Shekels

[Shusha]

The Palestinians are descendants of all the many peoples who have lived in that region over the centuries. The idea that they were magically transported there upon a Muslim conquest is ludicrous and serves one purpose: marginalizing them and their rights. That is it.

When Arab culture conquered large swaths of the area, local cultures became arabicized. But the people are still the same people who lived there prior. How inconvenient for those who want to portray them as invaders.

I am rather certain that we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. And perhaps that is okay.

Still...

The Arab culture is imported to the area. There is absolutely no relationship between the imported (and yes, invading and colonizing) culture and the peoples of history such as the Canaanites. Defining "peoples" has absolutely NO MEANING when you strip it of its culture. It would be saying that the Canaanites, and the Jewish peoples and the Romans and the Arab Muslims are all the same. Oh wait. That is EXACTLY what the Arabs are trying to say. The entire point of recognizing peoples AS peoples is to recognize their culture, and, importantly, to protect and preserve cultures so they don't become overrun or exterminated by colonizers and invaders.

 

[Shusha]

Well if they lived there "for centuries" that certainly confirm the historic parallel of conquest and colonization, through means of physical elimination of the indigenous culture while constant migration.

This is a key point.

Not only eliminating the indigenous culture, but then going back in time and CLAIMING it as their own.

 

[Pogo]

Depends on what "native status" is supposed to mean. Ask any number of wags on this site if they are "native American".

Well, I am certainly not. My ancestry is European settler (Scots, Irish and German).

But I think "native status" has a very specific meaning. And I think that meaning matters in this context.

But that's another meaning. The word native refers to birth, not ancestry.

 

[Coyote]

The Palestinians are descendants of all the many peoples who have lived in that region over the centuries. The idea that they were magically transported there upon a Muslim conquest is ludicrous and serves one purpose: marginalizing them and their rights. That is it.

When Arab culture conquered large swaths of the area, local cultures became arabicized. But the people are still the same people who lived there prior. How inconvenient for those who want to portray them as invaders.

I am rather certain that we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. And perhaps that is okay.

Still...

The Arab culture is imported to the area. There is absolutely no relationship between the imported (and yes, invading and colonizing) culture and the peoples of history such as the Canaanites. Defining "peoples" has absolutely NO MEANING when you strip it of its culture. It would be saying that the Canaanites, and the Jewish peoples and the Romans and the Arab Muslims are all the same. Oh wait. That is EXACTLY what the Arabs are trying to say. The entire point of recognizing peoples AS peoples is to recognize their culture, and, importantly, to protect and preserve cultures so they don't become overrun or exterminated by colonizers and invaders.

We won’t see it the the same.

I see people who’s families have resided in the same place, for thousands of years, as long as the Jews, suddenly labeled “invaders” and “newcomers”. Despite their ancient heritage. And that is just plain wrong. Regardless of what their modern culture is their ROOTS go back much further and denying them that is as wrong as denying Jews their roots.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Depends on what "native status" is supposed to mean. Ask any number of wags on this site if they are "native American".

Well, I am certainly not. My ancestry is European settler (Scots, Irish and German).

But I think "native status" has a very specific meaning. And I think that meaning matters in this context.

But that's another meaning. The word native refers to birth, not ancestry.

Good article on the meaning of the words Native, Indigenous, etc:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/mani...ian-native-aboriginal-or-indigenous-1.2784518

 

[rylah]

The Palestinians are descendants of all the many peoples who have lived in that region over the centuries. The idea that they were magically transported there upon a Muslim conquest is ludicrous and serves one purpose: marginalizing them and their rights. That is it.

When Arab culture conquered large swaths of the area, local cultures became arabicized. But the people are still the same people who lived there prior. How inconvenient for those who want to portray them as invaders.

I am rather certain that we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. And perhaps that is okay.

Still...

The Arab culture is imported to the area. There is absolutely no relationship between the imported (and yes, invading and colonizing) culture and the peoples of history such as the Canaanites. Defining "peoples" has absolutely NO MEANING when you strip it of its culture. It would be saying that the Canaanites, and the Jewish peoples and the Romans and the Arab Muslims are all the same. Oh wait. That is EXACTLY what the Arabs are trying to say. The entire point of recognizing peoples AS peoples is to recognize their culture, and, importantly, to protect and preserve cultures so they don't become overrun or exterminated by colonizers and invaders.

We won’t see it the the same.

I see people who’s families have resided in the same place, for thousands of years, as long as the Jews, suddenly labeled “invaders” and “newcomers”. Despite their ancient heritage. And that is just plain wrong. Regardless of what their modern culture is their ROOTS go back much further and denying them that is as wrong as denying Jews their roots.

First it's "centuries" now it's "thousands".
do you think people don't notice how you make things up on the go?

Each time losing an argument,
you just move the goalpost to equivalency fallacies, hoping the same bogus claims will bounce.

 

[Shusha]

And honestly, none of this in any way removes any rights from Arabs or Arab Palestinians. "We've been here for a really long time" is enough for legitimacy. (Witness the Americas).

 

[Shusha]

Depends on what "native status" is supposed to mean. Ask any number of wags on this site if they are "native American".

Well, I am certainly not. My ancestry is European settler (Scots, Irish and German).

But I think "native status" has a very specific meaning. And I think that meaning matters in this context.

But that's another meaning. The word native refers to birth, not ancestry.

Well, if we are being picky about language, and you and I are both apparently *ahem* precise about language, the word I going after here is "indigenous".

 

[xband]

Palestine is ancient Phoenicia that ancient Egypt called Sea Peoples.

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians are descendants of all the many peoples who have lived in that region over the centuries. The idea that they were magically transported there upon a Muslim conquest is ludicrous and serves one purpose: marginalizing them and their rights. That is it.

When Arab culture conquered large swaths of the area, local cultures became arabicized. But the people are still the same people who lived there prior. How inconvenient for those who want to portray them as invaders.

I am rather certain that we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. And perhaps that is okay.

Still...

The Arab culture is imported to the area. There is absolutely no relationship between the imported (and yes, invading and colonizing) culture and the peoples of history such as the Canaanites. Defining "peoples" has absolutely NO MEANING when you strip it of its culture. It would be saying that the Canaanites, and the Jewish peoples and the Romans and the Arab Muslims are all the same. Oh wait. That is EXACTLY what the Arabs are trying to say. The entire point of recognizing peoples AS peoples is to recognize their culture, and, importantly, to protect and preserve cultures so they don't become overrun or exterminated by colonizers and invaders.

We won’t see it the the same.

I see people who’s families have resided in the same place, for thousands of years, as long as the Jews, suddenly labeled “invaders” and “newcomers”. Despite their ancient heritage. And that is just plain wrong. Regardless of what their modern culture is their ROOTS go back much further and denying them that is as wrong as denying Jews their roots.

Arabs, collectively, have NOT resided in the same place as long as the Jewish people, collectively.

There is no ancient "heritage". Arab heritage does NOT extend back past the invasion and colonization of the Arab peoples. Unless you completely remove the meaning of the term "heritage".

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Good for you! I've had Gentile co-workers who couldn't pronounce Chanukah for the life of them.

It doesn't require an alphabet, all it requires is listening.

It requires training. Of course after appropriate training Arabs can pronounce the sound "p". Even parrots can do it. The point is that "Palestinians" is not an Arab native word. And the point is that this word, a foreign word, is used to name a part of Arab population. Moreover, it's not just a foreign word, but a word originated from their enemy's language.

Of course it's not an Arab(ic) native words. Words from foreign languages tend to be that way.

Again, WHY would they be using the English term when speaking Arabic? Two Germans talking about their own country don't call it "Germany", and it's not because German doesn't have a soft G.

This whole point about the letter P derives from a mindless gaffe committed in the Knesset, for which the gaffer was rightly ridiculed. It's not to be taken seriously.

The fact about lack of 'P' merely reminds of an inner self contradiction,
of a claim to native culture, in a land to name which it needs to borrow foreign terms.

How can a collective claim to native status, be taken in anyway seriously,
when their term for that land has no meaning in their language?

Know what "America" means?

Yes, it's a form of the name Amerigo, one of the explorers who "discovered" America. A name is not the same thing as a noun-word. Palestine is what the Romans renamed Judea to spite the Jews because the Philistines were their bitterest foes. It also means "invaders" in a language which is not Arabic. I don't see the equivalency between the two.

 

[admonit]

Just like there is no letter corresponding to the "kh" sound in the English alphabet, although there is a letter "khet" in Hebrew, in the same way there is no letter P in Arabic. This is why the Roman city in the West Bank called Neapolis became Nablus in Arabic. (It was originally called Shekhem by the Israelites.) Arabs don't call the land Palestine because they can't pronounce that name. I believe they call it Falistin. rylah is basically joking around and saying that the so-called Palestinians can't even pronounce the name of their own country. It would be like Jews calling our holiday Hanukkah instead of Chanukah because we can't pronounce the name of our very own festival.

Bullshit. My mother tongue is English but that doesn't somehow "prevent" me from pronouncing the kh sound of Arabic, the ü in German, the ñ in Spanish, the zh sound in French, or the nasals in Portuguese.

Good for you! I've had Gentile co-workers who couldn't pronounce Chanukah for the life of them.

It doesn't require an alphabet, all it requires is listening.

It requires training. Of course after appropriate training Arabs can pronounce the sound "p". Even parrots can do it. The point is that "Palestinians" is not an Arab native word. And the point is that this word, a foreign word, is used to name a part of Arab population. Moreover, it's not just a foreign word, but a word originated from their enemy's language.

Of course it's not an Arab(ic) native words. Words from foreign languages tend to be that way.

Not in case of names of peoples and their countries.

Again, WHY would they be using the English term when speaking Arabic?

Because it is a European term, not Arabic.

Two Germans talking about their own country don't call it "Germany"

Two Germans talking about their own country use their own native word: "Deutschland".

 

[admonit]

Excellent, the old "Everybody Knows" fallacy. "It's just common knowledge". You lose.

And you're mired in a cesspool of ethnocentricity if you think that "Arabs" must be speaking in English just because that's what you speak and

rylah is an Israeli and lives in the Middle East. He knows more about Arabs in the area and how they speak than you and I know.

Clearly he doesn't know how language learning works.

I spent considerable time among Arabs, which is where I learnt some Arabic, and while it's kind of a challenge to think of specific conversations involving the letter P, those conversations took place in either English or French, BOTH of which use the letter P, and there was never a time any of us got hung up on it. So his claim is, pun intended, perfidiously preposterous.

P is a plosive, virtually the same as the letter B but with more breath. It's not like it's even hard to do.

And btw I found a source for the ridiculous contention:

Israeli Legislator Argues With Straight Face That Palestine Can’t Exist Because There’s No P in Arabic

>> The remark came during a Knesset debate over a contentious proposal from opposition leader Isaac Herzog for Israel to unilaterally separate from the Palestinians in the absence of a two-state solution. Berko’s argument got an immediate response. “What? Did everyone hear this? Are you an idiot?” replied an MK from the opposition Meretz party. Arab lawmakers walked out in protest, reportedly muttering “P-P-P” under their breath.

The New York Times notes that the statement has been widely mocked in the Hebrew and Arabic media, with some joking that by her logic, there’s no pizza in America because English doesn’t have the Hebrew letter Tzadik, to make a tza sound. Jews might also be in trouble since there’s no J in Hebrew.

It might also blow Berko’s mind to learn that German, Egyptian, Chinese, and Japanese people, among many others, don’t actually refer to themselves by those names. <<
​

Long story short ---- he be trollin'.

While there is no ‘P’ sound, in Arabic, the word for “Palestine” in Arabic is “Falastin,” which also happens to be the similar pronunciation to its sister Semitic language - Hebrew.
​

Happens to be similar? What a ridiculous comment. Of course it is similar, because it's originally a Hebrew word and never was Arabic one.

It's a quote from the article. That's what >> .... << means.

Yes, but the bold font is yours.

Hate to be the one to break this to ya but languages borrow from each other all the time, including languages of "enemies". For instance in our weekly football games some team is going to run a "blitz".

Foreign words are incorporated into a native language as a result of a natural process. The word "Palestinians" was "borrowed" in a well known political document.
The identity of every people/nation starts with their name. No one people in history waited "hundreds" or "thousands" years just to borrow a foreign word as a name of people and their country.

 

[Pogo]

It doesn't require an alphabet, all it requires is listening.

It requires training. Of course after appropriate training Arabs can pronounce the sound "p". Even parrots can do it. The point is that "Palestinians" is not an Arab native word. And the point is that this word, a foreign word, is used to name a part of Arab population. Moreover, it's not just a foreign word, but a word originated from their enemy's language.

Of course it's not an Arab(ic) native words. Words from foreign languages tend to be that way.

Again, WHY would they be using the English term when speaking Arabic? Two Germans talking about their own country don't call it "Germany", and it's not because German doesn't have a soft G.

This whole point about the letter P derives from a mindless gaffe committed in the Knesset, for which the gaffer was rightly ridiculed. It's not to be taken seriously.

The fact about lack of 'P' merely reminds of an inner self contradiction,
of a claim to native culture, in a land to name which it needs to borrow foreign terms.

How can a collective claim to native status, be taken in anyway seriously,
when their term for that land has no meaning in their language?

Know what "America" means?

Yes, it's a form of the name Amerigo, one of the explorers who "discovered" America. A name is not the same thing as a noun-word. Palestine is what the Romans renamed Judea to spite the Jews because the Philistines were their bitterest foes. It also means "invaders" in a language which is not Arabic. I don't see the equivalency between the two.

Simply that "America" is not an English word, yet here we are. Actually it's not even an Italian word sooooo......

Not to suggest we can't call it anything we want of course, but that was the suggestion of the poster I quoted. He seems to think you can't call the place you live by a word that doesn't exist in your language.

 

[Coyote]

The Palestinians are descendants of all the many peoples who have lived in that region over the centuries. The idea that they were magically transported there upon a Muslim conquest is ludicrous and serves one purpose: marginalizing them and their rights. That is it.

When Arab culture conquered large swaths of the area, local cultures became arabicized. But the people are still the same people who lived there prior. How inconvenient for those who want to portray them as invaders.

I am rather certain that we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. And perhaps that is okay.

Still...

The Arab culture is imported to the area. There is absolutely no relationship between the imported (and yes, invading and colonizing) culture and the peoples of history such as the Canaanites. Defining "peoples" has absolutely NO MEANING when you strip it of its culture. It would be saying that the Canaanites, and the Jewish peoples and the Romans and the Arab Muslims are all the same. Oh wait. That is EXACTLY what the Arabs are trying to say. The entire point of recognizing peoples AS peoples is to recognize their culture, and, importantly, to protect and preserve cultures so they don't become overrun or exterminated by colonizers and invaders.

We won’t see it the the same.

I see people who’s families have resided in the same place, for thousands of years, as long as the Jews, suddenly labeled “invaders” and “newcomers”. Despite their ancient heritage. And that is just plain wrong. Regardless of what their modern culture is their ROOTS go back much further and denying them that is as wrong as denying Jews their roots.

Arabs, collectively, have NOT resided in the same place as long as the Jewish people, collectively.

There is no ancient "heritage". Arab heritage does NOT extend back past the invasion and colonization of the Arab peoples. Unless you completely remove the meaning of the term "heritage".

The Palestinians, however have, collectively.

 

[Coyote]

And honestly, none of this in any way removes any rights from Arabs or Arab Palestinians. "We've been here for a really long time" is enough for legitimacy. (Witness the Americas).

Well, I know you feel that, but unfortunately quite a few don’t agree with you on that.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The Palestinians, however have, collectively.

…..or you can tell the truth, instead.

People have lived in the area for millenia. None of these people called themselves "Palestinian" until the 20th century, however. There were certainly undifferentiated Arab nomads living in the are in the late 1800s, but they did not Identify as "Palestinian". After Jews purchased land during that time and developed it over the subsequent decades, many more Arabs emigrated to the area from surrounding lands, but again, they did not identify as "Palestinian".

Those we call "Palestinian" today include descendants of both sub groups of undifferentiated Arabs - those who were already there and those who moved into the area following the economic development.

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians, however have, collectively.

Without using the circular argument of "the people who lived there", define "Palestinians". And describe their "heritage".

 

[Shusha]

And honestly, none of this in any way removes any rights from Arabs or Arab Palestinians. "We've been here for a really long time" is enough for legitimacy. (Witness the Americas).

Well, I know you feel that, but unfortunately quite a few don’t agree with you on that.

If any of them explicitly claim that the Arab Palestinians have absolutely no rights to self-determination, sovereignty or a State, and that this has nothing to do with their lack of development and propensity to violence, rather than as a principle, I've yet to see them say so on this board. Maybe I am misunderstanding them.

 

[Coyote]

The Palestinians, however have, collectively.

Without using the circular argument of "the people who lived there", define "Palestinians". And describe their "heritage".

People are defined in part geography, so you can’t completely omit it.

In this case, there heritage is based in part on geography. They are a group of people, defined by a common heritage of place that have endured multiple waves of conquest. They speak a distinct dialect of Arabic influenced by Aramaic, they have their own distinctive embroidery, and certain distinctive dances that are thought to go back to a pre-Islamic era. They are a people native to a certain geographical area and there heritage is that of all the groups that have come through the area. They may not have had a national identity or desire for self determination prior to Israel but that doesn’t mean they did not exhist or that they did prior to Islam.