Who are the Israelis?

[Coyote]

What the hell...

Connection means just that. “The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times” and that is absolutely true. You are to make this into something it isn’t. That region has been invaded, conquered, overrun, traded with etc by hundreds of peoples. The People who eventually became the Jews were THEMSELVES invaders and conquers of earlier people. TRADE is a connection, one of many, yet it seems your only definition of Arab is “invader”. This predates Islam. What you are trying to do is take a scalpel and remove parts of history that are seen as threatening to Jewish identity. At least it seems that way because modern history has Arabs doing just that in an attempt to deny Jews their historic ties and identity.

Look at the history of the Bedouin: BEDOUINS | Facts and Details

Bedouins were once the primary inhabitants of the Holy Land. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were probably Bedouins. Many elements of Bedouin culture have not changed much since Biblical times. Bedouins were referred to Qedarites in the Old Testament and Arabaa by the Assyrians (a name still used for Bedouins today). They are referred to as the ‘A’rab in the Quran.

By the first century B.C., Bedouin moved westward into Jordan and the Sinai Peninsula and southwestward along the coast of the Red Sea. In the 7th century Bedouin were among the first converts to Islam. Mohammed was not a Bedouin. He was a townsperson from a family of traders. During the Muslim conquests thousands of Muslims---many of them Bedouins---left the Arabian peninsula and settled in newly conquered land nearby and later spread across of much of the Middle East and North Africa.​

So are they lying?

NO. A Big NO. A BIG HECK NOOOOOO.......to Arabs having connection to the ancient Canaan for the past 100,000 years or more, if that is how far one wishes to go to one's "Earliest historic times ".

Geesh.

The Patriarchs are not described as "Bedouins" in the Torah.
There is a reason for that. Because they were not.
And the article saying that "maybe they were" does not show any proof that they were.

How does the Torah describe Abraham to Joseph, to Moses, etc?

And the population which lived on the land known as Canaan, where he moved to, and later the Children of Israel returned to with Aaron from Egypt were not Arabs either, they were the indigenous people who eventually joined with the 12 tribes and became the Nation of Israel.

There are no Arabs involved in the history of the area at the time.
One cannot name one Arab who was part of any of the history from Abraham all the way to Roman times.

And first the Kurds and then the Arab Muslims did invade everywhere outside of the Arabian Peninsula after Mohammad's death.

And the word Palestinian does mean INVADER. Which is what the Philistines were, invaders from the Greek Islands.

But there is no connection at all between the Philistines, and the Arabs or the Palestinians.

Except that the Arabs eventually borrowed the name the Romans gave to the region of Israel in order to force the Jews to stop rioting against their Empire and hopefully forget who they were.
They changed the name to Syria Palestinea in order to humiliate the Jews with the name of the people who had defeated Israel before David, the boy, defeated them in turn, and created the Israeli Monarchy.


The Philistines were invaders of the land of Israel.
The Romans were invaders of the land of Israel.
The Arab Muslims were invaders of the land of Israel.

Is it so hard to imagine that some people, Abraham and his son, did migrate to Ancient Canaan, formed clans, eventually became powerful and then conquered most of the tribes and became one big Nation within a period of about 500 to 1000 years?

The Greeks who became the Philistines did it, but they were really foreigners, invaders, and lost both identities with time.

What the hell...

Connection means just that. “The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times” and that is absolutely true. You are to make this into something it isn’t. That region has been invaded, conquered, overrun, traded with etc by hundreds of peoples. The People who eventually became the Jews were THEMSELVES invaders and conquers of earlier people. TRADE is a connection, one of many, yet it seems your only definition of Arab is “invader”. This predates Islam. What you are trying to do is take a scalpel and remove parts of history that are seen as threatening to Jewish identity. At least it seems that way because modern history has Arabs doing just that in an attempt to deny Jews their historic ties and identity.

Look at the history of the Bedouin: BEDOUINS | Facts and Details

Bedouins were once the primary inhabitants of the Holy Land. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were probably Bedouins. Many elements of Bedouin culture have not changed much since Biblical times. Bedouins were referred to Qedarites in the Old Testament and Arabaa by the Assyrians (a name still used for Bedouins today). They are referred to as the ‘A’rab in the Quran.

By the first century B.C., Bedouin moved westward into Jordan and the Sinai Peninsula and southwestward along the coast of the Red Sea. In the 7th century Bedouin were among the first converts to Islam. Mohammed was not a Bedouin. He was a townsperson from a family of traders. During the Muslim conquests thousands of Muslims---many of them Bedouins---left the Arabian peninsula and settled in newly conquered land nearby and later spread across of much of the Middle East and North Africa.​

So are they lying?

NO. A Big NO. A BIG HECK NOOOOOO.......to Arabs having connection to the ancient Canaan for the past 100,000 years or more, if that is how far one wishes to go to one's "Earliest historic times ".

Geesh.

The Patriarchs are not described as "Bedouins" in the Torah.
There is a reason for that. Because they were not.
And the article saying that "maybe they were" does not show any proof that they were.

How does the Torah describe Abraham to Joseph, to Moses, etc?

And the population which lived on the land known as Canaan, where he moved to, and later the Children of Israel returned to with Aaron from Egypt were not Arabs either, they were the indigenous people who eventually joined with the 12 tribes and became the Nation of Israel.

There are no Arabs involved in the history of the area at the time.
One cannot name one Arab who was part of any of the history from Abraham all the way to Roman times.

And first the Kurds and then the Arab Muslims did invade everywhere outside of the Arabian Peninsula after Mohammad's death.

And the word Palestinian does mean INVADER. Which is what the Philistines were, invaders from the Greek Islands.

But there is no connection at all between the Philistines, and the Arabs or the Palestinians.

Except that the Arabs eventually borrowed the name the Romans gave to the region of Israel in order to force the Jews to stop rioting against their Empire and hopefully forget who they were.
They changed the name to Syria Palestinea in order to humiliate the Jews with the name of the people who had defeated Israel before David, the boy, defeated them in turn, and created the Israeli Monarchy.


The Philistines were invaders of the land of Israel.
The Romans were invaders of the land of Israel.
The Arab Muslims were invaders of the land of Israel.

Is it so hard to imagine that some people, Abraham and his son, did migrate to Ancient Canaan, formed clans, eventually became powerful and then conquered most of the tribes and became one big Nation within a period of about 500 to 1000 years?

The Greeks who became the Philistines did it, but they were really foreigners, invaders, and lost both identities with time.

Migrated or invaded?

Are you asking of Abraham?

Nope. Just you.

Who migrated or invaded and from where to where?

You already stated that above.

 

[Sixties Fan]

So you are saying these historians are all liars...based solely on your say so?

Abbas is saying it. From time immemorial he will say.
Maybe it is about a Million years, who knows. He does not.
He just makes it up.

I don’t care what Abbas says, he is a freaking politician

He is teaching all Palestinians that they have been there from time immemorial. It says so in their UNWRA textbooks, or any other textbooks they use in Gaza and the PA.

Jews are invading colonizers. They have all been taught that, and insist in the "right of return" to "Ancient Palestine".

I am


And yet you are saying Palestinians are invaders...[/QUOTE]
I think you are tired.
You have not made sense in your last two posts.

 

[Coyote]

So you are saying these historians are all liars...based solely on your say so?

Abbas is saying it. From time immemorial he will say.
Maybe it is about a Million years, who knows. He does not.
He just makes it up.

I don’t care what Abbas says, he is a freaking politician

He is teaching all Palestinians that they have been there from time immemorial. It says so in their UNWRA textbooks, or any other textbooks they use in Gaza and the PA.

Jews are invading colonizers. They have all been taught that, and insist in the "right of return" to "Ancient Palestine".

I am


And yet you are saying Palestinians are invaders...

I think you are tired.
You have not made sense in your last two posts.[/QUOTE]
It is extremely late here.

 

[Shusha]

Then are non practicing Jews still Jewish given that Jews who immigrated out of Israel in ancient times would certainly had to marry non indigenous people to survive as a people....a non practicing Jew is not practicing his culture, is he indigenous?

The criteria for being indigenous as an individual (as opposed to a community) are self-identification and acceptance by the community. Its identification rather than practice (although I'd argue that it would be VERY difficult to self-identity and be accepted in the group without any sort of cultural practice). An indigenous person practices the pre-invasion, pre-colonization, pre-conquered culture in the territory where the culture originated.

Thus: a person who identifies as Scottish and who is accepted by the Scottish community and very likely holds some sort of Scottish culture is indigenous to Scotland. A person who identifies as Scottish and who is accepted by the Scottish community and very likely holds some sort of Scottish culture is not indigenous to Canada. Or Arabia. Or China.

Indigeneity is a function of culture, self-identification and acceptance. A Jewish person with absolutely no connection to his Jewish heritage would not be indigenous to Israel. But its not a function of practice alone.

 

[Shusha]

Yet you ignore:

The Kindites were polytheistic until the 6th century CE, with evidence of rituals dedicated to the idols Athtar and Kāhil found in their ancient capital in south-central Arabia (present day Saudi Arabia). It is not clear whether they converted to Judaism or remained pagan, but there is a strong archaeological evidence that they were among the tribes in Dhū Nuwās' forces during the Jewish king's attempt to suppress Christianity in Yemen.[3] They converted to Islam in mid 7th century CE and played a crucial role during the Arab conquest of their surroundings, although some sub-tribes were declared apostates during the ridda after the death of Muḥammad.


Again connections. There whole area is interwoven with connections.you can’t pretend they don’t exist.

I'm not sure I understand your point in posting this. Are you trying to argue that the Jewish connection to Arabia goes back uninterrupted since the earliest historic times? That the Jewish people are indigenous to Arabia? That Arabian monuments are Jewish and that we must be aghast at the Arabization of Jewish monuments and holy places? That this gives the Jewish people some sort of rights to self-determination in Arabia? Sovereignty in Arabia? Rights to build holy places with exclusive access to Jews in Arabia? Rights to claim Arabian history because they were all really Jews back to earliest historic times?

 

[Mindful]

Chasam Sofer writes about how the economic development of the Land of Israel is part of the mitzvah of yishuv ha'aretz. But there's more than just that. Bein adam lechavero is no less important from a religious perspective than Bein adam leMakom.

The fact that the State of Israel provides a home for any Jew around the world is also valuable from a religious perspective. The fact that it provides and maintains an economy in which millions of Jews live their lives is also valuable from a religious perspective. The fact that the State of Israel engages in efforts to help Jews all around the world is also valuable from a religious perspective.

 

[rylah]

Oh please you are so fucking dishonest there is no point in even attempting a serious discussion with you.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with my dishonesty, You just twist and turn everything on its head,
and fall silent whenever pointed to Your double standards - for You Palestinians are neither Jews when convenient and neither Arabs when referring to ethnic cleansing of 99% of Jews at the hand of the Arabs.

Where have I called for caliphate?

Here and in several other discussions:

I have always been a proponent of multiple state or caliphate type ideas.

Where have I ever excused genocide?

By supporting a Caliphate, by comparing ethnic cleansing of 99% of a minority to displacement of less than 1% of a dominating majority in their war of annihilation against the minority. You're comparing war to ethnic cleansing without any reason other being Jews, thus excusing a genocide of people who were never hostile.

What am I occupying?

Milwaukee, figuratively speaking.
And as much as Arabs, You wouldn't know neither the original names of the places where You live, nor their meaning in the language of the place without looking into wikipedia or asking the real natives.

If a man who’s leadership of Irgun was memorable for a huge increase in violence targeting civilians is “straight as a ruler” I question your own values.

Give me a break, there was a war going that started long before Begin was even born, what he did was a drop in the sea compared to what Arabs did to Jews and themselves for a whole century before he or any other Jew even shot a single bullet. For him to increase anything, let alone "huge" had to live 5 lives...and still work hard to accomplish the magnitude of his enemies' hostility.

None of that by the way has anything to do with being "straight as a ruler".
He said what he thought to the face and stood by it, didn't twist around.
In those times a man's word was worth something, and he was such a man.

You question my values?
I question whether You have any at all in that mindless sea of moral relativism, where terms are twisted on their head, monumental difference in numbers are nullified, all colors are shades of gray, and day becomes night because You can't deal with differences, this is fundamentally immoral.

 

[Taz]

Yet you ignore:

The Kindites were polytheistic until the 6th century CE, with evidence of rituals dedicated to the idols Athtar and Kāhil found in their ancient capital in south-central Arabia (present day Saudi Arabia). It is not clear whether they converted to Judaism or remained pagan, but there is a strong archaeological evidence that they were among the tribes in Dhū Nuwās' forces during the Jewish king's attempt to suppress Christianity in Yemen.[3] They converted to Islam in mid 7th century CE and played a crucial role during the Arab conquest of their surroundings, although some sub-tribes were declared apostates during the ridda after the death of Muḥammad.


Again connections. There whole area is interwoven with connections.you can’t pretend they don’t exist.

I'm not sure I understand your point in posting this. Are you trying to argue that the Jewish connection to Arabia goes back uninterrupted since the earliest historic times? That the Jewish people are indigenous to Arabia? That Arabian monuments are Jewish and that we must be aghast at the Arabization of Jewish monuments and holy places? That this gives the Jewish people some sort of rights to self-determination in Arabia? Sovereignty in Arabia? Rights to build holy places with exclusive access to Jews in Arabia? Rights to claim Arabian history because they were all really Jews back to earliest historic times?

Jews were in the Middle East long before Muslims.

 

[Mindful]

Yet you ignore:

The Kindites were polytheistic until the 6th century CE, with evidence of rituals dedicated to the idols Athtar and Kāhil found in their ancient capital in south-central Arabia (present day Saudi Arabia). It is not clear whether they converted to Judaism or remained pagan, but there is a strong archaeological evidence that they were among the tribes in Dhū Nuwās' forces during the Jewish king's attempt to suppress Christianity in Yemen.[3] They converted to Islam in mid 7th century CE and played a crucial role during the Arab conquest of their surroundings, although some sub-tribes were declared apostates during the ridda after the death of Muḥammad.


Again connections. There whole area is interwoven with connections.you can’t pretend they don’t exist.

I'm not sure I understand your point in posting this. Are you trying to argue that the Jewish connection to Arabia goes back uninterrupted since the earliest historic times? That the Jewish people are indigenous to Arabia? That Arabian monuments are Jewish and that we must be aghast at the Arabization of Jewish monuments and holy places? That this gives the Jewish people some sort of rights to self-determination in Arabia? Sovereignty in Arabia? Rights to build holy places with exclusive access to Jews in Arabia? Rights to claim Arabian history because they were all really Jews back to earliest historic times?

Jews were in the Middle East long before Muslims.

What were Arabs, before were Muslims?

 

[rylah]

It is like those who blame Jews around the world for Israel’s actions. They blame Palestinians for what Arab countries did to their Jews.

It is not an equal comparison. The Jewish people have been under attack and threat of attack and threat of existence by multiple Arab nations -- not just Arab Palestine. We are not blaming Arab Palestinians for what other Arab countries did -- but we are INCLUDING Arab Palestine in those who threaten Israel's existence.

There's an argument to be made, regarding inciting the rest of the Arab world to an all open Jihad,
spreading the blood libel that Jews were planning to destroy Bait al-Muqqadis (the Arabic transliteration of Hebrew "Beit Mikdash").

There's also an argument to be made that if not for their stubborn hostility towards Jews in Syria-Palestine,
and Israel the huge losses on both sides would be prevented, including subsequent wars and stagnation of the Arab world as well (to a considerable extent).

I'm not saying they're responsible for when Arabs fight in Yemen, but that instead of creating false unity by fueling hostility towards Jews and Israel, they could actually focus on more practical and real goals that motivate responsibility for their own development.

All the money they've spent on that war could feed whole countries, and provide a higher standard of living. Otherwise they just fuel a self feeding cycle of wars and degeneration to the detriment of millions.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

We have a Who are the Palestinians thread, so just to be fair...

Golda Meir

Without reading this entire thread, the simple answer is, the Jews of today are Canaanites:

Full text of "The Two Seeds Of Genesis 3 15 By Charles Lee Mange"

 

[rylah]

We have a Who are the Palestinians thread, so just to be fair...

Golda Meir

Without reading this entire thread, the simple answer is, the Jews of today are Canaanites:

Full text of "The Two Seeds Of Genesis 3 15 By Charles Lee Mange"

Without reading the entire link,
the answer is simple - Jews are descendants of Hebrews descendants of Shem, Canaanites were not descendants of Shem, and referred to as invaders of the land.

"And Abram passed through the land, until the place of Shechem, until the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanites were then in the land." Beresheet 12:6

"Shechem" for example, literally means upper back in Hebrew.

Rashi further comments (in the same link): "He [the Canaanite] was gradually conquering the Land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, for it fell in Shem’s share when Noah apportioned the land to his sons, as it is said (below 14: 18):“And Malchizedek the king of Salem.” Therefore, (below verse 7): And the Lord said to Abram: To your seed will I give this land. I am destined to restore it to your children, who are of the descendants of Shem. [from Sifra, end of Kedoshim]"

 

[rylah]

[
Did the Palestinians expel Jews fron all those states? No.

Did the Arab Palestinians attempt to expel Jewish Palestinians from all of Palestine? Of course they did. They just failed. They are still attempting it. And they are still failing. Arab Palestinians are absolutely to be included in a much wider group of Arab nations which chose to persecute, oppress, cleanse and attempt genocide against the Jewish people.

There was a considerable effort on the part of Jews to expell a great many Palestinian Arabs. Looks like everyone was busy expelling.

And your use of the term genocide in this is as dishonest as when the pro pali’s use it against Israel. Genocide has a very specific meaning.

A specific meaning like, "We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants" or "The time has come to enter a battle of annihilation". Or how about "...rip the hearts out of Jews"? The term is accurate.

Again, you are trying to create a false equivalency where there is none. The Jewish people in the Arab countries were citizens with histories in many cases going back hundreds or thousands of years. They were not at war with the Arab countries in which they lived. They posed no threat to the Arab countries in which they lived. They had no weapons which they were using against the governments of the Arab countries.

IN CONTRAST, the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians were at war with each other. A war which, for the Jewish people, was in the CONTEXT of annihilation because that is what the Arabs SAID WAS THEIR PURPOSE.

That is still the context for the Jewish people because the Arabs are still saying this is their purpose.

Genocide is not rhetoric...if it were we could certainly point at some ugly rhetoric from Jewish leaders. Genocide is active. If the Arab States desired genocide they would not have expelled their Jewish population, nor would there still be Jews living in states like Iran. (Disclaimer, that is not by any means implying life is dandy for them). Misusing the term genocide dilutes it’s real horror.

They didn't just expel us, they murdered all non-Muslims in the Arabian peninsula, by the decree of Islam. By the same decree Jews were to be humiliated until the end of days to show their superiority and the irrelevance of Judaism, just minutes after they've appropriated every Jewish figure.

By the way it's the same source which defines Arab land, also referred in Palestinian charters, excludes Israel from it and defines the Arabs as Caliphate invaders. Their culture defines it as the 'land of Islam',
not Arab land.

So why does their culture makes this distinction, where did it originate and how did it spread?

 

[rylah]

That is denying it. They have their own history and their own homeland. They do not need monuments. They exist independently of Jewish Israeli’s by virtue of having inhabited that land.

Again, over and over sixties and Rylah reiterate that they are essentially fake, and according to Sixties, all came from the Arabian peninsula. They repeatedly deny them a distinct identity. You just do not see it.

See? Even you have to define Arab Palestinian identity in comparison and contrast to Jewish identity.

There is no dispute that they inhabit the land and have for several hundreds of years. There is no dispute that they have a history in that land. The discussion is on whether or not they developed a distinct identity and whether or not it is strong enough to establish a national identity. And whether or not it could be said that they ALREADY have a State with territory (Jordan). Those are legitimate questions.

What? I wasn’t defining it in comparison to Jewish identity, you were the one brought that up and I was responding to what YOU had said.

Those are not the questions being asked however. When people are going on insisting the Palestinians are a fake people, who should go back to the Arabian peninsula (that was Sixties), they ARE disputing the fact they have a history there. Several hundreds? How about several thousand?

Not several thousands .

It is a historical fact that the Arabs invaded the Land of Israel 1400 years ago. They were not living there for "thousands of years" . That is what Abbas has been repeating.

That is what others are now, since 1948, or 1973, repeating.

That the Arabs are the indigenous people for over 10,000 years.
True?

That the Jews are nothing but European colonizing invaders.
Is that true?

We are not telling the truth, but Abbas and all who deny any Jewish history to the area are telling the truth?

Are Abbas and so many people out there telling the world that there is no connection between "Palestine" and the Jewish people or not? And when that denial start?

See what I mean Shusha ? According to Sixties Palestinians are all descendants of invading Arabs. But it is a “misuse” of genetics to point out that isn’t exactly so?

Yes, politicized genetics are abhorrent, please leave it out.
There's no way for You to use it without falling into very ugly traps, or me being able to contradict them. Neither are definitive, rather progress and can lead to completely opposite conclusions at different stages of development of the science.

Unfortunately I see team Palestine constantly using this frame of discourse when their other arguments are found lacking.

 

[rylah]

.,l.,.m

See what I mean Shusha ? According to Sixties Palestinians are all descendants of invading Arabs. But it is a “misuse” of genetics to point out that isn’t exactly so?

Yes. And also certainly contrary to fact. The Arab Palestinians are the result of an invading culture (that would be the Arabs, whose origins are elsewhere) and the local indigenous peoples (the culture who originated in that place before invading cultures arrived). Surely, you are not going DENY that, are you?!

No. Because that is basically what I have always said if anyone bothered to listen.

Again, it is not a matter of how many Jews, Druze, Samaritan or Bedouins have married or converted to Islam, and are now being identified as Arabs.

It is a VERY SMALL percentage, therefore it does not make the Palestinian Arabs on an equal foot with the Jews as being indigenous, anymore than it makes those who came from Spain indigenous of any of the Spanish countries which now exist, no matter how many have married and mixed with the indigenous population.

And you know it is a “very small percentage” how, exactly?

Palestinians - Wikipedia

Origins
See also: Demographic history of Palestine (region)
The origins of Palestinians are complex and diverse. The region was not originally Arab — its Arabization was a consequence of the inclusion of Palestine within the rapidly expanding Arab Empire conquered by Arabian tribes and their local allies in the first millennium, most significantly during the Islamic conquest of Syria in the 7th century. Palestine, then a Hellenized region controlled by the Byzantine empire, with a large Christian population, came under the political and cultural influence of Arabic-speaking Muslim dynasties, including the Kurdish Ayyubids. From the conquest down to the 11th century, half of the world's Christians lived under the new Muslim order and there was no attempt for that period to convert them.[86] Over time, nonetheless, much of the existing population of Palestine was Arabized and gradually converted to Islam.[38] Arab populations had existed in Palestine prior to the conquest, and some of these local Arab tribes and Bedouin fought as allies of Byzantium in resisting the invasion, which the archaeological evidence indicates was a 'peaceful conquest', and the newcomers were allowed to settle in the old urban areas. Theories of population decline compensated by the importation of foreign populations are not confirmed by the archaeological record[87][88] Like other "Arabized" Arab nations the Arab identity of Palestinians, largely based on linguistic and cultural affiliation, is independent of the existence of any actual Arabian origins. The Palestinian population has grown dramatically. For several centuries during the Ottoman period the population in Palestine declined and fluctuated between 150,000 and 250,000 inhabitants, and it was only in the 19th century that a rapid population growth began to occur.[

Pre-Arab/Islamic Influences on the Palestinian national identity
While Palestinian culture is primarily Arab and Islamic, many Palestinians identify with earlier civilizations that inhabited the land of Palestine.[90] According to Walid Khalidi, in Ottoman times "the Palestinians considered themselves to be descended not only from Arab conquerors of the seventh century but also from indigenous peoples who had lived in the country since time immemorial."

Similarly Ali Qleibo, a Palestinian anthropologist, argues:

"Throughout history a great diversity of peoples has moved into the region and made Palestine their homeland: Canaanites, Jebusites, Philistines from Crete, Anatolian and Lydian Greeks, Hebrews, Amorites, Edomites, Nabataeans, Arameans, Romans, Arabs, and Western European Crusaders, to name a few. Each of them appropriated different regions that overlapped in time and competed for sovereignty and land. Others, such as Ancient Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians, and the Mongol raids of the late 1200s, were historical 'events' whose successive occupations were as ravaging as the effects of major earthquakes ... Like shooting stars, the various cultures shine for a brief moment before they fade out of official historical and cultural records of Palestine. The people, however, survive. In their customs and manners, fossils of these ancient civilizations survived until modernity—albeit modernity camouflaged under the veneer of Islam and Arabic culture."[90]

George Antonius, founder of modern Arab nationalist history, wrote in his seminal 1938 book The Arab Awakening:

"The Arabs' connection with Palestine goes back uninterruptedly to the earliest historic times, for the term 'Arab' [in Palestine] denotes nowadays not merely the incomers from the Arabian Peninsula who occupied the country in the seventh century, but also the older populations who intermarried with their conquerors, acquired their speech, customs and ways of thought and became permanently arabised."[91]

American historian Bernard Lewis writes:

"Clearly, in Palestine as elsewhere in the Middle East, the modern inhabitants include among their ancestors those who lived in the country in antiquity. Equally obviously, the demographic mix was greatly modified over the centuries by migration, deportation, immigration, and settlement. This was particularly true in Palestine, where the population was transformed by such events as the Jewish rebellion against Rome and its suppression, the Arab conquest, the coming and going of the Crusaders, the devastation and resettlement of the coastlands by the Mamluk and Turkish regimes, and, from the nineteenth century, by extensive migrations from both within and from outside the region. Through invasion and deportation, and successive changes of rule and of culture, the face of the Palestinian population changed several times. No doubt, the original inhabitants were never entirely obliterated, but in the course of time they were successively Judaized, Christianized, and Islamized. Their language was transformed to Hebrew, then to Aramaic, then to Arabic."[92]

Everyone, and no one at the same time.
Grasping at straws trying to create an identity that was never there based on lots of vague speculations that at the end of the day can define nothing concrete. It becomes geometrically impossible to point Your finger at anything specific with each step of adding another, and another, and another nation hoping to delude all sense of identity altogether in face of a very specific indigenous culture and heritage, which magnitude is impossible to deny.

"Citizens of the world" kinda argument,
multiple personalities disorder also comes to mind.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

We have a Who are the Palestinians thread, so just to be fair...

Golda Meir

Without reading this entire thread, the simple answer is, the Jews of today are Canaanites:

Full text of "The Two Seeds Of Genesis 3 15 By Charles Lee Mange"

Without reading the entire link,
the answer is simple - Jews are descendants of Hebrews descendants of Shem, Canaanites were not descendants of Shem, and referred to as invaders of the land.

"And Abram passed through the land, until the place of Shechem, until the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanites were then in the land." Beresheet 12:6

"Shechem" for example, literally means upper back in Hebrew.

Rashi further comments (in the same link): "He [the Canaanite] was gradually conquering the Land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, for it fell in Shem’s share when Noah apportioned the land to his sons, as it is said (below 14: 18):“And Malchizedek the king of Salem.” Therefore, (below verse 7): And the Lord said to Abram: To your seed will I give this land. I am destined to restore it to your children, who are of the descendants of Shem. [from Sifra, end of Kedoshim]"

You should read the link. You're wrong. Judah intermarried with a Canaanite. He was forbidden to that. It's a complicated story, so you need to quit trying to use a verse or there to attempt to prove a misconception. Read the link.

 

[rylah]

We have a Who are the Palestinians thread, so just to be fair...

Golda Meir

Without reading this entire thread, the simple answer is, the Jews of today are Canaanites:

Full text of "The Two Seeds Of Genesis 3 15 By Charles Lee Mange"

Without reading the entire link,
the answer is simple - Jews are descendants of Hebrews descendants of Shem, Canaanites were not descendants of Shem, and referred to as invaders of the land.

"And Abram passed through the land, until the place of Shechem, until the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanites were then in the land." Beresheet 12:6

"Shechem" for example, literally means upper back in Hebrew.

Rashi further comments (in the same link): "He [the Canaanite] was gradually conquering the Land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, for it fell in Shem’s share when Noah apportioned the land to his sons, as it is said (below 14: 18):“And Malchizedek the king of Salem.” Therefore, (below verse 7): And the Lord said to Abram: To your seed will I give this land. I am destined to restore it to your children, who are of the descendants of Shem. [from Sifra, end of Kedoshim]"

You should read the link. You're wrong. Judah intermarried with a Canaanite. He was forbidden to that. It's a complicated story, so you need to quit trying to use a verse or there to attempt to prove a misconception. Read the link.

I don't see how that contradicts anything I've presented, though I could be wrong, but I'm sure not of the standing to question what Rashi wrote.

Porter Rockwell
Do You know of any Torah scholar who could contradict that?
Please let's see.

 

[Coyote]

Oh please you are so fucking dishonest there is no point in even attempting a serious discussion with you.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with my dishonesty, You just twist and turn everything on its head,
and fall silent whenever pointed to Your double standards - for You Palestinians are neither Jews when convenient and neither Arabs when referring to ethnic cleansing of 99% of Jews at the hand of the Arabs.

Where have I called for caliphate?

Here and in several other discussions:

I have always been a proponent of multiple state or caliphate type ideas.

Where have I ever excused genocide?

By supporting a Caliphate, by comparing ethnic cleansing of 99% of a minority to displacement of less than 1% of a dominating majority in their war of annihilation against the minority. You're comparing war to ethnic cleansing without any reason other being Jews, thus excusing a genocide of people who were never hostile.

What am I occupying?

Milwaukee, figuratively speaking.
And as much as Arabs, You wouldn't know neither the original names of the places where You live, nor their meaning in the language of the place without looking into wikipedia or asking the real natives.

If a man who’s leadership of Irgun was memorable for a huge increase in violence targeting civilians is “straight as a ruler” I question your own values.

Give me a break, there was a war going that started long before Begin was even born, what he did was a drop in the sea compared to what Arabs did to Jews and themselves for a whole century before he or any other Jew even shot a single bullet. For him to increase anything, let alone "huge" had to live 5 lives...and still work hard to accomplish the magnitude of his enemies' hostility.

None of that by the way has anything to do with being "straight as a ruler".
He said what he thought to the face and stood by it, didn't twist around.
In those times a man's word was worth something, and he was such a man.

You question my values?
I question whether You have any at all in that mindless sea of moral relativism, where terms are twisted on their head, monumental difference in numbers are nullified, all colors are shades of gray, and day becomes night because You can't deal with differences, this is fundamentally immoral.

You are fundamentally dishonest. It is pretty ballsy to claim I twist and turn everthing when you yourself do exactly that. Your claim that I called for Caliphates is a perfect example of your deceit when you know damn well I meant Emerites in that one discussion. Nowhere else Caliphates.

I should not be surprised at this, coming from one who excuses Jewish terrorists and won't even call the deliberate firebombing of an innocent family or the murder of a woman from a stone thrown at her car terrorism.

Moral relativism? Have you looked in a mirror? Your moral compass shifts with the ethnicity of the people involved, offering differing sets of standards for the different groups.

You excuse terrorism. An act that has no defense, no excuse. EVER. What makes you any different from anyone else who makes excuses for the murder of innocent people? Nothing.

I am done with any discussion with you.

 

[rylah]

Oh please you are so fucking dishonest there is no point in even attempting a serious discussion with you.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with my dishonesty, You just twist and turn everything on its head,
and fall silent whenever pointed to Your double standards - for You Palestinians are neither Jews when convenient and neither Arabs when referring to ethnic cleansing of 99% of Jews at the hand of the Arabs.

Where have I called for caliphate?

Here and in several other discussions:

I have always been a proponent of multiple state or caliphate type ideas.

Where have I ever excused genocide?

By supporting a Caliphate, by comparing ethnic cleansing of 99% of a minority to displacement of less than 1% of a dominating majority in their war of annihilation against the minority. You're comparing war to ethnic cleansing without any reason other being Jews, thus excusing a genocide of people who were never hostile.

What am I occupying?

Milwaukee, figuratively speaking.
And as much as Arabs, You wouldn't know neither the original names of the places where You live, nor their meaning in the language of the place without looking into wikipedia or asking the real natives.

If a man who’s leadership of Irgun was memorable for a huge increase in violence targeting civilians is “straight as a ruler” I question your own values.

Give me a break, there was a war going that started long before Begin was even born, what he did was a drop in the sea compared to what Arabs did to Jews and themselves for a whole century before he or any other Jew even shot a single bullet. For him to increase anything, let alone "huge" had to live 5 lives...and still work hard to accomplish the magnitude of his enemies' hostility.

None of that by the way has anything to do with being "straight as a ruler".
He said what he thought to the face and stood by it, didn't twist around.
In those times a man's word was worth something, and he was such a man.

You question my values?
I question whether You have any at all in that mindless sea of moral relativism, where terms are twisted on their head, monumental difference in numbers are nullified, all colors are shades of gray, and day becomes night because You can't deal with differences, this is fundamentally immoral.

You are fundamentally dishonest and you have the balls to say I twist and turn everthing? Your claim of me calling for Caliphates is a perfect example of your deceit when you know damn well I meant Emerites. But I should not be surprised coming from who excuses Jewish terrorists and wont even call the deliberate firebombing of a family or the murder of a woman from a stone thrown at her car terrorism. I am done with any discussion with you.

And yet You have already tried that trick even after I've pointed to the difference between a Caliphate and an Emirate. That You returned to using that word again after that, leaves no doubts as to where You're coming from, and the motives.

You just "by mistake" keep suggesting this brutal tyranny, and merely "by mistake" excluded Jews from Palestinians, and merely "by mistake" excused Arab genocide against the Jews, and merely "by mistake" justified terror "if they feel like it", and merely "by mistake" support and justify people who demand to erase the only Jewish state.

"All by mistake", and we're all idiots.
Everyone sees Your obsession on this forum, and in every thread where You attempt to excuse the crimes and rhetoric of Jihadis around the world.

I'm not You average westerner infidel, and I've heard much better taqiyya than You'd ever invent.
So please feel welcome to spare me of Your moral indignation and go shake someone else's leg.

 

[rylah]

I Have No Other Country !