Jerusalem Corpus Separatum

[Shusha]

Irish Catholics are the descendants of the original Irish although they may have worshipped trees or rocks before.

And you are trying to tell me that you can't culturally tell the difference between the Irish and the Romans? That the Irish culture was completely subsumed by the Roman Christian culture? That only Romans are Irish now? That Romans are the First Nations peoples of Ireland?

 

[Coyote]

You are again distorting my position. I have consistently said that the Palestinians are descendents of original people's in that region combined with successive waves of migrations and conquests much as Jews, today, are descendents of original people's in that region combined with the people's of the regions they spread out out into. You seem to think that Jews have some special rights other "First Nation" peoples in that region and they don't - they have the same rights.

Of course they have the same rights. When have I EVER said that they didn't? I'm the one arguing for the rights of both peoples, remember?

But they can not both be First Nations for the term to have any meaning. The Jewish people, being the culture which has had the longest, recognizable, continuing culture in that territory were "first". Making them the First Nation. What happened afterwards is all eggs which can't be unscrambled. All the eggs have rights at this point.

Yes, they can both be First Nations. The United States has multiple First Nations peoples. There is nothing that says there can only be one.

 

[Coyote]

The people that have always lived in an area, regardless of the languages, cultural changes or changes in religion remain the native people. Just because native americans may have become Roman Catholics, may speak Spanish and may have adopted much of the Hispanic (Spanish) culture, does not somehow change their status as the native people of America.

By definition, Arab Muslims have NOT "always lived there".

By definition, Spanish cultures are NOT the indigenous cultures of the Americas.

By definition, I (Canadian of Irish/Scots/German descent) am from an immigrating (invading) culture and am not First Nations. Nor will my descendants EVER be.

By definition invading, colonizing cultures are not First Nations cultures.

I totally disagree. You call them "Arab Muslims" - a term I'm assuming you've now chosen to use because it implies an invading Arab people. They aren't. Some are. Many are the same people as the Jews who had been there prior to Islam, but converted over time.

Spanish cultures aren't indiginous - but, the people who assumed aspects of those cultures may very well be indiginous. Even Jews - when they spread out over the world, took on the cultural attributes of the countries they resided in.

The PURPOSE of identifying and protecting First Nations cultures is to preserve the cultures of those who were invaded and conquered.

Can a First Nations person learn to speak a foreign language and still be First Nations? Duh. Of course, they can. Can a First Nations culture entirely adopt an invading culture so that there is no trace of their First Nations culture and still be First Nations. Uh. No.

Yes. They can. Jews, who have lived over a thousand years in European countries are essentially European in culture - not Middle Eastern.

We invaded a really, really long time ago does not confer First Nations status on people. Though it might give them claims to sovereignty and self-determination.

Ironically, "First Nations" has only ever been used to apply to Native American tribes, most specifically Canadian, where conquest is relatively recent and the cultures still quite clear. When you are talking about a people who dispersed some three thousand years ago - does it really apply in the same way? When they immigrated back, after all that time, they brought back foreign cultures. How are they any more "First Nation" than the people who stayed behind, and absorbed foreign cultures?

 

[Coyote]

This is interesting - reading about the Temple Mount.

Jews worshipping there is not only controversial with the Muslims, but also among the Jews.

Ultra-Orthodox war against Jews ascending Temple Mount - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

 

[montelatici]

Irish Catholics are the descendants of the original Irish although they may have worshipped trees or rocks before.

And you are trying to tell me that you can't culturally tell the difference between the Irish and the Romans? That the Irish culture was completely subsumed by the Roman Christian culture? That only Romans are Irish now? That Romans are the First Nations peoples of Ireland?

So, the Irish are Italians today? You really don't get it. The Irish are the same people that they were, they are in no way Italians.

 

[docmauser1]

Irish Catholics are the descendants of the original Irish although they may have worshipped trees or rocks before.

And you are trying to tell me that you can't culturally tell the difference between the Irish and the Romans? That the Irish culture was completely subsumed by the Roman Christian culture? That only Romans are Irish now? That Romans are the First Nations peoples of Ireland?

So, the Irish are Italians today? You really don't get it. The Irish are the same people that they were, they are in no way Italians.

But any angry arab anywhere is, of course, a palistanian.

 

[Shusha]

When they immigrated back, after all that time, they brought back foreign cultures. How are they any more "First Nation" than the people who stayed behind, and absorbed foreign cultures?

Because they retained their distinct and recognizable Jewish culture, regardless of what other cultural attributes they may have gained they never LOST their originating, First Nations, Jewish culture. As opposed to the "Palestinian" people who were entirely swallowed up by the invading culture.

 

[Shusha]

So, the Irish are Italians today? You really don't get it. The Irish are the same people that they were, they are in no way Italians.

You clearly did not understand my post.

 

[Phoenall]

And it has been shown that the only way to do that will be to remove one groups access for good. Then defend that by force of arms until they have been wiped out.

Has it? When was it shown that removing ONE group is a solution? Which group would that be Phoney?

Seems that the zionut mantra is simply Jerusalem for jews only...

Seems like the Muslim mantra is Jerusalem for Muslims only...

Christians, well, they aren't well represented in the ME so their mantra is fairly muted...

Remove any thoughts of controlling from those who would choose 'exclusivity' to Jerusalem and place Jerusalem into the hands of a neutral, multi national, multi cultural body to govern and keep open Jerusalem for all...

Which group was it that invaded in 1948 and occupied the city of Jerusalem. Then annexed the land to its own against the terms of the UN charter and Geneva conventions. That is the same group that will set out to claim it for themselves yet again even though they have no religious , cultural or racial ties to the City. You can tell as many lies as you want, and deflect as much as you want you will never change the facts.


We can tell you are losing the argument you are using your made up words again to demonise the Jews

I'm not sure who's more stupid...

You for writing this crap or me for even bothering responding to you!

I can't lose an argument that I haven't even started...

You will see from the OP that there was no argument, simply an opening for debate. Seems your failed neo marxist mentality has simply been transferred to a failed zionut mentality!

You will see from the OP that there was NO demonisation of ANYONE... Rather a suggestion that no religious group should have control of Jerusalem...

Debate the topic Phoney or move along!

I am and you are losing, proven by your failed attempt at rule 7 in the book of disinformation

When all else fails LIE

Glad you agree that it is you who is stupid Phoney...

Want to show me where I have lied ?

The lie arena is normally exclusively yours Phoney!

How I can fail by putting up a post for debate is beyond any normal persons comprehension... Ah but it's Phoney the failed neo marxist zionut!

So, try to debate the OP... Because you haven't so far!

Jerusalem corpus separatum... A solution to peace?

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution...

Once again you enlist the help of rule 7 to get out of the hole you have dug. Far too many people see you as the LIAR you are when it involves what other people write.






So you advocate expelling every Jew and muslim from Jerusalem and just leaving the Christians and atheists. Will you pay the compensation out of your funds, and then stand with the troops in a ring around Jerusalem to stop the Jews and muslims from getting back in ?


IDIOT OR WHAT ?

 

[Phoenall]

Jerusalem corpus separatum... A solution to peace?

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution...

Why don't we try giving it to the First Nations people to whom it belongs, who by all rights should be in control of their own monuments?

Because it's not just theirs. It's a monument for other people's as well. They are no more First Nations than the people who have been there just as long but converted to other religions.

How is it Christian and muslim when they have no ties to the place other than through their links to Judaism. Shown one link that is not based on Judaism or a lie and I will fight alongside you for the rights of the muslims to do as they want in Jerusalem

 

[Phoenall]

Because it's not just theirs. It's a monument for other people's as well. .

Sure. Because it was usurped (stolen). Someone built a mosque on another culture's holy place. You've already said that is an atrocity.

And as I've said before that does not preclude sharing. Sharing fits well with Jewish faith traditions (as opposed to not fitting well with Muslim faith traditions).

You can't usurp - or steal - something that you are part owner of. And no, I did not say that THAT was an atrocity - you are distorting my words.

If you want to be philosophical about it: no one owns the land beneath the structures, two faiths built upon the same site. Each owns the structures.

So I have just claimed part ownership of your home and car when can I take possession ?

That is the only part ownership the Christians and muslims have to the whole of Jerusalem, because they say so.

If you want to be pedantic the Jews own the land under International law of 1923, and the muslims have no right to claim it as theirs.

 

[Phoenall]

Why don't we try giving it to the First Nations people to whom it belongs, who by all rights should be in control of their own monuments?

Because it's not just theirs. It's a monument for other people's as well. They are no more First Nations than the people who have been there just as long but converted to other religions.

I might agree with you if we could differentiate culturally between the original inhabitants and the Arab invaders. But we can't. Which means that the original inhabitants have been entirely subsumed into the invading culture. And thus are not, culturally, the First Nations peoples, by all definitions of First Nations that I have ever read. (Of course, we CAN actually differentiate culturally between the original inhabitants and the Arab invaders, people just don't like to).

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

That aside, as a topic that has been re-hashed too many times already (though I was not aware that you were in the "Arabs are First Nations" camp), take a look at Israeli society and give me one good reason why we shouldn't at least give the Jewish people a chance to manage Jerusalem and the Temple Mount and other sites.

You are again distorting my position. I have consistently said that the Palestinians are descendents of original people's in that region combined with successive waves of migrations and conquests much as Jews, today, are descendents of original people's in that region combined with the people's of the regions they spread out out into. You seem to think that Jews have some special rights other "First Nation" peoples in that region and they don't - they have the same rights.

As far as giving the Jewish people a chance to manage those places, why not? Well, for a start, they are forcing out muslims from Jerusalem are they not? Is that a just thing to do? Seems a better idea is some sort of joint management given the importance of the sites and the fact that no one religion has ownership.

If you followed the posts on this board then you would see that many of the muslims were thieves who stole Jewish land and property in 1948/1949, after forcibly eviction over 1 million Jews from their lands and properties. So all the Jews are doing is re-claiming what is rightfully theirs. Many of the thieves that took the Jewish land were not even Palestinians in 1947, they were soldiers in the pay of the arab league nations. Which is why the population of arab muslims increased by over 100% between 1947 and 1949.

The joint management was how it was supposed to work when Israel made the treaty with Jordan, and the muslims immediately resorted to the Temple mount and Jerusalem being theirs. So why will it work this time round. The only answer is to flatten Jerusalem and be done with it, then they will have to find something else to fight over

 

[Phoenall]

You are again distorting my position. I have consistently said that the Palestinians are descendents of original people's in that region combined with successive waves of migrations and conquests much as Jews, today, are descendents of original people's in that region combined with the people's of the regions they spread out out into. You seem to think that Jews have some special rights other "First Nation" peoples in that region and they don't - they have the same rights.

Of course they have the same rights. When have I EVER said that they didn't? I'm the one arguing for the rights of both peoples, remember?

But they can not both be First Nations for the term to have any meaning. The Jewish people, being the culture which has had the longest, recognizable, continuing culture in that territory were "first". Making them the First Nation. What happened afterwards is all eggs which can't be unscrambled. All the eggs have rights at this point.

Its like saying the Pilgrim Fathers were first nations people because they claim the land as theirs

 

[Humanity]

Has it? When was it shown that removing ONE group is a solution? Which group would that be Phoney?

Seems that the zionut mantra is simply Jerusalem for jews only...

Seems like the Muslim mantra is Jerusalem for Muslims only...

Christians, well, they aren't well represented in the ME so their mantra is fairly muted...

Remove any thoughts of controlling from those who would choose 'exclusivity' to Jerusalem and place Jerusalem into the hands of a neutral, multi national, multi cultural body to govern and keep open Jerusalem for all...

Which group was it that invaded in 1948 and occupied the city of Jerusalem. Then annexed the land to its own against the terms of the UN charter and Geneva conventions. That is the same group that will set out to claim it for themselves yet again even though they have no religious , cultural or racial ties to the City. You can tell as many lies as you want, and deflect as much as you want you will never change the facts.


We can tell you are losing the argument you are using your made up words again to demonise the Jews

I'm not sure who's more stupid...

You for writing this crap or me for even bothering responding to you!

I can't lose an argument that I haven't even started...

You will see from the OP that there was no argument, simply an opening for debate. Seems your failed neo marxist mentality has simply been transferred to a failed zionut mentality!

You will see from the OP that there was NO demonisation of ANYONE... Rather a suggestion that no religious group should have control of Jerusalem...

Debate the topic Phoney or move along!

I am and you are losing, proven by your failed attempt at rule 7 in the book of disinformation

When all else fails LIE

Glad you agree that it is you who is stupid Phoney...

Want to show me where I have lied ?

The lie arena is normally exclusively yours Phoney!

How I can fail by putting up a post for debate is beyond any normal persons comprehension... Ah but it's Phoney the failed neo marxist zionut!

So, try to debate the OP... Because you haven't so far!

Jerusalem corpus separatum... A solution to peace?

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution...

Once again you enlist the help of rule 7 to get out of the hole you have dug. Far too many people see you as the LIAR you are when it involves what other people write.

So you advocate expelling every Jew and muslim from Jerusalem and just leaving the Christians and atheists. Will you pay the compensation out of your funds, and then stand with the troops in a ring around Jerusalem to stop the Jews and muslims from getting back in ?

IDIOT OR WHAT ?

So, you can't show me where I have lied then... Typical Phoney transference ploy!

Clearly you are way out of your depth on this subject...

Where did I advocate expelling ANYONE? Just the usual BS that you make up when you have nothing to say!

 

[Phoenall]

The people that have always lived in an area, regardless of the languages, cultural changes or changes in religion remain the native people. Just because native americans may have become Roman Catholics, may speak Spanish and may have adopted much of the Hispanic (Spanish) culture, does not somehow change their status as the native people of America.

The original Roman Catholics spoke Latin or Greek, and it was aggressive conversions of natives that led to the spread of Catholicism around the world. Originally the Catholics were violent invaders and colonisers of any land they thought held riches for Rome.

Just because land invaded by the arab muslims became arabised and the people already spoke Arabic does not mean they converted to islam. This was shown by the many laws and rules the muslims placed on unbelievers and infidels from the 7C till the early 1900's. These were aimed at Jews and Christians in the whole of the Ottoman Empire showing that the Jews were in existence all through the reign of the muslims, Christian crusaders and Ottomans

 

[Phoenall]

There were no colonizing settler Turks in Palestine. The Ottoman governor(s), colonial civil servants and soldiers left when the territory was lost. Much like the British viceroy/governor, colonial civil servants and soldiers left India.

Why would you think it would be any different for the Ottomans in the territories they lost?

So the Turks invaded, conquered the land and people and then left after killing how many thousands of their own people in the process ?

The British left a large contingent of armed troops to garrison India and the civilian contingent colonised parts of India as their own. They took Indians as poorly paid servants and enlisted local warlords help in policing the country. The Ottomans did exactly the same and they were for ever putting down rebellions in Egypt and Syria until they made the local headman the governor.

 

[Phoenall]

Which group was it that invaded in 1948 and occupied the city of Jerusalem. Then annexed the land to its own against the terms of the UN charter and Geneva conventions. That is the same group that will set out to claim it for themselves yet again even though they have no religious , cultural or racial ties to the City. You can tell as many lies as you want, and deflect as much as you want you will never change the facts.


We can tell you are losing the argument you are using your made up words again to demonise the Jews

I'm not sure who's more stupid...

You for writing this crap or me for even bothering responding to you!

I can't lose an argument that I haven't even started...

You will see from the OP that there was no argument, simply an opening for debate. Seems your failed neo marxist mentality has simply been transferred to a failed zionut mentality!

You will see from the OP that there was NO demonisation of ANYONE... Rather a suggestion that no religious group should have control of Jerusalem...

Debate the topic Phoney or move along!

I am and you are losing, proven by your failed attempt at rule 7 in the book of disinformation

When all else fails LIE

Glad you agree that it is you who is stupid Phoney...

Want to show me where I have lied ?

The lie arena is normally exclusively yours Phoney!

How I can fail by putting up a post for debate is beyond any normal persons comprehension... Ah but it's Phoney the failed neo marxist zionut!

So, try to debate the OP... Because you haven't so far!

Jerusalem corpus separatum... A solution to peace?

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution...

Once again you enlist the help of rule 7 to get out of the hole you have dug. Far too many people see you as the LIAR you are when it involves what other people write.

So you advocate expelling every Jew and muslim from Jerusalem and just leaving the Christians and atheists. Will you pay the compensation out of your funds, and then stand with the troops in a ring around Jerusalem to stop the Jews and muslims from getting back in ?

IDIOT OR WHAT ?

So, you can't show me where I have lied then... Typical Phoney transference ploy!

Clearly you are way out of your depth on this subject...

Where did I advocate expelling ANYONE? Just the usual BS that you make up when you have nothing to say!

I have and you still do it, so it seems that pointing out your LIES is a waste of time


Did you or did you not post this


Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution..


So how do you propose to do this ?

 

[Phoenall]

There were no colonizing settler Turks in Palestine. The Ottoman governor(s), colonial civil servants and soldiers left when the territory was lost. Much like the British viceroy/governor, colonial civil servants and soldiers left India.

Why would you think it would be any different for the Ottomans in the territories they lost?

You've been scouring wiki again.

The invading / colonizing Turks have not "always lived there", so we can see your stuttering and mumbling comes from cutting and pasting from predictable sources.

I never use Wiki for politically controversial subject matter. I have been a Wiki editor since it was started, so i can see the crazy edits that go on for politically controversial entries.

There were no Ottoman settlers, they were rulers like the British in India.

I just know far more than you so you are at a disadvantage.

BULLSHIT if they stayed then they were settlers/colonisers. And this is shown when you look at land ownership prior to 1917 and the vast majority of the land was in absentee landlords hands

 

[Humanity]

I'm not sure who's more stupid...

You for writing this crap or me for even bothering responding to you!

I can't lose an argument that I haven't even started...

You will see from the OP that there was no argument, simply an opening for debate. Seems your failed neo marxist mentality has simply been transferred to a failed zionut mentality!

You will see from the OP that there was NO demonisation of ANYONE... Rather a suggestion that no religious group should have control of Jerusalem...

Debate the topic Phoney or move along!

I am and you are losing, proven by your failed attempt at rule 7 in the book of disinformation

When all else fails LIE

Glad you agree that it is you who is stupid Phoney...

Want to show me where I have lied ?

The lie arena is normally exclusively yours Phoney!

How I can fail by putting up a post for debate is beyond any normal persons comprehension... Ah but it's Phoney the failed neo marxist zionut!

So, try to debate the OP... Because you haven't so far!

Jerusalem corpus separatum... A solution to peace?

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution...

Once again you enlist the help of rule 7 to get out of the hole you have dug. Far too many people see you as the LIAR you are when it involves what other people write.

So you advocate expelling every Jew and muslim from Jerusalem and just leaving the Christians and atheists. Will you pay the compensation out of your funds, and then stand with the troops in a ring around Jerusalem to stop the Jews and muslims from getting back in ?

IDIOT OR WHAT ?

So, you can't show me where I have lied then... Typical Phoney transference ploy!

Clearly you are way out of your depth on this subject...

Where did I advocate expelling ANYONE? Just the usual BS that you make up when you have nothing to say!

I have and you still do it, so it seems that pointing out your LIES is a waste of time

Did you or did you not post this

Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution..

So how do you propose to do this ?

Well, no you haven't Phoney... The capitalisation of the word LIES just seems to appear in virtually every post you make without any proof or evidence, often just included for fun!

Yes, well done, I did post that, congratulations... Thanks for proving yourself either a liar or simply incapable of reading and understanding the English language!

Where in my post, and let me write it out again so that there can be no confusion... "Taking Jerusalem out of the control of Jews AND Muslims has got to be a good solution.", does it say, to write what you claimed, "advocate expelling every Jew and muslim from Jerusalem"?

Clearly my post does not advocate the expulsion of anyone! That is you making things up again Phoney...

Furthermore, has you bothered to keep up with this post you would see that I called for a 'free' Jerusalem for all!

 

[Phoenall]

The people that have always lived in an area, regardless of the languages, cultural changes or changes in religion remain the native people. Just because native americans may have become Roman Catholics, may speak Spanish and may have adopted much of the Hispanic (Spanish) culture, does not somehow change their status as the native people of America.

By definition, Arab Muslims have NOT "always lived there".

By definition, Spanish cultures are NOT the indigenous cultures of the Americas.

By definition, I (Canadian of Irish/Scots/German descent) am from an immigrating (invading) culture and am not First Nations. Nor will my descendants EVER be.

By definition invading, colonizing cultures are not First Nations cultures.

The PURPOSE of identifying and protecting First Nations cultures is to preserve the cultures of those who were invaded and conquered.

Can a First Nations person learn to speak a foreign language and still be First Nations? Duh. Of course, they can. Can a First Nations culture entirely adopt an invading culture so that there is no trace of their First Nations culture and still be First Nations. Uh. No.

We invaded a really, really long time ago does not confer First Nations status on people. Though it might give them claims to sovereignty and self-determination.

The people of Palestine, whatever religion they converted to are still descendants of the native people. Irish Catholics are the descendants of the original Irish although they may have worshipped trees or rocks before.

So you are saying that a person that converts from English Christian to islam becomes an arab muslm now. Care to provide the evidence to back this up.

The evidence showed that the inhabitants took on the arab culture only, but kept their own religion and culture with it.




Arab Immigration To Palestine | Cherson and Molschky


First Wave(7TH Century)

The first wave was after the occupation of the country by the Arabs in the 7th century A.D. The Arab – Muslim occupation of Palestine lasted about 400 years (640 – 1099). Most scholars agree that the ethnic- religious structure of the population remained essentially unchanged from the days of the Byzantine occupation (324CE – 640CE), and the majority of the population consisted of Greek Orthodox Christians and 2 minorities: Jews and Samaritans. The number of Arabs settled in Palestine was negligible.

The Muslim army emerging from the Arabian Peninsula was comprised of Bedouin warriors who moved along with their families and flocks. Prof Moshe Sharon, rejects the theory that the 7th century Arabic conquest was immediately accompanied by massive Arabic settlement in the country. He gives several reasons for the absence of massive Arabic penetration into the Land of Israel prior to the 9th century…

An Arabic 9th century source attests to the composition of the coastal cities population, which included Jews, Samaritans, Persians, Greeks, and a few Arabs.

At a later stage, soldiers released from the Caliph’s Muslim army settled in villages and towns that had been deserted by Christians fleeing ahead of the Arab conquerors, but no numerical data is available.