- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,601
By the Sixties, I do agree with you on one point, the Jews have been far more generous than other faiths in allowing access to historuc holy sites.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Your counter is rather pathetic.At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand? Come on Shusha. You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders. The "other". And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia. I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity. People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan? In Gaza? As they did for thousands of years?
Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand? Come on Shusha. You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders. The "other". And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.
And that is different from the Jewish people claiming that tbe Palestinians history is pretend...made up...etc? Again...the constant refrain from those who also ptomote the idea thst their righrs are less than.
It isnt pathetic at all. If you are going to label different people invaders then acknowledge your own people were invaders of an earlier people. That is the problem with labels. The people you dislike are labeled "invaders", the ones you like are "migrants". At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?Your counter is rather pathetic.At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand? Come on Shusha. You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders. The "other". And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.The Palestinians were not Arabs from Arabia. I dont know why that lie keeps getting repeated.
It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity. People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan? In Gaza? As they did for thousands of years?
Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
Judaism began in Ancient Canaan. Islam did not.
Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years. The Muslims built no nation in the area. And the Muslim Arabs even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.
Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.
That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.
At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?
You are not discussing who is indigenous now. You just changed the discussion into something totally different which is not about who is indigenous.It isnt pathetic at all. If you are going to label different people invaders then acknowledge your own people were invaders of an earlier people. That is the problem with labels. The people you dislike are labeled "invaders", the ones you like are "migrants". At what exact point in history is one determined to be an "invader" and when do they transition into "indigenous"?Your counter is rather pathetic.At one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.Invaders, as the Arabs are, or indigenous, the fact continues to be that when the Jews were ready to reconstitute their Nation on their ancestral land they were more than ready to accept leaving side by side with the Muslims who have been there for 1300 years.Like calling Jews who immigrated to Israel Europeans is a useful shorthand? Come on Shusha. You know darn well that is NOT what iths shorthand for...it is nothing more than a means of separating them out as non native invaders. The "other". And it absolutely affects their rights in the same manner as referring to Jews as Europeans.It keeps getting repeated because it is accurate and a useful shorthand about the meaning of indigeneity. People belonging to an invading, conquering, colonizing, culture (no matter how many centuries have passed since the conquest) are not indigenous.
Why do you worry about it so much, since it affects their RIGHTS not at all?
Not so with the Arabs, who saw it as a Muslim land only, and still see it as Muslim land only, taking away as much land as they could from 1920 to 1948 from the Jews .
Were Jews given the right to their holy sites during 1948-1967?
Are they allowed to live in TrasJordan? In Gaza? As they did for thousands of years?
Jews give the Muslims and Christians and all others freedom of worship and visiting their holy sites.
The same has never been true of Muslims, not only now, but for much of the 1300 years before the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate.
Judaism began in Ancient Canaan. Islam did not.
Jews created a Nation 3000 years ago which stood for about 1000 years. The Muslims built no nation in the area. And the Muslim Arabs even acknowledge in their own Quran, that the land belongs to the Children of Israel, the Jews, when they invaded it.
Do know equate more recent invaders with the Jews who are made of all the tribes in Canaan at the time.
That way, the British are indigenous to the USA and Canada, and Australia and NZ, simply because they took over those lands and the language spoken there happens to be English now.
That is a REGION called Palestine, where the Jewish Kingdoms flourished.PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
As that article states:Coyote
Please don't tell me you have fallen for the absolute bull-hockey that Arab Palestinians are really ancient Philistines.
Do you mean the map to the right? It seems to be a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it. Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
But what is your point?
Edited to add: Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
Do you mean the map to the right? It seems to be a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it. Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
But what is your point?
Edited to add: Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
Maybe because since the Romans changed some of the area's name to Syria Palestine some people have chosen to only call it Palestine, and not the whole Syria Palestine name.Do you mean the map to the right? It seems to be a latter map with the words Judaea, Galilee and Samaria on it. Post the Kingdom of Israel, I would say.PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.
That page is incorrectly labelled as "Palestine".
But what is your point?
Edited to add: Also, notice how ISRAEL has been erased from that page?
I mean more generally. Why has it entered into common vocabulary to call the region "Palestine"?
Where does it say that the entire native population moved out and an entirely new population moved in? When did that happen?PalestineAt one time the Jews were invaders of a pre existing culture. Be careful who you term invaders.
Absolute bull-hockey. There was no Jewish culture until the Jewish culture came into being. It came into being in that homeland as a natural development of the pre-existing culture. Every bit of archaeological evidence points to this. There is absolutely no evidence of an invasion. Nor is there evidence of Jewish culture pre-existing anywhere else in the world.