Are the Palestinians a real people?

[Shusha]

How they came to be a real people does NOT invalidate their existence as a real people.

Doesn't it?

How can we define "a people" without having an understanding of what that means and how one people are differentiated from another people? For example, are the people of Nazareth a "real" people? How would we know if they are or if they are not? How are they differentiated from Arab Palestinians? Should they have rights and access to national sovereignty and self-determination? What about the people of Galilee? Are they a "real" people? How would we know? How are they differentiated from all other people? Should they have rights and access to national self-determination?

What if the people of Judea and Samaria were to declare themselves a "real" people with history going back thousands of years? Would they not gain the rights of sovereignty and self-determination in their homeland? Surely, you would champion a State of Judea and Samaria in the West Bank, would you not?

 

[Shusha]

So, again,I will ask. WHY is it so vitally important to deny they are a people?

Well, from my POV, it's largely to prevent Arabs from usurping Jewish history, Jewish ancestry, Jewish monuments, Jewish religious figures, Jewish culture, and Jewish land.

And then using that usurping of all things Jewish as reasons why the Jewish people shouldn't have rights to anything.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Of course Palestinians are a people. They call themselves Palestinians. Everyone else calls them Palestinians. They are called Palestinians because they are from Palestine.

 

[Hollie]

Of course Palestinians are a people. They call themselves Palestinians. Everyone else calls them Palestinians. They are called Palestinians because they are from Palestine.

Actually, they’re Arab settler colonists from Egypt, Syria, etc.

People from the “Bible Belt”, a loosely defined geographic area, are sometimes called “Bible Belters” but there is no “country of the Bible Belt”.

An Egyptian Arab-Moslem Terrorist invented a people and an invented national identity for those squatters back in the late 1960’s .

 

[rylah]

Of course Palestinians are a people. They call themselves Palestinians. Everyone else calls them Palestinians. They are called Palestinians because they are from Palestine.

Who?
The royal tribe of Qatar?

Arabian Royal Tribes - Banu Tamimi

Dynasties[edit]

• The Aghlabid dynasty
• The Al Thani, ruling family of Qatar. (See House of Thani)
• The Al ash-Sheikh family of the Grand Muftis of the Emirate of Diriyah, then the Emirate of Najd and now modern day Saudi Arabia (Religious Dynasty).

 

[Coyote]

What's the magical number of years when a people can finally be acknowledged to be a people?

Its not about years. Its about definitions.

Apparently it is about years.

According to whom? The only person asking about "magical number of years" is you.

rylah isn't claiming that years are the problem. (At least I don't think he is). He is pointing out that Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. He is pointing out that the Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

How they came to be a real people does NOT invalidate their existence as a real people. They existed prior to the Jewish domination of the region in the twentieth century. They may have unified in opposition to that but that doesn’t make them any less a real people. The whole argument echos that of those who deny the right of Israel to exist.

So, again,I will ask. WHY is it so vitally important to deny they are a people?

Most of the Pali towns summaries that Rylah posted were very informative... It gives the founding of those settlements... But a couple hundred years in Western time is maybe only 50 yrs in Holyland time... Because the claims to "location" go back farther than any court or international body can really consider..

And the only direction this can go is FARTHER back in "Holyland time to Biblical times.. So for purposes of having a traceable presence and stake in the territory in MODERN times, that enough time to say those places have a traceable "Palestinian presence" that's "long enough" to make an argument in the present day world..

It's undeniable tho that a large fraction of folks identifying as Palis don't even have a case in terms of "Western time" lengths.. Also undeniable, that even the residents of Israel worry that some of their generous immigration policies may have contributed to accepting people who don't have a traceable history to the Jewish people.

The country is too small and exerts too much energy just SUSTAINING ITS RIGHT TO EXIST... So it's understandable that they need to be somewhat selective in maintaining their purpose and identity....

Just like a Palestinian state would... But the difference is --- Israel IS capable of living in rough neighborhood.. A "Pali state" would be a mid-morning snack for an aggressor nation like Iran or a rogue extremist army....

Those are good points flac, but what do they have to with the points I made, with recognizing Palestinians as a people and spending si much energy denying that recognition?

 

[Coyote]

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

rylah is perfectly capable of clarifying his thoughts on his own, so I will not presume to continue to answer for him.

BUT you MUST ask yourself why a "real" people would not have a name for their own land in their own native language.

And then you might go back and respond to my point:

Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

I disagree. Their national identity may have developed in response to Jewish control of their land, but they existed as a semi cohesive collection of tribes defined geographically and also linguistically with a dialect that contains elements of older non Arabic languages.

They are a people now, even if, in your view they were not originally. Why work so hard to deny them that?

 

[Coyote]

So, again,I will ask. WHY is it so vitally important to deny they are a people?

Well, from my POV, it's largely to prevent Arabs from usurping Jewish history, Jewish ancestry, Jewish monuments, Jewish religious figures, Jewish culture, and Jewish land.

And then using that usurping of all things Jewish as reasons why the Jewish people shouldn't have rights to anything.

So you would deny a people their identity because you feel they will do to Jews what Jews are doing to them? That makes no more sense than denying Jews their identity

Every succeeding wave of people has usurped parts of preceding cultures. I have never before heard that used as a pretext to deny them their identity.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Its not about years. Its about definitions.

Apparently it is about years.

According to whom? The only person asking about "magical number of years" is you.

rylah isn't claiming that years are the problem. (At least I don't think he is). He is pointing out that Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. He is pointing out that the Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

How they came to be a real people does NOT invalidate their existence as a real people. They existed prior to the Jewish domination of the region in the twentieth century. They may have unified in opposition to that but that doesn’t make them any less a real people. The whole argument echos that of those who deny the right of Israel to exist.

So, again,I will ask. WHY is it so vitally important to deny they are a people?

Most of the Pali towns summaries that Rylah posted were very informative... It gives the founding of those settlements... But a couple hundred years in Western time is maybe only 50 yrs in Holyland time... Because the claims to "location" go back farther than any court or international body can really consider..

And the only direction this can go is FARTHER back in "Holyland time to Biblical times.. So for purposes of having a traceable presence and stake in the territory in MODERN times, that enough time to say those places have a traceable "Palestinian presence" that's "long enough" to make an argument in the present day world..

It's undeniable tho that a large fraction of folks identifying as Palis don't even have a case in terms of "Western time" lengths.. Also undeniable, that even the residents of Israel worry that some of their generous immigration policies may have contributed to accepting people who don't have a traceable history to the Jewish people.

The country is too small and exerts too much energy just SUSTAINING ITS RIGHT TO EXIST... So it's understandable that they need to be somewhat selective in maintaining their purpose and identity....

Just like a Palestinian state would... But the difference is --- Israel IS capable of living in rough neighborhood.. A "Pali state" would be a mid-morning snack for an aggressor nation like Iran or a rogue extremist army....

Those are good points flac, but what do they have to with the points I made, with recognizing Palestinians as a people and spending si much energy denying that recognition?

Speaking of recognition, these sorts of conversations would be more productive if you could learn to recognize the truth.

The truth is that there were no people called "Palestinian" as we know them today prior to the middle part of the 20th century when they were encouraged to do so by an Egyptian whose uncle just happened to be a Nazi.

The truth has been pointed out to you dozens, if not hundreds of times over the years, yet you continue with your crap. You can not use your manifest ignorance as an excuse as you are obviously lying by design. Why?

 

[Coyote]

At this point I am seeing absolutely no difference between those who would deny Jews their rights to recognized as a people and those who deny Palestinians their rights to be recognized as a people

 

[Coyote]

How they came to be a real people does NOT invalidate their existence as a real people.

Doesn't it?

How can we define "a people" without having an understanding of what that means and how one people are differentiated from another people? For example, are the people of Nazareth a "real" people? How would we know if they are or if they are not? How are they differentiated from Arab Palestinians? Should they have rights and access to national sovereignty and self-determination? What about the people of Galilee? Are they a "real" people? How would we know? How are they differentiated from all other people? Should they have rights and access to national self-determination?

What if the people of Judea and Samaria were to declare themselves a "real" people with history going back thousands of years? Would they not gain the rights of sovereignty and self-determination in their homeland? Surely, you would champion a State of Judea and Samaria in the West Bank, would you not?

Being g a people and rights of national sovereignty are two different things imo.

 

[Coyote]

Another provocative view: The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia

Do we we have a number of “invented” people running around the Middle East?

Unlike ANY OTHER conflict...the IP conflict is the only one in which we seem populate with peoples we insist were invented to achieve strategic nationalist aims.

Why don’t we simply except them as a people? Will destroy narratives? Alter rights?

Please tell me you did not just bring Shlomo Sand into the conversation.

What?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Of course Palestinians are a people. They call themselves Palestinians. Everyone else calls them Palestinians. They are called Palestinians because they are from Palestine.

Actually, they’re Arab settler colonists from Egypt, Syria, etc.

People from the “Bible Belt”, a loosely defined geographic area, are sometimes called “Bible Belters” but there is no “country of the Bible Belt”.

An Egyptian Arab-Moslem Terrorist invented a people and an invented national identity for those squatters back in the late 1960’s .

I often find myself wondering what would happen If the Unites States were to have attacked Canada when I was young and soon thereafter created a brand new people called "Mainahs" to try to create the impression that Canada was the more powerful entity at a certain flashpoint of contention?

Would idiots today be insisting that these inhabitants of Maine were a distinct and valid people while claiming their peoplehood extended back in time long before their invention?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another provocative view: The Invention of the Jewish People - Wikipedia

Do we we have a number of “invented” people running around the Middle East?

Unlike ANY OTHER conflict...the IP conflict is the only one in which we seem populate with peoples we insist were invented to achieve strategic nationalist aims.

Why don’t we simply except them as a people? Will destroy narratives? Alter rights?

Please tell me you did not just bring Shlomo Sand into the conversation.

What?

He's a crazy fuck who has renounced being Jewish among other things. One thing he did get right, however, is that there was no Palestinian identity before they were invented in the middle part of the 20th century. I find it amusingly ironic that you would reference him.


BTW -- you indicated that post 329 is funny to you. Why do you think it is funny that you know you are lying? Is that some sort of Islamic thing with you?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

rylah is perfectly capable of clarifying his thoughts on his own, so I will not presume to continue to answer for him.

BUT you MUST ask yourself why a "real" people would not have a name for their own land in their own native language.

And then you might go back and respond to my point:

Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

I disagree. Their national identity may have developed in response to Jewish control of their land, but they existed as a semi cohesive collection of tribes defined geographically and also linguistically with a dialect that contains elements of older non Arabic languages.

They are a people now, even if, in your view they were not originally. Why work so hard to deny them that?

Please provide a link to your outrageous claim that Palestinian Arabic is a dialect that has elements of older, non-Arabic languages.
Hebrew, however, is the national language of no other country besides Israel.

 

[jillian]

They speak Arabic, like in 21 other countries. They wear the keffiya and hijab, like in 21 other countries. They eat hummus and shwarma, like in 21 other countries. They celebrate Mohammed's birthday and Abraham's near sacrifice of his son, like in 21 other countries.


In Israel, they speak Hebrew. It's the only country with this national language. In Israel, they wear the kippa and kova temble, like in no other country. In Israel, they eat gefilte fish, kugel, kishke, and cholent, like in no other country. In Israel, the national holidays are Yom Kippur, Passover and Hanukkah. These are no other country's national holidays.

Why does Tinmore want to destroy the only Jewish state in the world to set up a 22nd jihadist state? Is this what the world really needs?

Palestinians are Jordanian bedouins that Jordan doesn’t want

 

[Shusha]

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

rylah is perfectly capable of clarifying his thoughts on his own, so I will not presume to continue to answer for him.

BUT you MUST ask yourself why a "real" people would not have a name for their own land in their own native language.

And then you might go back and respond to my point:

Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

I disagree. Their national identity may have developed in response to Jewish control of their land, but they existed as a semi cohesive collection of tribes defined geographically and also linguistically with a dialect that contains elements of older non Arabic languages.

Jewish control of THEIR land?!

See, that is exactly how their identity developed: by creating the false idea that the land, in its entirety, was exclusively Arab land rather than a land which had been shared with the Jewish people for 1400 years since the land was Arabized.

Those linguistic elements of older non-Arabic languages are Hebrew and Aramaic words borrowed from the previous, existing, indigenous peoples of that territory because they lived amongst people who continued to use Hebrew and Aramaic. (They also have borrowed words from Greek, French and English).

 

[flacaltenn]

Its not about years. Its about definitions.

Apparently it is about years.

According to whom? The only person asking about "magical number of years" is you.

rylah isn't claiming that years are the problem. (At least I don't think he is). He is pointing out that Arab Palestinians did not develop naturally as a distinct culture or a cohesive collection of separate but connected tribes. He is pointing out that the Arab Palestinians were, in fact, intentionally invented to be a political tool in order to fight against and defeat the Jewish people. And that this fact invalidates their existence as a "real" people.

That seems to me to be a valid criticism.

No. He is not. He is claiming they were invented on a certain date and they cant possibly be a real people because the Arabic language does not pronounce P. That is his argument.

How they came to be a real people does NOT invalidate their existence as a real people. They existed prior to the Jewish domination of the region in the twentieth century. They may have unified in opposition to that but that doesn’t make them any less a real people. The whole argument echos that of those who deny the right of Israel to exist.

So, again,I will ask. WHY is it so vitally important to deny they are a people?

Most of the Pali towns summaries that Rylah posted were very informative... It gives the founding of those settlements... But a couple hundred years in Western time is maybe only 50 yrs in Holyland time... Because the claims to "location" go back farther than any court or international body can really consider..

And the only direction this can go is FARTHER back in "Holyland time to Biblical times.. So for purposes of having a traceable presence and stake in the territory in MODERN times, that enough time to say those places have a traceable "Palestinian presence" that's "long enough" to make an argument in the present day world..

It's undeniable tho that a large fraction of folks identifying as Palis don't even have a case in terms of "Western time" lengths.. Also undeniable, that even the residents of Israel worry that some of their generous immigration policies may have contributed to accepting people who don't have a traceable history to the Jewish people.

The country is too small and exerts too much energy just SUSTAINING ITS RIGHT TO EXIST... So it's understandable that they need to be somewhat selective in maintaining their purpose and identity....

Just like a Palestinian state would... But the difference is --- Israel IS capable of living in rough neighborhood.. A "Pali state" would be a mid-morning snack for an aggressor nation like Iran or a rogue extremist army....

Those are good points flac, but what do they have to with the points I made, with recognizing Palestinians as a people and spending si much energy denying that recognition?

One of the points is -- they are NOT a united or organized people who can agree on governance or representation... So does it REALLY MATTER?

It's not something that can get wrenched from afar... They are tribal, that do value their familial and place roots, but they can't even AGREE amongst themselves "who is a Palestinian"...

Look at the treatment from the govt of Jordan.. The earliest refugees who fled the land after the creation of Israel were largely absorbed and assimilated as Jordanians.. The later they ARRIVED, the more they were shuffled off to make-shift towns and camps... Do the "early Palis" in Jordan worry about this abuse as much as YOU do???

Ironically, it's probably that early wave of refugees who have the highest claim as "Palestinians"... But the term has been abused by the ability to "self-declare one's self" as a Palestinian...

And with no unified movement amongst themselves,, I don't think WE can guess as to who is and who is not..

It would be like 20 years hence in California when the state becomes majority Hispanic, trying to sort out claims to citizenship when MILLIONS of the people living there came in illegally... Not ALL of them from any one country...

As far as Jewish claims to be "a people", those claims have never changed, was recognized BEFORE the creation of Israel and there's general INTERNAL agreement amongst the clan who belongs and who does not... I taught my 13/15 yr olds in Sunday School, to explain "the Jews" as a people.. Not a religion, not a race, not bound by where they currently claim citizenship...

Not all Palestinians would choose to live within Israel.. Although the West Bank Palis enjoy a much higher standard of living than the majority OUTSIDE of the West Bank, but choosing to remain in the Mid East. The majority of Jews chose not to return to Israel.. It doesn't matter.,. We are one people...

This is an exercise in proving biblical claims actually.. Not a rejection of the fact that Palestinian refugees are getting screwed in the many places they now live...

 

[flacaltenn]

At this point I am seeing absolutely no difference between those who would deny Jews their rights to recognized as a people and those who deny Palestinians their rights to be recognized as a people

See post above.. Jews have ALWAYS been a unified people.. Even under horrid conditions in diaspora..

Being a "people" confers no rights or status.. You can't deprive "a people" of their own identity.. But when a people want a homeland -- they have to step up and unify and HAVE representation that speaks for ALL of them..

THEN -- they can pursue rights and status...

 

[Shusha]

So you would deny a people their identity because you feel they will do to Jews what Jews are doing to them? That makes no more sense than denying Jews their identity

Seriously? "What the Jews are doing to them?" Are the Jews claiming Mecca as a Jewish holy site? Are the Jews claiming that Mohammed was a Jew?

You are, again, falling into your usual trap that everything is equivalent. It is not.

The Arab Palestinians are claiming that ALL of the history of the territory is THEIRS. Not Jewish. Theirs. Arab. That the Temple Mount is theirs. That the holy burial sites are theirs. That the city of David is theirs. That Jewish historical figures are theirs. They are erasing Jewish history and claiming for themselves. They complain of "Judaizing" places like Jerusalem and Hebron. They rename historical places. They tear up ancient sites and then claim that the ancient site never existed. They destroy every historical building and then claim Jews never lived in that place.

The Arab Palestinians insist that the Jewish people are not REALLY the Jewish people, because all the "real"TM Jews were dispersed and disappeared and all the modern Jews are "fake" Jews who were invented a couple hundred years ago. You know, just like you did when you brought up Shlomo Sand.

Those of us arguing the other side do not deny the identity of the Arab Palestinian people. We simply correct the above errors and acknowledge the Arab Palestinian people for what they are: a mix of local, indigenous peoples and Arab colonizers who arrived several hundreds of years ago and who coalesced into a national, political group about 70 years ago as a response to Jewish return and reclamation of the Jewish homeland.

We don't deny that the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque are Arab Muslim shrines. We don't deny the history of Arabs in the territory.

There is no equivalence here.

Every succeeding wave of people has usurped parts of preceding cultures.

Does that make it morally correct? Should the Jewish Israelis turn the Dome and the Mosque into synagogues?