped (ie 'Iraq'), and old names got 99% of the Ottoman Break up.The problem, as you unwitting quoted above, was they wanted 100%.
But Arabs overall did very well in the Break-up. Perhaps ruling 110% of their 'original Range'.

"Arabs" got countries where they lived under Ottoman rule. Turks got Turkey, where they lived. The Kurds did get screwed over, but at least they're still where they lived, not getting bulldozed out of their land anymore. Again, what happened elsewhere is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

What is relevant is that the Arabs of historic Palestine, today known as Palestinians, wanted 100% because they basically were 100% until mass immigration of Jews began in the 1920s; their population began doubling every 10 years, it began to be overrun by Jews basically. Even in 48, Jews were only a third of the population, and they also wanted 100%.

I think most people, Israelis and Jews, know they will not have 100%. But those that do on either side, regardless of all the false justifications they can give, whether you with your "palestinians aren't real" or "palestinians don't deserve to live there" or people on the other side with their "Jews aren't real" or "Jews stole all the land so they must be driven out" - it's pathetic. They can see very clearly the other sides terrible propositions, but cannot come to terms with the fact that they're advocating the same exact thing. It's called ethnic cleansing. Both sides propose it, both are wrong. Everything else is just a veil to justify it - there is no justification for it, so stop trying.

The only real loser the Larger True People (Culture, Language, Ethicity) KURDS.
But you don't here much about that, and certainly You aren't/haven't going to make an issue of that.

Sure that Kurds are a people. I'm not going to deny that. If Kurds want a state, they should have one, Britain should've carved a Kurdish state. If they wanted to separate from Iraq/Turkey/Syria/Iran, I'd be all for it, and if they were oppressed (as they have been for ages by all of those regimes) I'll be the first to condemn it. This thread isn't about Kurds though. Feel free to make one and I'll go right to it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Epsilon Delta.

Well said.

 

[mudwhistle]

Isn't Palestine derived from Philistine?