Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people

[rylah]

You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights

Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL. Others have nationality rights elsewhere. That is actually how the global system currently works. Citizens have national rights in their nation.

Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine? Or not?

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?

Evidently in Israel,
they're the only minority with a 'special' status, their language has a special status, and one could even argue that Israel is the most free of 'Arab countries".

 

[rylah]

You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights

Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL. Others have nationality rights elsewhere. That is actually how the global system currently works. Citizens have national rights in their nation.

Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine? Or not?

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?

Evidently in Israel,
they're the only minority with a 'special' status, their language has a special status and one could even argue that Israel is the most free of 'Arab countries".

Israeli Nationality Law of 1952 - Wikipedia

 

[rylah]

You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights

Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL. Others have nationality rights elsewhere. That is actually how the global system currently works. Citizens have national rights in their nation.

Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine? Or not?

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree . But it's irrelevant.

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there. It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history. As a state does Israel have the right to do that? Yes. Any state does. Does it make it right? That is questionable. How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel. You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen. As an outsider or somehow less than. Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia

Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] ​

F, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.

Indeed, that is called apartheid.

Only for propaganda purposes.
To cover the fact of Arabs openly demanding a Jew-free state.

 

[rylah]

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree . But it's irrelevant.

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there. It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history. As a state does Israel have the right to do that? Yes. Any state does. Does it make it right? That is questionable. How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel. You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen. As an outsider or somehow less than. Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia

Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] ​

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree . But it's irrelevant.

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there. It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history. As a state does Israel have the right to do that? Yes. Any state does. Does it make it right? That is questionable. How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel. You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen. As an outsider or somehow less than. Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia

Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] ​

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America. Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do. I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.

I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one. But you believe only one has rights to that region. And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.

That is not true, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independence. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment.
Jews didn't fight against Iraq independence or Syria independence, or Morocco.
Arabs are fighting and subjugating each and every indigenous nation in the region that is a threat to Arab hegemony.

 

[Coyote]

I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree . But it's irrelevant.

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there. It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history. As a state does Israel have the right to do that? Yes. Any state does. Does it make it right? That is questionable. How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel. You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen. As an outsider or somehow less than. Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia

Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] ​

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree . But it's irrelevant.

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there. It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history. As a state does Israel have the right to do that? Yes. Any state does. Does it make it right? That is questionable. How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel. You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen. As an outsider or somehow less than. Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia

Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] ​

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America. Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do. I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.

I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one. But you believe only one has rights to that region. And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.

That is not true, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independent. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment..

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here...we've been through this before and there has been an utter failure at changing minds...just saying. If I go into it more, I'll derail the thread

 

[rylah]

You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights

Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL. Others have nationality rights elsewhere. That is actually how the global system currently works. Citizens have national rights in their nation.

Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine? Or not?

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

Uhh, there is no Israeli nationality.

66 years have passed since it was enshrined in a Basic Law.

 

[Humanity]

For many years, we have been disappointed by the court. The nation-state law is an attempt at redemption. Ironically, the forefathers of this law are in fact Aharon Barak and his faction. The citizens of Israel, by way of their elected representatives, are trying to restore some of the freedom they once had, before the court decided to educate us. I have reiterated this point many times: The Supreme Court justices, including Aharon Barak, are no better than we are at understanding values. Their job description does not include telling us what is good and what is bad, or defining for us what is true. All we've ever asked of them is to rule according to the law – to decide whether one act or another complies with or violates the existing, written law.

But they, in turn, adopted Plato's Republic, in which the philosopher king rules over the ignorant masses. They found a clever way to impose a tyranny of the minority over the majority. The nation-state law was designed to slightly rectify this gross imbalance. Judicial activism is guided by hubris and aggression – the belief that you understand better than others what is worthy and the aggressive tendency to dismiss the will of the voters. Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, as it is known by its official name, offers the tools to restore some of the eroded Jewish identity.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/08/03/the-jews-deserve-justice-too/

"We don't like what the Supreme Court of Israel says so we will override them with an apartheid law"...

Perfect, if you believe that fascism is the way forward and we ALL know how that turns out!

 

[rylah]

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America. Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do. I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.

I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one. But you believe only one has rights to that region. And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.

That is not true, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independent. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment..

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here...we've been through this before and there has been an utter failure at changing minds...just saying. If I go into it more, I'll derail the thread

Jews didn't fight against Iraq independence or Syria independence, or Morocco.
They were alloted some 2% of the land in the middle east, and since that day they've been in negotiation with Arabs over another Arab state or two, in the heart of their historic homeland.
All while Arabs are fighting and subjugating each and every indigenous nation in the region that is a threat to their hegemony.

Only one group has been supporting the other, and enables expression of a variety of opinions in favor of the other competing group. There's no equivalence.

 

[Humanity]

So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?

This is such a bad analogy and one that you keep repeating to try and make a point that is WAY off the mark!

Did Miroslav Cerar Jr. state that Slovenia is exclusively for Slovenians?

I live in an adopted country, I have the exact same rights as nationals, there is NO difference in the laws that apply to me! Why should there be? I am law abiding, pay my taxes, have the right to vote, can run for office, yet this is not my country! Imagine that... The prime minister here has made no declaration of "exclusivity"!

 

[rylah]

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America. Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do. I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.

I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one. But you believe only one has rights to that region. And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.

Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?

If they also have Native American ancestry yes.

I disagree. He ancestry is not the important element.

The elements to be measured (and this is in the UN Declaratiin of Indigenous Rights) are:

1. Self identification with the peoples.
2. Acceptance by the collective as part of the peoples.
3. Participation in the culture.


It's not about a blood test. It's about being part of the people.

You can have indiginous cultures. And you can have indiginous people. Palestinians, regardless of culture are indigninous - descended from indiginous. Their rights are the same.

It's not that complicated...
A nation claims to be indigenous but doesn't know the meaning of the nation's name and land?

RIDICULOUS.

 

[rylah]

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory. Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

No it doesn't.

I don't see a refutation.

 

[Humanity]

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory. Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

 

[rylah]

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people. The Palestinian Arabs are not. Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc. to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous. There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality? In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.

Why does it have to be in place of? Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel? If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it. Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.

--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.

I think that remains to be seen. Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America. Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do. I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.

I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one. But you believe only one has rights to that region. And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.

Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?

If they also have Native American ancestry yes.

Depends on the tribe's rules of acceptance.

 

[rylah]

Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?

In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory. Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning invade.
PLS(h)TI - means simply invader.


Philistine: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew plishtim - were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel whose name simply meant "invaders."
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew

 

[Humanity]

In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory. Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning invade.
PLS(h)TI - means simply invader.


Philistine: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew plishtim - were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel whose name simply meant "invaders."
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew

What a crock of shit!

It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?

Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!

 

[rylah]

The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory. Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning invade.
PLS(h)TI - means simply invader.


Philistine: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew plishtim - were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel whose name simply meant "invaders."
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew

What a crock of shit!

It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?

Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!

Did I say foreign language?
I said in the "native", and in the native languages 'Palestinian' means - foreign invader.

That's the meaning like it or not.

 

[rylah]

So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?

This is such a bad analogy and one that you keep repeating to try and make a point that is WAY off the mark!

Did Miroslav Cerar Jr. state that Slovenia is exclusively for Slovenians?

I live in an adopted country, I have the exact same rights as nationals, there is NO difference in the laws that apply to me! Why should there be? I am law abiding, pay my taxes, have the right to vote, can run for office, yet this is not my country! Imagine that... The prime minister here has made no declaration of "exclusivity"!

If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
Every Israeli citizen, normalized or other has the rights You've mentioned.

 

[Humanity]

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning invade.
PLS(h)TI - means simply invader.


Philistine: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew plishtim - were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel whose name simply meant "invaders."
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew

What a crock of shit!

It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?

Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!

Did I say foreign language?
I said in the "native", and in the native languages 'Palestinian' means - foreign invader.

That's the meaning like it or not.

Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!

The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!

So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?

 

[rylah]

Indeed, "Palestinian" in the native language means "colonial settlers".

It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning invade.
PLS(h)TI - means simply invader.


Philistine: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew plishtim - were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel whose name simply meant "invaders."
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew

What a crock of shit!

It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?

Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!

Did I say foreign language?
I said in the "native", and in the native languages 'Palestinian' means - foreign invader.

That's the meaning like it or not.

Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!

The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!

So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?

You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People

1 — Basic principles

A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.

Today's Israel are not in any way representative of the Jews of the Bible. Far from it. Though, they are an arrogant bunch. I'm of the view that today's Israel will have much to answer for. Much.

So, no need in reading beyond point 1.