Consider The Facts

[Coyote]

Coyote ;--) lets see if this paste from pages works.

====================================


Quote
How can they not be "indiginous" when their history includes descent from indiginous peoples?

If a mixed pedigree is an automatic exclusion than you would also have to exclude many Jews who are the products of mixed descent during the diaspora.

If a distinct culture is a requirement - what distinct culture is common and unique to all Jews? Not religion - culture.

========================================

It doesn’t, thats one of the problems with WIKI it fails utterly to use specific language, that error would have been corrected in a peer review but on WIKI its allowed to stand.

And yes, religion, language, customs all part of culture. The Judaic peoples have retained their uniqueness throughout the centuries. They are a truly unique culture.

========================================

Quote
Unlike Nazareth - the Palestinians are stateless. That at the very least should be addressed. As to how much land should be "given away" - none. Because the Occupied Territories are not Israel's to give - in my opinion. Israel controls them, but ownership is far from clear. The insistence that a people must have a unique culture to be a people and have considered rights as Boston implies is weak. There are many nations who's people have indistinguishable cultures but no one questions their existance or implies they aren't a "real people" - only with the Palestinians. Why?

========================================

The Nazareth ? give me a hint ;—))

The Arab Muslims you are referring to as palestinians are not stateless, they have 75% of the mandate area as the state of Jordan. This whole thing is really about just taking more land from israel.

The intent of the mandate is clear. EVERYTHING west of the Jordan River is available for the creation of a Jewish national homeland. Including Judea and Summaria.
========================================

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

Quote
I disagree. For one - the only Jewish people who are truly indiginous imo, would be the Mizrahi. Those who left married out into other nationalities and their culture changed along with that.

I'm curious why you say "Muslims reject Jewish history, and convert Jewish myths and religious into their own. As in, "Abraham and Moses and David and Solomon were Muslims, not Jews" as if this is some unique way of destroying Jewish heritage. Judaism is the founding Abrahamic faith. When Christianity was invented it usurped much of the Jewish faith for it's own. When Islam was invented it did the same. This is common with religions - they are almost all built upon earlier faiths and traditions.

The Canaanites are part of the Palistinian heritage.

=======================================

The Judaic people originated in the Canaan valley area have remained a distinct people with a distinct culture. You can claim they have been absorbed into whatever culture you want but without any evidence to support your claim it remains nothing but a claim. DNA evidence clearly shows that the Judaic people have remained by and large unaffected by their time in foreign lands.

Although I would be the first to point out that DNA evidence can also show we are 99% chimps and I’m not about to support giving chimpanzees a homeland in israel either.

I think you are mistaken about who claimed Muslims reject Jewish history. I’m innocent on that one although I wouldn’t be surprised.

I would suggest that Christianity actually incorporated little of the Judaic faith and instead relies heavily on Hellenistic pagan beliefs more known to Paul the Myth Maker, as H McCobby might suggest.

Oh and palestinians are part of no heritage, they seem to be an invention of the 1950s era.
========================================

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

That's deceptive if not downright dishonest. Ottoman and Mandate census figures show a considerable non-Jewish population. In fact, the number of Jews were relatively small until Zionist immigration started. Whether you call them "Palestinians" or Martians - the people who lived in that region were a mixture of religions that had been there for some time. Your statement would have us believe that until recently there were only Jews there and that is demonstratably false unless "recent" means the last thousand years or so.

========================================

Not at all, you are assuming once again that the people called palestinians previous to about 1950ish were Arab Muslims, they were not. You have to remember that the first time the term palestinian is applied to an Arab Muslim colonist is about 1950 with the invention of the PLO.

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation.

The lack of Judaic people in Judea at various times in history is virtually entirely due to the various pogroms enacted against them.

While there were various other peoples from a variety of faiths remaining you’d be hard pressed to find any reference to palestinians other than of the Jewish faith. Most identified themselves with their country of origin or with being Southern Syrian IE one of the three Ottoman Syrian provinces. Gaza Acre or Lebanon, I think, I’d have to go look up the names, but i”m pretty sure I nailed it.

In a nutshell I don’t believe the Arab Muslim colonists referred to themselves as palestinians until about 1950 ish.

========================================

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

Quote
They aren't First Nation tribes. To use YOUR terminology they are "European colonizers".

========================================

The Judaic people returning to Judea from Europe make up about 35% of the overall population of Israel today. The term returning is far more accurate than the term colonizing.

According to the way you define "colonist" - they are colonizing.

The term returning implies the people came from this area in the first place. They did, their ancestral line can be traced back to a pre bronze age people in the Canaan valley area.

The term Colonist implies that a person is moving into new territory and displacing a native people. We know that the Arab Mulsim colonists came from the Arabian peninsula in two waves, one between the 7th and 9th centuries and another in the mid Zionist period. That fact isn’t really in dispute. All you are arguing is that there were some survivors of the various pogroms and their genetics are evident in the colonist populations.

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them.

Big deal
A people is defined by its heritage, language, culture, belief systems, customs and uniqueness. None of which define the Arab Muslim colonists of the mandate area. But all of which define the Judaic peoples.

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

Which brings us to the point.

Why do the Arab Muslim colonists deserve more than 75% of the mandate area when the indigenous people only get 25% ?

Cheers

That is debatable and, is being debated whole heartedly in another thread

 

[Coyote]

Your very argument ignores history - the history that has had these people, called Palestinians, living on that land for hundreds and in some cases thousands of years. You want to delete that history, and expell them.

But lets give recognition to WHY Boston wants to expel them.

1. They are categorically unable to live in a peaceful partnership under Jewish rule.
2. They want their own sovereignty and self-determination (supposedly).
3. They already have a State where they have their own sovereignty and self-determination.

They do not already have a state.

How many tie have they oped for violence, demand Israel as their state, walked away from negotiations, refused statehood or citizenship elsewhere............

Palestinians could have had a state but they did everything to prove they were not ready or willing.

The point is they DON'T have a state.

 

[Coyote]

Its quite refreshing to finally have a peaceful discussion instead of the usual pissing contest. I appreciate your input

Thank you! I agree - it is refreshing

Should I throw in a few slurs for old times sake folks don't get too freaked out?

 

[aris2chat]

Your very argument ignores history - the history that has had these people, called Palestinians, living on that land for hundreds and in some cases thousands of years. You want to delete that history, and expell them.

But lets give recognition to WHY Boston wants to expel them.

1. They are categorically unable to live in a peaceful partnership under Jewish rule.
2. They want their own sovereignty and self-determination (supposedly).
3. They already have a State where they have their own sovereignty and self-determination.

They do not already have a state.

How many tie have they oped for violence, demand Israel as their state, walked away from negotiations, refused statehood or citizenship elsewhere............

Palestinians could have had a state but they did everything to prove they were not ready or willing.

The point is they DON'T have a state.

They are responsible for that. They keep refusing even the best offers that would have given them all but 2%, which would have involved land trade, they walk away and incited violence because Israel would still exist.

Five times after '47 and they kept refusing. Short of a jew free world, they could have had their state. Everyone, especially Israel have bend over backwards for 65 yrs to try and bring about a palestinian state. Palestinians are the failure, as a people, as an authority, as peace partner, as nation builders, they failed.

Why is Israel being blamed for the palestinians not accepting Israel's right to exist? Why is Israel being blamed for palestinians not speaking with a single palestinian voice? Why is Israel being blamed for palestinian violence?

Israel does not have an obligation to give them more to reward the hate and calls for the spilling of Israeli blood. Palestinians had the chance and now they will if they get their shit together, get less not more for their years of stalling and violence. Sooner or later there will just be no more offers of any kind. Everyone will just ignore the palestianian spokespeople altogether. Violence against the jews/Israelis has been going on for a century, so why should the palestinians be rewarded for refusing every reasonable offer of peace of statehood from the UN, Israel and everyone else? How many more centuries do they deserve to make demands and walk away just to incite more violence, yet again?

The death of Israel is not an option. Why won't they take anything less if statehood is really their aim?

From the neighborhood coffee shop to honored clerics and political leaders, the call is for Israeli blood and the rape of non-muslims that don't submit completely.

65 + yrs and the calls "first the saturday then the sunday people" have not ended. The spilling by adults, women or children of Israeli blood has not been stopped.

So why aren't you asking the palestinians what thy will give for peace and statehood instead of expecting the jews and the west to give and give and keep giving?

 

[aris2chat]

Your very argument ignores history - the history that has had these people, called Palestinians, living on that land for hundreds and in some cases thousands of years. You want to delete that history, and expell them.

But lets give recognition to WHY Boston wants to expel them.

1. They are categorically unable to live in a peaceful partnership under Jewish rule.
2. They want their own sovereignty and self-determination (supposedly).
3. They already have a State where they have their own sovereignty and self-determination.

They do not already have a state.

How many tie have they oped for violence, demand Israel as their state, walked away from negotiations, refused statehood or citizenship elsewhere............

Palestinians could have had a state but they did everything to prove they were not ready or willing.

The point is they DON'T have a state.

They have to deserve a state and willing to give up their violence and hate if they expect to ever have one
They have to work to build the foundation and teach their people what statehood will mean, instead of working on more violence and hate

 

[Shusha]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

How can they not be "indiginous" when their history includes descent from indiginous peoples?

Because when your culture is overtaken by an imported, colonial, invading culture and your culture is lost or forgotten -- you are no longer indigenous. When you adopt the culture of the imported, colonial, invaders there is no culture to preserve and keep intact. There is no meaning to being "indigenous" if all it means is those people who currently live there. Are all Americans "indigenous" to the US? Are they all the original inhabitants whose culture developed in that place? Of course not. They are products of a mixture of the original inhabitants and the imported, colonial, invading cultures. This does not confer indigenousness to them. If it did -- the prevailing, surviving culture of ANY place becomes the indigenous culture.

If you want to argue that being "indigenous" confers no special rights to self-determination or sovereignty -- go ahead. I'd even agree with you. I'd even be able to come up with some pretty solid and tight legal arguments to back it up. But the argument that Palestinians with an Arabic Muslim culture are indigenous strips all meaning from the word.

If a mixed pedigree is an automatic exclusion than you would also have to exclude many Jews who are the products of mixed descent during the diaspora.

A MIXED culture is not (necessarily) a problem. There is still evidence of the indigenous culture. A culture INDISTINGUISHABLE from the imported, invading, colonist culture is a problem.

Further, again, one of the RIGHTS of being indigenous is the RIGHT to self-identify. YOU don't get to decide who is Jewish enough and who is not. The Jewish people do.

If a distinct culture is a requirement - what distinct culture is common and unique to all Jews? Not religion - culture.

First of all, religion is a valid marker of culture. Aside from that: language, laws, holidays, life celebrations, history, myths, stories, foods, names. Pretty much any criteria you want to throw at the problem, Jews have.

Now, what distinct culture is unique to Palestinians. Good luck with that.

Unlike Nazareth - the Palestinians are stateless. That at the very least should be addressed. As to how much land should be "given away" - none. Because the Occupied Territories are not Israel's to give - in my opinion. Israel controls them, but ownership is far from clear.

You fail to see my point. One wonders if it is intentional. I will try again. Once upon a time there was a big piece of land called the Mandate for Palestine. In it lived two culturally distinct groups of people. (Not three -- two). One was culturally Jewish people (the indigenous ones who had experienced thousands of years of expulsion and invasion and genocide) and one was the culturally Arab Muslim people. Two distinct cultures, yes? The powers that decide such things, under all the legal instruments of the time, decided that each of these two distinct cultures should have their own sovereign nation. So they divided the land in four equal parts and gave three to the Arab Muslims and one to the Jewish people. (Perhaps, not so unfairly as would seem given the relative populations of both.) Thus came about the nations of Jordan and Israel.

Suddenly! another people appeared. Seems there were not two populations of Arab Muslims -- but three. And even though there is nothing at all to culturally distinguish one from the other the "Palestinians" were born from the womb of Jordan. "What?" they say, "we have been living here the whole time. Why shouldn't we have our own country?" And so, in our fictitious little world, they too are given their own country.

Suddenly! another people appear. Seems that there were not two populations of Arab Muslims, or even three -- but four! And even though there is nothing at all to culturally distinguish one from the others the "Nazarethis" are born from the womb of Palestine. "What?" they say, "we have been living here the whole time. Why shouldn't we have our own country?"

Do you see my point now? The continuous invention of "new" cultures (cultures which are, in fact, indistinguishable from their parent cultures) serves the purpose (intentional, I believe) to continually chip away and reject the idea of the Jewish State.

The insistence that a people must have a unique culture to be a people and have considered rights as Boston implies is weak. There are many nations who's people have indistinguishable cultures but no one questions their existance or implies they aren't a "real people" - only with the Palestinians. Why?

You misunderstand Boston, I think. The insistence that a people must have a culture to be indigenous is very strong. The insistence that a people are not a people or have no rights as a people, even without being indigenous is weaker, but not weak

I would challenge you to provide examples of indistinguishable cultures which no one questions so I can address them individually. I can't think of any off the top of my head except those in the ME area we are discussing.

I disagree. For one - the only Jewish people who are truly indiginous imo, would be the Mizrahi. Those who left married out into other nationalities and their culture changed along with that.

Only if you subscribe to the notion that ethnic cleansing removes indigenousness. And if you subscribe to the notion that one can "marry out" of a culture -- you have just defeated your own argument about the Palestinians.

I'm curious why you say "Muslims reject Jewish history, and convert Jewish myths and religious into their own. As in, "Abraham and Moses and David and Solomon were Muslims, not Jews" as if this is some unique way of destroying Jewish heritage.

Because it does. It usurps it. It replaces it. It denies the origins of the stories. It erases us.

The Canaanites are part of the Palistinian heritage.

The Canaanites are the cultural forefathers of the Jewish people. Not the Palestinians.[/QUOTE]

 

[Boston1]

Quote

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

========================================

There is absolutely nothing to distinguish the Arab Mulsims west of the Jordan from the Arab Muslims east of the Jordan.

Jordan was invented within a month or two of the onset of the mandate period. It exceeds the ludicrous to think that any culture, language, religion, customs or any other distinctive characteristic could have developed within this two month window.

The assertion that the Arab Muslims living west of the Jordan are any different from those living east of the Jordan is simply ridiculous.

========================================

Quote

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

========================================

Not at all what I’m saying is that the term palestinian was used to define Judaic people ( Jews ) living in their ancient homeland prior to the creation of the state of Israel.

I’m sure other people live there, but I’ve yet to see a single first source document in which they refer to themselves as palestinian people. There is nothing from the time of the Muslim conquest and in Ottoman times the area was divided up into the Ottoman Syrian provinces. It was never palestine until you get to the mandate period.

========================================

Quote

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation

========================================

The terms hold the utmost relevance. Without accurate terminology we might as well just go back to all the swearing and name calling. By using specific language we accurately define our postions and express our views clearly.

The people now palestinians were formerly called southern Syrians of the x province. As were the people now called Jordanians. There is absolutely no difference between the two and 75% of the area subsequently known as the British mandate should be more than enough to satisfy any claim they might have to the land.

========================================

Quote

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

========================================
Odd, change just a few words and we would be in exact agreement.

“the name of the Arabs might change but the Arabs are still Arab .

And we all know where the Arab Muslims came from. The Arabian peninsula.

Given the effectiveness of the pogroms we do know about, just how thorough the slaughter of the Muslim conquest was can only be guessed at. So in fact you have no evidence to support your view. Although it is near certain that at least some of the areas original inhabitants survived and were incorporated in to the colonist ranks. However genetic testing does show a difference between the Arab and Judaic blood lines.

========================================

Quote

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them

========================================

Actually it was. Constantine’s sons made Christianity the official religion of Rome and the riots ensued. It was a blood bath of burning and pillage. Temples of all faiths were sacked and the libraries were burned.

You forget your history my friend.

And you don’t know how many converted and how many were killed during that first wave of Christian violence. Just like its unknown how many died vs were converted in the Muslim conquest. What is known is that there are still distinct differences in the genomes of the two three peoples. Arab Muslims, Christians and Jews.

And actually I think there is ample evidence to show that genetically Judaic peoples are still a distinct grouping. Although that would be an interesting discussion.

========================================

Quote

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

========================================

Um ;—) the Judaic culture ;—)

Its a simple matter of language, customs, religion and heritage. Among a few other things.

========================================

Quote

The point is they DON'T have a state.

========================================

They absolutely have a state ( Jordan ) for the exact reasons you specify. Arabs are no different west of the Jordan river than east.

Cheers

 

[MJB12741]

Coyote ;--) lets see if this paste from pages works.

====================================


Quote
How can they not be "indiginous" when their history includes descent from indiginous peoples?

If a mixed pedigree is an automatic exclusion than you would also have to exclude many Jews who are the products of mixed descent during the diaspora.

If a distinct culture is a requirement - what distinct culture is common and unique to all Jews? Not religion - culture.

========================================

It doesn’t, thats one of the problems with WIKI it fails utterly to use specific language, that error would have been corrected in a peer review but on WIKI its allowed to stand.

And yes, religion, language, customs all part of culture. The Judaic peoples have retained their uniqueness throughout the centuries. They are a truly unique culture.

========================================

Quote
Unlike Nazareth - the Palestinians are stateless. That at the very least should be addressed. As to how much land should be "given away" - none. Because the Occupied Territories are not Israel's to give - in my opinion. Israel controls them, but ownership is far from clear. The insistence that a people must have a unique culture to be a people and have considered rights as Boston implies is weak. There are many nations who's people have indistinguishable cultures but no one questions their existance or implies they aren't a "real people" - only with the Palestinians. Why?

========================================

The Nazareth ? give me a hint ;—))

The Arab Muslims you are referring to as palestinians are not stateless, they have 75% of the mandate area as the state of Jordan. This whole thing is really about just taking more land from israel.

The intent of the mandate is clear. EVERYTHING west of the Jordan River is available for the creation of a Jewish national homeland. Including Judea and Summaria.
========================================

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

Quote
I disagree. For one - the only Jewish people who are truly indiginous imo, would be the Mizrahi. Those who left married out into other nationalities and their culture changed along with that.

I'm curious why you say "Muslims reject Jewish history, and convert Jewish myths and religious into their own. As in, "Abraham and Moses and David and Solomon were Muslims, not Jews" as if this is some unique way of destroying Jewish heritage. Judaism is the founding Abrahamic faith. When Christianity was invented it usurped much of the Jewish faith for it's own. When Islam was invented it did the same. This is common with religions - they are almost all built upon earlier faiths and traditions.

The Canaanites are part of the Palistinian heritage.

=======================================

The Judaic people originated in the Canaan valley area have remained a distinct people with a distinct culture. You can claim they have been absorbed into whatever culture you want but without any evidence to support your claim it remains nothing but a claim. DNA evidence clearly shows that the Judaic people have remained by and large unaffected by their time in foreign lands.

Although I would be the first to point out that DNA evidence can also show we are 99% chimps and I’m not about to support giving chimpanzees a homeland in israel either.

I think you are mistaken about who claimed Muslims reject Jewish history. I’m innocent on that one although I wouldn’t be surprised.

I would suggest that Christianity actually incorporated little of the Judaic faith and instead relies heavily on Hellenistic pagan beliefs more known to Paul the Myth Maker, as H McCobby might suggest.

Oh and palestinians are part of no heritage, they seem to be an invention of the 1950s era.
========================================

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

That's deceptive if not downright dishonest. Ottoman and Mandate census figures show a considerable non-Jewish population. In fact, the number of Jews were relatively small until Zionist immigration started. Whether you call them "Palestinians" or Martians - the people who lived in that region were a mixture of religions that had been there for some time. Your statement would have us believe that until recently there were only Jews there and that is demonstratably false unless "recent" means the last thousand years or so.

========================================

Not at all, you are assuming once again that the people called palestinians previous to about 1950ish were Arab Muslims, they were not. You have to remember that the first time the term palestinian is applied to an Arab Muslim colonist is about 1950 with the invention of the PLO.

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation.

The lack of Judaic people in Judea at various times in history is virtually entirely due to the various pogroms enacted against them.

While there were various other peoples from a variety of faiths remaining you’d be hard pressed to find any reference to palestinians other than of the Jewish faith. Most identified themselves with their country of origin or with being Southern Syrian IE one of the three Ottoman Syrian provinces. Gaza Acre or Lebanon, I think, I’d have to go look up the names, but i”m pretty sure I nailed it.

In a nutshell I don’t believe the Arab Muslim colonists referred to themselves as palestinians until about 1950 ish.

========================================

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

Quote
They aren't First Nation tribes. To use YOUR terminology they are "European colonizers".

========================================

The Judaic people returning to Judea from Europe make up about 35% of the overall population of Israel today. The term returning is far more accurate than the term colonizing.

According to the way you define "colonist" - they are colonizing.

The term returning implies the people came from this area in the first place. They did, their ancestral line can be traced back to a pre bronze age people in the Canaan valley area.

The term Colonist implies that a person is moving into new territory and displacing a native people. We know that the Arab Mulsim colonists came from the Arabian peninsula in two waves, one between the 7th and 9th centuries and another in the mid Zionist period. That fact isn’t really in dispute. All you are arguing is that there were some survivors of the various pogroms and their genetics are evident in the colonist populations.

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them.

Big deal
A people is defined by its heritage, language, culture, belief systems, customs and uniqueness. None of which define the Arab Muslim colonists of the mandate area. But all of which define the Judaic peoples.

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

Which brings us to the point.

Why do the Arab Muslim colonists deserve more than 75% of the mandate area when the indigenous people only get 25% ?

Cheers

That is debatable and, is being debated whole heartedly in another thread

Muslim Palestinians are not natives to the land except for converts to Islam. However, indigenous Palestinians did include Jews.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote ;--) lets see if this paste from pages works.

====================================


Quote
How can they not be "indiginous" when their history includes descent from indiginous peoples?

If a mixed pedigree is an automatic exclusion than you would also have to exclude many Jews who are the products of mixed descent during the diaspora.

If a distinct culture is a requirement - what distinct culture is common and unique to all Jews? Not religion - culture.

========================================

It doesn’t, thats one of the problems with WIKI it fails utterly to use specific language, that error would have been corrected in a peer review but on WIKI its allowed to stand.

And yes, religion, language, customs all part of culture. The Judaic peoples have retained their uniqueness throughout the centuries. They are a truly unique culture.

========================================

Quote
Unlike Nazareth - the Palestinians are stateless. That at the very least should be addressed. As to how much land should be "given away" - none. Because the Occupied Territories are not Israel's to give - in my opinion. Israel controls them, but ownership is far from clear. The insistence that a people must have a unique culture to be a people and have considered rights as Boston implies is weak. There are many nations who's people have indistinguishable cultures but no one questions their existance or implies they aren't a "real people" - only with the Palestinians. Why?

========================================

The Nazareth ? give me a hint ;—))

The Arab Muslims you are referring to as palestinians are not stateless, they have 75% of the mandate area as the state of Jordan. This whole thing is really about just taking more land from israel.

The intent of the mandate is clear. EVERYTHING west of the Jordan River is available for the creation of a Jewish national homeland. Including Judea and Summaria.
========================================

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

Quote
I disagree. For one - the only Jewish people who are truly indiginous imo, would be the Mizrahi. Those who left married out into other nationalities and their culture changed along with that.

I'm curious why you say "Muslims reject Jewish history, and convert Jewish myths and religious into their own. As in, "Abraham and Moses and David and Solomon were Muslims, not Jews" as if this is some unique way of destroying Jewish heritage. Judaism is the founding Abrahamic faith. When Christianity was invented it usurped much of the Jewish faith for it's own. When Islam was invented it did the same. This is common with religions - they are almost all built upon earlier faiths and traditions.

The Canaanites are part of the Palistinian heritage.

=======================================

The Judaic people originated in the Canaan valley area have remained a distinct people with a distinct culture. You can claim they have been absorbed into whatever culture you want but without any evidence to support your claim it remains nothing but a claim. DNA evidence clearly shows that the Judaic people have remained by and large unaffected by their time in foreign lands.

Although I would be the first to point out that DNA evidence can also show we are 99% chimps and I’m not about to support giving chimpanzees a homeland in israel either.

I think you are mistaken about who claimed Muslims reject Jewish history. I’m innocent on that one although I wouldn’t be surprised.

I would suggest that Christianity actually incorporated little of the Judaic faith and instead relies heavily on Hellenistic pagan beliefs more known to Paul the Myth Maker, as H McCobby might suggest.

Oh and palestinians are part of no heritage, they seem to be an invention of the 1950s era.
========================================

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

That's deceptive if not downright dishonest. Ottoman and Mandate census figures show a considerable non-Jewish population. In fact, the number of Jews were relatively small until Zionist immigration started. Whether you call them "Palestinians" or Martians - the people who lived in that region were a mixture of religions that had been there for some time. Your statement would have us believe that until recently there were only Jews there and that is demonstratably false unless "recent" means the last thousand years or so.

========================================

Not at all, you are assuming once again that the people called palestinians previous to about 1950ish were Arab Muslims, they were not. You have to remember that the first time the term palestinian is applied to an Arab Muslim colonist is about 1950 with the invention of the PLO.

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation.

The lack of Judaic people in Judea at various times in history is virtually entirely due to the various pogroms enacted against them.

While there were various other peoples from a variety of faiths remaining you’d be hard pressed to find any reference to palestinians other than of the Jewish faith. Most identified themselves with their country of origin or with being Southern Syrian IE one of the three Ottoman Syrian provinces. Gaza Acre or Lebanon, I think, I’d have to go look up the names, but i”m pretty sure I nailed it.

In a nutshell I don’t believe the Arab Muslim colonists referred to themselves as palestinians until about 1950 ish.

========================================

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

Quote
They aren't First Nation tribes. To use YOUR terminology they are "European colonizers".

========================================

The Judaic people returning to Judea from Europe make up about 35% of the overall population of Israel today. The term returning is far more accurate than the term colonizing.

According to the way you define "colonist" - they are colonizing.

The term returning implies the people came from this area in the first place. They did, their ancestral line can be traced back to a pre bronze age people in the Canaan valley area.

The term Colonist implies that a person is moving into new territory and displacing a native people. We know that the Arab Mulsim colonists came from the Arabian peninsula in two waves, one between the 7th and 9th centuries and another in the mid Zionist period. That fact isn’t really in dispute. All you are arguing is that there were some survivors of the various pogroms and their genetics are evident in the colonist populations.

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them.

Big deal
A people is defined by its heritage, language, culture, belief systems, customs and uniqueness. None of which define the Arab Muslim colonists of the mandate area. But all of which define the Judaic peoples.

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

Which brings us to the point.

Why do the Arab Muslim colonists deserve more than 75% of the mandate area when the indigenous people only get 25% ?

Cheers

That is debatable and, is being debated whole heartedly in another thread

Muslim Palestinians are not natives to the land except for converts to Islam. However, indigenous Palestinians did include Jews.

Basically - that is what I have been saying all along , and there were many converts to Islam and to Christianity.

 

[Coyote]

Quote

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

========================================

There is absolutely nothing to distinguish the Arab Mulsims west of the Jordan from the Arab Muslims east of the Jordan.

Jordan was invented within a month or two of the onset of the mandate period. It exceeds the ludicrous to think that any culture, language, religion, customs or any other distinctive characteristic could have developed within this two month window.

The assertion that the Arab Muslims living west of the Jordan are any different from those living east of the Jordan is simply ridiculous.

========================================

Except they did not originate in Jordan and they are not Jordanians. Just like Canadians aren't Americans.

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

========================================

Not at all what I’m saying is that the term palestinian was used to define Judaic people ( Jews ) living in their ancient homeland prior to the creation of the state of Israel.

I’m sure other people live there, but I’ve yet to see a single first source document in which they refer to themselves as palestinian people. There is nothing from the time of the Muslim conquest and in Ottoman times the area was divided up into the Ottoman Syrian provinces. It was never palestine until you get to the mandate period.

========================================

It is irrelevant what they "referred to themselves" as - they existed, in that place for centuries and millinia. And that is enough.

Quote

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation

========================================

The terms hold the utmost relevance. Without accurate terminology we might as well just go back to all the swearing and name calling. By using specific language we accurately define our postions and express our views clearly.

The people now palestinians were formerly called southern Syrians of the x province. As were the people now called Jordanians. There is absolutely no difference between the two and 75% of the area subsequently known as the British mandate should be more than enough to satisfy any claim they might have to the land.

========================================

I strongly disagree. The term is only words. It does not legitimize or delegitimze the existance of people. Expelling millions of people as you would do would be a humanatarian nightmare. Jordan is a resource poor state - they are not going to take millions of Palestinians simply because Israel wants the land but not the people.

Quote

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

========================================
Odd, change just a few words and we would be in exact agreement.

“the name of the Arabs might change but the Arabs are still Arab .

And we all know where the Arab Muslims came from. The Arabian peninsula.

Given the effectiveness of the pogroms we do know about, just how thorough the slaughter of the Muslim conquest was can only be guessed at. So in fact you have no evidence to support your view. Although it is near certain that at least some of the areas original inhabitants survived and were incorporated in to the colonist ranks. However genetic testing does show a difference between the Arab and Judaic blood lines.

========================================

Actualy, they might not even be "arabs". Arabs are a specific people, but (according to a historical quote I posted earlier) the term "arab" has been applied to many peoples who aren't actually Arab in origin.

You bring up genetic testing, so what does it show? At the very least it shows a very close relationship to Palestinians and Jews and in fact - Palestinians have a closer relationship to some Jewish groups than those groups have to other Jewish groups.

Quote

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them

========================================

Actually it was. Constantine’s sons made Christianity the official religion of Rome and the riots ensued. It was a blood bath of burning and pillage. Temples of all faiths were sacked and the libraries were burned.

You forget your history my friend.

And you don’t know how many converted and how many were killed during that first wave of Christian violence. Just like its unknown how many died vs were converted in the Muslim conquest. What is known is that there are still distinct differences in the genomes of the two three peoples. Arab Muslims, Christians and Jews.

And actually I think there is ample evidence to show that genetically Judaic peoples are still a distinct grouping. Although that would be an interesting discussion.

========================================

Point taken on history

Quote

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

========================================

Um ;—) the Judaic culture ;—)

Its a simple matter of language, customs, religion and heritage. Among a few other things.

What defines a "singular unique Jewish culture"?

Language?

Jews speak many languages. Yiddish is one unique language to one distinctive group of Jews. Hebrew was a dead language used only in religious rites (much like Latin in the Catholic Church). It had long ceased to be a spoken language and was revived, and altered to become a usable language when Israel was reinvented. That it is now the language of Israel does not make it a common language to all Jews any more than Latin is to all Christians. Customs - outside of religious observences - what customs? Heritage varies widely depending on where in the world they are in and this can be seen also in the genomic differences.

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

 

[aris2chat]

Quote

The Palestinians do not have a state. They are not Jordanian. They have never been Jordanian. They lived where they live for hundreds of years (with some immigration from other area). You would expel them from their homeland in order to give that land to another people.

========================================

There is absolutely nothing to distinguish the Arab Mulsims west of the Jordan from the Arab Muslims east of the Jordan.

Jordan was invented within a month or two of the onset of the mandate period. It exceeds the ludicrous to think that any culture, language, religion, customs or any other distinctive characteristic could have developed within this two month window.

The assertion that the Arab Muslims living west of the Jordan are any different from those living east of the Jordan is simply ridiculous.

========================================

Except they did not originate in Jordan and they are not Jordanians. Just like Canadians aren't Americans.

Again, that is false - are you trying to insist that the only people living their prior to 1950 were Jews?

========================================

Not at all what I’m saying is that the term palestinian was used to define Judaic people ( Jews ) living in their ancient homeland prior to the creation of the state of Israel.

I’m sure other people live there, but I’ve yet to see a single first source document in which they refer to themselves as palestinian people. There is nothing from the time of the Muslim conquest and in Ottoman times the area was divided up into the Ottoman Syrian provinces. It was never palestine until you get to the mandate period.

========================================

It is irrelevant what they "referred to themselves" as - they existed, in that place for centuries and millinia. And that is enough.

Quote

The term itself is irrelevant - the people now called Palestinians are the same people that were living there prior to 1950. This nothing more than rhetorical trickery to try and deny them any sort of validation

========================================

The terms hold the utmost relevance. Without accurate terminology we might as well just go back to all the swearing and name calling. By using specific language we accurately define our postions and express our views clearly.

The people now palestinians were formerly called southern Syrians of the x province. As were the people now called Jordanians. There is absolutely no difference between the two and 75% of the area subsequently known as the British mandate should be more than enough to satisfy any claim they might have to the land.

========================================

I strongly disagree. The term is only words. It does not legitimize or delegitimze the existance of people. Expelling millions of people as you would do would be a humanatarian nightmare. Jordan is a resource poor state - they are not going to take millions of Palestinians simply because Israel wants the land but not the people.

Quote

Again - the name of the people might change but the people have always been there.

========================================
Odd, change just a few words and we would be in exact agreement.

“the name of the Arabs might change but the Arabs are still Arab .

And we all know where the Arab Muslims came from. The Arabian peninsula.

Given the effectiveness of the pogroms we do know about, just how thorough the slaughter of the Muslim conquest was can only be guessed at. So in fact you have no evidence to support your view. Although it is near certain that at least some of the areas original inhabitants survived and were incorporated in to the colonist ranks. However genetic testing does show a difference between the Arab and Judaic blood lines.

========================================

Actualy, they might not even be "arabs". Arabs are a specific people, but (according to a historical quote I posted earlier) the term "arab" has been applied to many peoples who aren't actually Arab in origin.

You bring up genetic testing, so what does it show? At the very least it shows a very close relationship to Palestinians and Jews and in fact - Palestinians have a closer relationship to some Jewish groups than those groups have to other Jewish groups.

Quote

Not at all. It wasn't all pograms in Palestine. When Christians became dominant - many Jews converted to Christianity, out of expediency, or for what ever reason. Likewise with the Muslim conquests. The mistake is trying to use religion as a way of defining a people when people change religions like politics: Spread of Islam, The - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

You can't even argue that worldwide, Jews are pure anymore - they intermarried with other people, and other people converted to their faith during the diaspora - like the Palestinians, they are mutts with their religion uniting them

========================================

Actually it was. Constantine’s sons made Christianity the official religion of Rome and the riots ensued. It was a blood bath of burning and pillage. Temples of all faiths were sacked and the libraries were burned.

You forget your history my friend.

And you don’t know how many converted and how many were killed during that first wave of Christian violence. Just like its unknown how many died vs were converted in the Muslim conquest. What is known is that there are still distinct differences in the genomes of the two three peoples. Arab Muslims, Christians and Jews.

And actually I think there is ample evidence to show that genetically Judaic peoples are still a distinct grouping. Although that would be an interesting discussion.

========================================

Point taken on history

Quote

What singular unique culture encorporates all Jews?

========================================

Um ;—) the Judaic culture ;—)

Its a simple matter of language, customs, religion and heritage. Among a few other things.

What defines a "singular unique Jewish culture"?

Language?

Jews speak many languages. Yiddish is one unique language to one distinctive group of Jews. Hebrew was a dead language used only in religious rites (much like Latin in the Catholic Church). It had long ceased to be a spoken language and was revived, and altered to become a usable language when Israel was reinvented. That it is now the language of Israel does not make it a common language to all Jews any more than Latin is to all Christians. Customs - outside of religious observences - what customs? Heritage varies widely depending on where in the world they are in and this can be seen also in the genomic differences.

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

Not all Lebanese are arab. Most are of mixed european dna and some families go back to ancient city state/Phoenician/Kinahni roots.

 

[Shusha]

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

Really? You are going to try to argue that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture? To what end?

 

[P F Tinmore]

No we can't, they are not a people. They have no identifying language, culture, faith or customs that define a specifically unique people. They are Arab Muslim colonists who may or may not have incorporated some of the native peoples into that Arab Muslim culture.

But thats actually beside the point. The Arab Muslims of the mandate area be they colonists or not have already received 75% of the mandated area. In two states or at least one soon to be state.

Now they are using the excuse of a manufactured peoples to further destabilize Israel.

I say not another inch.

They already have 75% of the mandated area

It's not beside the point. As long as you insist the Palestinians are not "a people" - you disenfranchise them. Every "people" starts somewhere.

The Arab Muslims of the mandate area be they colonists or not have no distinct language, customs, belief system or culture. They are not a distinct people. They are southern Ottoman era Syrians of the Arab Muslim conquest who remained in the area and imposed their culture on the surviving inhabitants. Colonists.

They do not meet the requirements of a distinct people.

The whole argument is an excuse to further destabilize Israel. If the issue is so important let Jordan cede land to them. Israel is small enough already.

If we ignore the passage of time we might as well say that Coloradians are a distinct people and demand statehood

The Arab Muslims of the mandate area be they colonists or not have no distinct language, customs, belief system or culture. They are not a distinct people.​

They are citizens of Palestine. That is the tie that binds.

What is the distinct culture of the US which is comprised of many native tribes and people from virtually every other place on the earth.

Palestine is "Arab" like the US is "English."

Homeland or Jewish state.

More sanity than most can handle

 

[aris2chat]

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

Really? You are going to try to argue that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture? To what end?

Jewish Culture - Sharon Pluralism

sharonpluralism.org › Cultural Protocols
Most are aware of general American culture and customs, though more traditional or Orthodox Jews may observe dIfferent customs connected to their religion.
Orthodox Jewish Culture, Lifestyle, Traditions and Customs

www.orthodox-jews.com/jewish-culture.html
Learn and get acquainted with the unique Orthodox Jewish Culture, get to know their dress style, education, views on life and more.
The Jewish people: religion and culture - British Library

www.bl.uk › ... › Information cards
British Library
Background information on Jewish religion and culture.
Jewish Cultural Identity - My Jewish Learning

www.myjewishlearning.com › ... › Jewish Identity
MyJewishLearning
While the organized Jewish community often identifies Jews by their denominational affiliation, more than half of all Jews in North America resist ...
Ancient Jewish Religion and Culture - My Jewish Learning

www.myjewishlearning.com/.../ancient-jewish-religio...
MyJewishLearning
Home → Jewish History → Ancient & Medieval History → 2500 BCE to 539 BCE: The Story → Ancient Jewish Religion and Culture ...
Jewish culture - Projet ALADIN

www.projetaladin.org › English › A Muslim's Guide to Judaism
This makes it difficult to draw a clear distinction between the cultural production of members of the Jewish people, and culture that is specifically Jewish.


134,000,000 results

Art, music, literature, food, dance, architecture, language, religion .............

unique

 

[Coyote]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

How can they not be "indiginous" when their history includes descent from indiginous peoples?

Because when your culture is overtaken by an imported, colonial, invading culture and your culture is lost or forgotten -- you are no longer indigenous. When you adopt the culture of the imported, colonial, invaders there is no culture to preserve and keep intact. There is no meaning to being "indigenous" if all it means is those people who currently live there. Are all Americans "indigenous" to the US? Are they all the original inhabitants whose culture developed in that place? Of course not. They are products of a mixture of the original inhabitants and the imported, colonial, invading cultures. This does not confer indigenousness to them. If it did -- the prevailing, surviving culture of ANY place becomes the indigenous culture.

If you want to argue that being "indigenous" confers no special rights to self-determination or sovereignty -- go ahead. I'd even agree with you. I'd even be able to come up with some pretty solid and tight legal arguments to back it up. But the argument that Palestinians with an Arabic Muslim culture are indigenous strips all meaning from the word.

Actually - that's exactly what I feel. Whether or not they are "indiginous" doesn't necessarily line up with rights and self-determination. But I disagree on your final statement. The Palestinian culture prior to Israel's recreation, was arabicized - and that would have included Mizrahim Jews, as well as Christians. Outside of religion - how did their cultures differ from one another prior to outside immigration?

If a mixed pedigree is an automatic exclusion than you would also have to exclude many Jews who are the products of mixed descent during the diaspora.

A MIXED culture is not (necessarily) a problem. There is still evidence of the indigenous culture. A culture INDISTINGUISHABLE from the imported, invading, colonist culture is a problem.

Further, again, one of the RIGHTS of being indigenous is the RIGHT to self-identify. YOU don't get to decide who is Jewish enough and who is not. The Jewish people do.

It would seem to me that the Palestinians have those same rights given their descent from indiginous peoples. It seems to me it is THEIR right to determine whether or not they are a people, not anyone elses.

If a distinct culture is a requirement - what distinct culture is common and unique to all Jews? Not religion - culture.

First of all, religion is a valid marker of culture. Aside from that: language, laws, holidays, life celebrations, history, myths, stories, foods, names. Pretty much any criteria you want to throw at the problem, Jews have.

Now, what distinct culture is unique to Palestinians. Good luck with that.

Language is not unique to all Jews. Holidays and laws are religiously based. What foods - outside of sacred rites - do they have in common worldwide? What language? If religion is the primary marker than can we say that Christians are a culture, despite the huge differences outside of religion?

What is culture?

Culture is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people, defined by everything from language, religion, cuisine, social habits, music and arts.

Language? They all speak different languages. Hebrew is a common language used only in religious rites. There is no common spoken language.

Cuisine? What common cuisine is there amongst the many different Jewish cultures?

Social habits?

Music and arts?

Unlike Nazareth - the Palestinians are stateless. That at the very least should be addressed. As to how much land should be "given away" - none. Because the Occupied Territories are not Israel's to give - in my opinion. Israel controls them, but ownership is far from clear.

You fail to see my point. One wonders if it is intentional. I will try again. Once upon a time there was a big piece of land called the Mandate for Palestine. In it lived two culturally distinct groups of people. (Not three -- two). One was culturally Jewish people (the indigenous ones who had experienced thousands of years of expulsion and invasion and genocide) and one was the culturally Arab Muslim people. Two distinct cultures, yes? The powers that decide such things, under all the legal instruments of the time, decided that each of these two distinct cultures should have their own sovereign nation. So they divided the land in four equal parts and gave three to the Arab Muslims and one to the Jewish people. (Perhaps, not so unfairly as would seem given the relative populations of both.) Thus came about the nations of Jordan and Israel.

No, I do not fail to see your point. I disagree with the value of the mandate, from over 100 years ago, in resolving today's conflict.

Suddenly! another people appeared. Seems there were not two populations of Arab Muslims -- but three. And even though there is nothing at all to culturally distinguish one from the other the "Palestinians" were born from the womb of Jordan. "What?" they say, "we have been living here the whole time. Why shouldn't we have our own country?" And so, in our fictitious little world, they too are given their own country.

Suddenly! another people appear. Seems that there were not two populations of Arab Muslims, or even three -- but four! And even though there is nothing at all to culturally distinguish one from the others the "Nazarethis" are born from the womb of Palestine. "What?" they say, "we have been living here the whole time. Why shouldn't we have our own country?"

Do you see my point now? The continuous invention of "new" cultures (cultures which are, in fact, indistinguishable from their parent cultures) serves the purpose (intentional, I believe) to continually chip away and reject the idea of the Jewish State.

No, they did not suddenly appear. They were always there. Israel just doesn't want them, but it wants the land (without the inhabitents) - to summarize. So what do you do with the people that had been living there but are of the wrong ethnic flavor? You do your best to delegitimize them and make them a non-people. Since I don't see any other groups clamoring for a state - I think that claim is bogus and a distraction.

The insistence that a people must have a unique culture to be a people and have considered rights as Boston implies is weak. There are many nations who's people have indistinguishable cultures but no one questions their existance or implies they aren't a "real people" - only with the Palestinians. Why?

You misunderstand Boston, I think. The insistence that a people must have a culture to be indigenous is very strong. The insistence that a people are not a people or have no rights as a people, even without being indigenous is weaker, but not weak

I would challenge you to provide examples of indistinguishable cultures which no one questions so I can address them individually. I can't think of any off the top of my head except those in the ME area we are discussing.

I look at it from a very humanistic perspective when people have been occupying an area for generations - whether you consider them indiginous or "a people" is irrelevant. They have rights to that space. The Palestinians are unique (well, not totally - the Rohinga face the same issue) in that the conflict has rendered them a stateless people. It makes no difference whether they are a people or not (and the pro-Israeli camp is doing it's utmost to make them non-people) - they were inhabitants of the area. Now, as a result of various conflicts which they lost - there is a state that exerts a great deal of control over the regions they once occupied so the question is - what to do. People like Boston want to send them all to Jordan because "there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians" (kind of like saying there is no difference between Americans and Canadians). Ultimately every "people" starts new at some point - or are, as some are fond of putting it - "invented". Does that make them any less a "people"? 200 some years ago, Americans were invented after all - a result of conflict.

As far as Palestinians having a unique culture - I hadn't looked at it. So I used my friend Google (he's a very handy guy ):

Culture and Customs of the Palestinians

They share traditional dress with other Arab cultures, but have their own unique decorations and and features which distinguish their clothing, headgear and veils from other Arab states. This has been preserved even in the diaspora.

They have their unique dialect: Palestinian Arabic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have their own folk songs: Palestine-Israel Journal: <b>Land, Heritage and Identity of the Palestinian People</b>

Stories, fables and legends, passed down through generations, are now playing a role in raising morale, expressing the harsh realities of the present, and maintaining hope by showing that justice will prevail. Popular songs and stories were passed down not only by the hakawati (popular story teller) but also by mothers, grandmothers and grandfathers. It is true that the land was occupied, but memories of the land are alive through stories told to children and grandchildren. These stories play the role of fairy tales, yet the situation is now concrete.
Folklore songs have been adapted to suit the new Palestinian situation. Some songs are based on poetry. These songs express feelings of sorrow, dignity, and hope for return to the land. They are sung by almost all the Palestinians in Palestine and the Diaspora, and are even popular in Arab countries. Palestinian poets, among them Mahmoud Darwish and Ahmad Dahbour, depend on popular culture as a source, and many of their poems have become songs of resistance:
​

I disagree. For one - the only Jewish people who are truly indiginous imo, would be the Mizrahi. Those who left married out into other nationalities and their culture changed along with that.

Only if you subscribe to the notion that ethnic cleansing removes indigenousness. And if you subscribe to the notion that one can "marry out" of a culture -- you have just defeated your own argument about the Palestinians.

I'm curious why you say "Muslims reject Jewish history, and convert Jewish myths and religious into their own. As in, "Abraham and Moses and David and Solomon were Muslims, not Jews" as if this is some unique way of destroying Jewish heritage.

Because it does. It usurps it. It replaces it. It denies the origins of the stories. It erases us.

Aren't you erasing the Palestinians just as surely by denying they are a people?

I guess I don't see it as "destroying" a heritage" - to me, all religions are built on others and in fact, many modern "demons" were demotions of prior deities. I'm a firm believer in the commonality of many religions.

The Canaanites are part of the Palistinian heritage.

The Canaanites are the cultural forefathers of the Jewish people. Not the Palestinians.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Maybe they are...maybe they aren't

So is it possible for anyone in the area today to prove a historic link to any of the original inhabitants?
It is important to keep in mind both the tumultuous history of this region over time and the massive waves of migration that have taken place during the past 4,000 years. As a result of assimilation, annihilation, and acculturation, it is highly unlikely that anyone living in the area today, whether Palestinian or Israeli, can provide a legitimate pedigree definitively extending back to any of the original inhabitants of [this land]. ​

 

[Coyote]

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

Really? You are going to try to argue that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture? To what end?

I'm asking you the same question you ask me about Palestinian - is there a unique Jewish culture that applies to all Jews?

 

[Shusha]

134,000,000 results

Art, music, literature, food, dance, architecture, language, religion .............

unique

Yep. Marriage rituals, burial rituals, rituals for the birth of a child and for becoming an adult, a system of laws and legal structure, creation myths, stories, legends, styles of clothing, holidays and feasts, the list goes on and on and on.

 

[Shusha]

Aren't you erasing the Palestinians just as surely by denying they are a people?

I am not denying they are a people. I am denying they are the indigenous people.

I look at it from a very humanistic perspective when people have been occupying an area for generations - whether you consider them indiginous or "a people" is irrelevant. They have rights to that space. It makes no difference whether they are a people or not (and the pro-Israeli camp is doing it's utmost to make them non-people) - they were inhabitants of the area.

We agree.

It seems to me it is THEIR right to determine whether or not they are a people, not anyone elses.

It is. They do.

Israel just doesn't want them, but it wants the land (without the inhabitents) - to summarize.

Not true. Israel has always been willing to create a multi-cultural society. Israel has been able, in fact, to create a successful multi-cultural society. And this despite the all of the conflict. (Please contrast that with any Muslim country you care to).

What Israel doesn't want is HOSTILE inhabitants who wish to destroy her nation and murder her civilians. Perfectly reasonable request, imo.

 

[Boston1]

Quote

I am not denying they are a people. I am denying they are the indigenous people.

End Quote

I sure am, Not only are the Arab Muslim colonists not an indiginous people but since palestine hasn't existed for more than about 100 years there simply isn't enough time to develop a distinct culture.

There can be no indiginous palestinians because not only is there no palestine but there is no distinct palestinian culture and even if there was that culture would have been superseded by a vastly older culture of the Judaic peoples.

The suggestion that there is a palestine or that there is a distinct palestinian culture is simply ludicrous.

By any measure the statement is entirely false.

 

[Coyote]

What specifically defines Jewish culture that encompasses all Jews and is unique?

Really? You are going to try to argue that there is no such thing as a Jewish culture? To what end?

Jewish Culture - Sharon Pluralism

sharonpluralism.org › Cultural Protocols
Most are aware of general American culture and customs, though more traditional or Orthodox Jews may observe dIfferent customs connected to their religion.
Orthodox Jewish Culture, Lifestyle, Traditions and Customs

www.orthodox-jews.com/jewish-culture.html
Learn and get acquainted with the unique Orthodox Jewish Culture, get to know their dress style, education, views on life and more.
The Jewish people: religion and culture - British Library

www.bl.uk › ... › Information cards
British Library
Background information on Jewish religion and culture.
Jewish Cultural Identity - My Jewish Learning

www.myjewishlearning.com › ... › Jewish Identity
MyJewishLearning
While the organized Jewish community often identifies Jews by their denominational affiliation, more than half of all Jews in North America resist ...
Ancient Jewish Religion and Culture - My Jewish Learning

www.myjewishlearning.com/.../ancient-jewish-religio...
MyJewishLearning
Home → Jewish History → Ancient & Medieval History → 2500 BCE to 539 BCE: The Story → Ancient Jewish Religion and Culture ...
Jewish culture - Projet ALADIN

www.projetaladin.org › English › A Muslim's Guide to Judaism
This makes it difficult to draw a clear distinction between the cultural production of members of the Jewish people, and culture that is specifically Jewish.


134,000,000 results

Art, music, literature, food, dance, architecture, language, religion .............

unique

Google Palestinian culture - 48,200,000 results.