Palestinians are the descendants of the area's original Jews.

[The Rabbi]

Palestinians are the descendants of the area's original Jews


"Most of the early Zionist leaders, including David Ben Gurion believed that the Palestinians were the descendants of the area's original Jews. They believed the Jews had later converted to Islam."

Jonathan Cook in an Electronic Intifada article addresses the phenomena of a book 19 weeks on Israel's bestseller list that challenges Israel's biggest taboo. The book: When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? written by Shlomo Sand, an"expert on European history at Tel Aviv University" controversially argues that: the Jews were never exiled from the Holy Land, that most of today's Jews have no historical connection to the land called Israel and that the only political solution to the country's conflict with the Palestinians is to abolish the Jewish state ....

Sand's main argument is that until little more than a century ago, Jews thought of themselves as Jews only because they shared a common religion. At the turn of the 20th century, he said, Zionist Jews challenged this idea and started creating a national history by inventing the idea that Jews existed as a people separate from their religion.


Palestinians are the descendants of the area's original Jews. - Indymedia Ireland

Palestinians are the descendants of the area's original Jews. - Indymedia Ireland

Nothing wrong with you that some medication won't help. Same iwth the nutjob you quoted.

 

[Marc39]

Of course it is bogus to you. If it isn't www.israelibullshit.il it is bogus.

All palestinian® pornsites are bogus. That's an established fact, so, let's admit it and stop fooling innocent people.

Established by whom? The lying sacks of shit in Israel?

Established by history, dummy.

There is no Palestine...

Middle East historian Bernard Lewis...

Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity [Syria].

The word Palestine comes from "Philistine" and originally denoted the coastal region north and south of Gaza [not the land now known as Israel] which was occupied and settled by the Philistine, invaders from across the [Mediterranean] sea [who were Aegean, not Arab or Semitic]

After the Ottoman conquest in 1516-17...Palestine was no longer used by Muslims, for whom it had never meant more than an administrative sub-district, and it had been forgotten even in that limited sense. In the final phase of this rule before the British conquest, Palestine was part of Beirut.

For Arabs, the term Palestine was unacceptable. For Muslims it was alien and irrelevant. The main objection for them was that it seemed to assert a separate entity which politically conscious Arabs in Palestine and elsewhere denied. For them there was no such thing as a country called Palestine. The region which the British called Palestine was merely a separated part of a larger whole [Syria]. For a long time organized and articulate Arab political opinion was virtually unanimous on this point.

The Palestine entity, formally established and defined by Britain, was formally abolished in 1948 with the termination of the Mandate.

There are no Palestinians.

Bernard Lewis...

At first, the country of which Palestine was a part was felt to be Syria. In Ottoman times, that is, immediately before the coming of the British, Palestine had indeed been a part of a larger Syrian whole from which it was in no way distinguished whether by language, culture, education, administration, political allegiance, or any other significant respect.

The Palestinian Arabs' basic sense of corporate historic identity was, at different levels, Muslim or Arab or -- for some -- Syrian; it is significant that even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after 30 years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Middle-East-Bernard-Lewis/dp/0684832801/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1288529772&sr=8-5]Amazon.com: The Middle East (9780684832807): Bernard Lewis: Books: Reviews, Prices & more[/ame]

 

[editec]

Do you think it accurate to say Semitic and Canaanite people are cousins?

I don't know.

Did the Cannites speak a Semitic language?

Then probably.

I've read that the term Cannites is a vague term used to describe various people who lived near the med coastlines back when ancient Isreal was expanding its holdings.

If that is the case then the question of who the Cannites were might have many answers. Seems likely to me that they were probably a Hellenistic culture than a Semite one.

But as to the Arabs and the original tribes of Isreal?

Yes, I think that we could use the term cousins to describe their origins.

It's their languages which tip us off, even if their geography didn't make that so apparent

But clearly their geography does also tip us off somewhat.

The Bedoins and the early tribes of Isreal had very similar husbandry-based cultures.

They were both peoples who kept flocks and who did not have permanent places to live because they followed those flocks.

The eary Isrealites founded their capital not on the coast, as you might expect them to do if they were engaged in trade and such, but in the desert away from the sea.

So yes, I do suspect that the people we call Arabs and the people we know to be progeny of the original Jews were originally of the same people.

 

[Marc39]

Do you think it accurate to say Semitic and Canaanite people are cousins?

I don't know.

Did the Cannites speak a Semitic language?

Then probably.

I've read that the term Cannites is a vague term used to describe various people who lived near the med coastlines back when ancient Isreal was expanding its holdings.

If that is the case then the question of who the Cannites were might have many answers. Seems likely to me that they were probably a Hellenistic culture than a Semite one.

But as to the Arabs and the original tribes of Isreal?

Yes, I think that we could use the term cousins to describe their origins.

It's their languages which tip us off, even if their geography didn't make that so apparent

But clearly their geography does also tip us off somewhat.

The Bedoins and the early tribes of Isreal had very similar husbandry-based cultures.

They were both peoples who kept flocks and who did not have permanent places to live because they followed those flocks.

The eary Isrealites founded their capital not on the coast, as you might expect them to do if they were engaged in trade and such, but in the desert away from the sea.

So yes, I do suspect that the people we call Arabs and the people we know to be progeny of the original Jews were originally of the same people.

Except, Arabs originated from Arabia, not Canaan, and, Canaan, later Judea (land of the Jews) first became Arabized in 636 AD with the Battle of Yarmuk.

Jews had been living in Judea for at least 2,000 years before the Arab invasion.

 

[editec]

Do you think it accurate to say Semitic and Canaanite people are cousins?

I don't know.

Did the Cannites speak a Semitic language?

Then probably.

I've read that the term Cannites is a vague term used to describe various people who lived near the med coastlines back when ancient Isreal was expanding its holdings.

If that is the case then the question of who the Cannites were might have many answers. Seems likely to me that they were probably a Hellenistic culture than a Semite one.

But as to the Arabs and the original tribes of Isreal?

Yes, I think that we could use the term cousins to describe their origins.

It's their languages which tip us off, even if their geography didn't make that so apparent

But clearly their geography does also tip us off somewhat.

The Bedoins and the early tribes of Isreal had very similar husbandry-based cultures.

They were both peoples who kept flocks and who did not have permanent places to live because they followed those flocks.

The eary Isrealites founded their capital not on the coast, as you might expect them to do if they were engaged in trade and such, but in the desert away from the sea.

So yes, I do suspect that the people we call Arabs and the people we know to be progeny of the original Jews were originally of the same people.

Except, Arabs originated from Arabia, not Canaan, and, Canaan, later Judea (land of the Jews) first became Arabized in 636 AD with the Battle of Yarmuk.

Jews had been living in Judea for at least 2,000 years before the Arab invasion.

Yeah... sort of.

That takes them back to 700 AD and that is probably a good guess, too.

Not every Semite speaking people (except Jews) lived in Arabia.

Clearly that is not true.

Ancient Jews were Semites.

So, in all likihood, were most of their neighbors except those who spoke a Greek or Turkic language. (possibly the Cannites?)

The ancient Egyptians spoke a Semetic tongue, and the modern ones still do (Farsi) As do the Ethiopians (Amharic).

In fact it is more likely than not that the Semitic language originated in Africa and that as tribes of the original speakers spread out their language changed as languages are wont to do over time and distance.

Really from an archeological standpoint the existence of the Jews as a unique people can be traced back about 2500 years or so.

That is not to say that the Jewish tradition about who they are is entirely wrong, but certainly it is somewhat chauvinistic and no doubt somewhat self-aggrandizing just as most people's mytho-histories tend to be..

The ancient Hebrews were, for most part, bearly noticed by the ancient historians.

They were a subjectated people pretty much like most people of that region.

Sometimes they were controlled by Egypt, sometimes by the Persians, lastly by the Greco-Romans.

Occassionally they might have had kingdoms which were not beholding to foreign empires but that's about it.

It's the culture of that people which is so impressive to me, personally.

The fact that they still so identify themselves as sons of Abraham and have maintained so many traditions over so many centuries that gives Jews their true identity.

Genetically I suspect that the decendents of those ancient Jews are preety similar to that of the average decendent of the Arabs.

Where things get really confusing is that the Jews now also include a people who were not remotely Semites but who adopted that religion after Islam was founded.

Those people are not, I think, genetically or linguistically related to the ancient Jews. But they think themselves (and it is more than reasonable for them to do so, too) as authentically Jewish as any other Jew.

Lord knows they suffered right along with their Semite bretheran for that decision.

 

[Marc39]

Yeah... sort of.

Not sort of. In point of fact.

Jews entered Canaan in at least 1200-1300 BCE.

Arabs invaded in 636 AD, from Arabia.

Now, you know.

 

[Marc39]

The ancient Hebrews were, for most part, bearly noticed by the ancient historians.

The ancient Hebrews were significant enough to have warranted inclusion in King Merneptah's Stele.

Today, there are thousands of books of history of the Jewish people.

There are a small handful of books on the Arabs.

 

[Bonano]

God must really hate jews or he wouldn't let everyone hate them so much, gas them, fry them...

 

[Marc39]

God must really hate jews or he wouldn't let everyone hate them so much, gas them, fry them...

Warren Buffett is richer than God.

Warren Buffett...

Israel is now a major factor in commerce and in the world, and, is a smaller replica of what has been accomplished in the US and I think Americans admire that. They feel good about a society that is on the move

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaN_2nFqFtI[/ame]


Suck on it, loser.

 

[Bonano]

What does Warren Buffett have to do with anything?
Is he even a snake person?

 

[Marc39]

What does Warren Buffett have to do with anything?
Is he even a snake person?

You = loser.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Do you think it accurate to say Semitic and Canaanite people are cousins?

I don't know.

Did the Cannites speak a Semitic language?

Then probably.

I've read that the term Cannites is a vague term used to describe various people who lived near the med coastlines back when ancient Isreal was expanding its holdings.

If that is the case then the question of who the Cannites were might have many answers. Seems likely to me that they were probably a Hellenistic culture than a Semite one.

But as to the Arabs and the original tribes of Isreal?

Yes, I think that we could use the term cousins to describe their origins.

It's their languages which tip us off, even if their geography didn't make that so apparent

But clearly their geography does also tip us off somewhat.

The Bedoins and the early tribes of Isreal had very similar husbandry-based cultures.

They were both peoples who kept flocks and who did not have permanent places to live because they followed those flocks.

The eary Isrealites founded their capital not on the coast, as you might expect them to do if they were engaged in trade and such, but in the desert away from the sea.

So yes, I do suspect that the people we call Arabs and the people we know to be progeny of the original Jews were originally of the same people.

Interesting post.

Are all Palestinians Arab. Palestine, being the crossroads of a large section of the planet, have had many people come an go over the centuries. It seems that each time some have stayed and put down roots. Their appearance is varied and you cannot look at a Palestinian and determine his origin.

My main question is why it is so important to some people to pigeonhole people into racial, ethnic, or religious groups. What difference does it make?

 

[Marc39]

Are all Palestinians Arab. Palestine, being the crossroads of a large section of the planet, have had many people come an go over the centuries. It seems that each time some have stayed and put down roots. Their appearance is varied and you cannot look at a Palestinian and determine his origin.

My main question is why it is so important to some people to pigeonhole people into racial, ethnic, or religious groups. What difference does it make?

Prior to Israeli statehood, Jews, not Arabs, were known as Palestinians.

Palestine Post: Today, Jerusalem Post
Anglo Palestine Company: Today, Bank Leumi
Palestine Orchestra: Today, Israeli Philharmonic

Your history lesson for the day.

 

[Marc39]

Do you think it accurate to say Semitic and Canaanite people are cousins?

I don't know.

Did the Cannites speak a Semitic language?

Then probably.

I've read that the term Cannites is a vague term used to describe various people who lived near the med coastlines back when ancient Isreal was expanding its holdings.

If that is the case then the question of who the Cannites were might have many answers. Seems likely to me that they were probably a Hellenistic culture than a Semite one.

But as to the Arabs and the original tribes of Isreal?

Yes, I think that we could use the term cousins to describe their origins.

It's their languages which tip us off, even if their geography didn't make that so apparent

But clearly their geography does also tip us off somewhat.

The Bedoins and the early tribes of Isreal had very similar husbandry-based cultures.

They were both peoples who kept flocks and who did not have permanent places to live because they followed those flocks.

The eary Isrealites founded their capital not on the coast, as you might expect them to do if they were engaged in trade and such, but in the desert away from the sea.

So yes, I do suspect that the people we call Arabs and the people we know to be progeny of the original Jews were originally of the same people.

Interesting post.

Are all Palestinians Arab. Palestine, being the crossroads of a large section of the planet, have had many people come an go over the centuries. It seems that each time some have stayed and put down roots. Their appearance is varied and you cannot look at a Palestinian and determine his origin.

My main question is why it is so important to some people to pigeonhole people into racial, ethnic, or religious groups. What difference does it make?

There is no Palestine...

Middle East historian Bernard Lewis...

Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity [Syria].

The word Palestine comes from "Philistine" and originally denoted the coastal region north and south of Gaza [not the land now known as Israel] which was occupied and settled by the Philistine, invaders from across the [Mediterranean] sea [who were Aegean, not Arab or Semitic]

After the Ottoman conquest in 1516-17...Palestine was no longer used by Muslims, for whom it had never meant more than an administrative sub-district, and it had been forgotten even in that limited sense. In the final phase of this rule before the British conquest, Palestine was part of Beirut.

For Arabs, the term Palestine was unacceptable. For Muslims it was alien and irrelevant. The main objection for them was that it seemed to assert a separate entity which politically conscious Arabs in Palestine and elsewhere denied. For them there was no such thing as a country called Palestine. The region which the British called Palestine was merely a separated part of a larger whole [Syria]. For a long time organized and articulate Arab political opinion was virtually unanimous on this point.

The Palestine entity, formally established and defined by Britain, was formally abolished in 1948 with the termination of the Mandate.

There are no Palestinians.

Bernard Lewis...

At first, the country of which Palestine was a part was felt to be Syria. In Ottoman times, that is, immediately before the coming of the British, Palestine had indeed been a part of a larger Syrian whole from which it was in no way distinguished whether by language, culture, education, administration, political allegiance, or any other significant respect.

The Palestinian Arabs' basic sense of corporate historic identity was, at different levels, Muslim or Arab or -- for some -- Syrian; it is significant that even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after 30 years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Middle-East-Bernard-Lewis/dp/0684832801/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1288529772&sr=8-5]Amazon.com: The Middle East (9780684832807): Bernard Lewis: Books: Reviews, Prices & more[/ame]


Arab Commentator Azmi Bishara...

Well, I dont think there is a Palestinian nation at all. I think there is an Arab nation. I always thought so and I did not change my mind. I do not think there is a Palestinian nation, I think its a colonialist invention - Palestinian nation. When were there any Palestinians? Where did it come from? I think there is an Arab nation. I never turned to be a Palestinian nationalist, despite of my decisive struggle against the occupation. I think that until the end of the 19th century, Palestine was the south of Greater Syria.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3n5-yG-6dU[/ame]

 

[Marc39]

Palestine, being the crossroads of a large section of the planet, have had many people come an go over the centuries.

Actually, not so much,...

Middle East historian Bernard Lewis...

The Palestine entity, formally established and defined by Britain [in 1918], was formally abolished in 1948 with the termination of the Mandate.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Middle-East-Bernard-Lewis/dp/0684832801/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1288529772&sr=8-5]Amazon.com: The Middle East (9780684832807): Bernard Lewis: Books: Reviews, Prices & more[/ame]


D'oh!

 

[Bonano]

What does Warren Buffett have to do with anything?
Is he even a snake person?

You = loser.

You can't even defend what you write, probably because you had no point about buffett.

 

[Marc39]

What does Warren Buffett have to do with anything?
Is he even a snake person?

You = loser.

You can't even defend what you write, probably because you had no point about buffett.

Translation: you got nothing. Just like the losers who raised you

 

[PoliticalChic]

(5) The Largest Arab Immigration ever to Israel/Palestine happened during 1914 to 1948 the British White Paper days. Arabs could immigrate without being checked, yet the Jews were forbidden. ~ GHook93

The percentage of Arabs in Palestine DECLINED from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% in 1948.

Just got his in my e-mail...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjSdbVZ8QPY[/ame]

Wadda ya think?

 

[hipeter924]

(5) The Largest Arab Immigration ever to Israel/Palestine happened during 1914 to 1948 the British White Paper days. Arabs could immigrate without being checked, yet the Jews were forbidden. ~ GHook93

The percentage of Arabs in Palestine DECLINED from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% in 1948.

Just got his in my e-mail...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjSdbVZ8QPY[/ame]

Wadda ya think?

It's wasted on him, he just wants to believe the lie his elitist, left wing coke/marijuana addicts, and Muslim apologists/terrorists tell him.

 

[Bonano]

You = loser.

You can't even defend what you write, probably because you had no point about buffett.

Translation: you got nothing. Just like the losers who raised you

You make about as much sense as the rest of the heeb lovers here. No wonder you got kicked out of europe after wwII