The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indiginous to Palestine?

[Vagabond63]

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.

Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or surnames, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai Al Balushi, Aisha Al Balushi; Al Filisṭīnī, related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini.

Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Happy to help.

...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.

Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.

Interesting....I did not know that. Missing the “informative“ choice. people were very tribal back then.

People are very "tribal" now.

 

[Vagabond63]

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over. What's the point? Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?

Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.

“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?

 

[MartyNYC]

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over. What's the point? Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?

Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.

“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?

Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.

 

[MartyNYC]

I don't actually think it matters. I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous". It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.

The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture. Not so difficult after all.

But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else. As long as that is applied equally. The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people. ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't. Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not. Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.

Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine. Full stop. They are Europeans. The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→ MartyNYC, et al,

BLUF: Well, that is not entirely true. You might have to qualify that statement a bit.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

(COMMENT)

There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:

◈ 1922: Part I • Preliminary • Title: Palestine Order in Council (Paragraph 1)​

◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE”​

◈ 2012- UN Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine." (Formerly For: Internal Use Only)​

I won't regurgitate what is already written. I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.

What I would say, is that "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine" is an idea, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say: The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave;" - or ⁜→ the idea in the Israeli saying: "To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem." These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MartyNYC]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→ MartyNYC, et al,

BLUF: Well, that is not entirely true. You might have to qualify that statement a bit.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

(COMMENT)

There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:

◈ 1922: Part I • Preliminary • Title: Palestine Order in Council (Paragraph 1)​

◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE”​

◈ 2012- UN Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine." (Formerly For: Internal Use Only)​

I won't regurgitate what is already written. I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.

What I would say, is that "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine" is an idea, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say: The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave;" - or ⁜→ the idea in the Israeli saying: "To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem." These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.

Most Respectfully,
R

Arabs and Muslims didn’t create “palestine” It isn’t their country to be liberated.

 

[rylah]

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.

Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or surnames, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai Al Balushi, Aisha Al Balushi; Al Filisṭīnī, related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini.

Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Happy to help.

...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.

Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.

The word 'Hebrew' is an English translation of 'Ivri',
which comes from a the name 'Eber; originally 'Ever'.

The Egyptian root of Habiru or Apiru is 'a-f-r which means dust
while the Hebrew root of Ever is 'a-v-r which means side.

To make Habiru into 'thug', 'mercenary' or 'filthy',
one has to switch to Akkadian, and translate a completely different word "SA.ZAG" (if remember correctly).That's kinda a long stretch, to start with a false assumption assumption of a Semitic word originating from a Egyptian, though using an Akkadian translation to attach a completely new meaning to a root of a Hebrew word.

Habiru or 'Apiru in Egyptian was a name for a social class, rather than a nation or a tribe,
they came from all directions and different countries, rather than as a group, which at most can suggest that the Hebrew tribes, who by that time were already known as Israel by the same Egyptians, if following the timeline of the theory which dates their emergence with the exodus of Israel from Egypt, could have been included in that class, but couldn't be what the word defines, because it doesn't refer neither to tribe, ethnicity or an organized unit moving from one place, nor does it fit the Egyptian use of the name Israel and the other side of that theory that also draws connection between the Hebrews, Habiry and the Hyksos. Long stretch as I've said, and quiet self-contradictory on the corners because of the mess trying to bridge all those back from a conclusion rather than otherwise.

The whole theory was common among previous century historians, mostly rejected today.
Mainly because of the development in the research of Hyksos and the war of AhMose.

Now, again, Your theory was to bridge between a translation of an Akkadian word that sounds nothing like the target and used interchangeably for an Egyptian word which root has no common meaning in a similar sounding Hebrew root.

Meanwhile the meaning and origin of 'Palestinian' is clear,
one doesn't have to jump between 3 different languages,
a Hebrew word that means 'invaders',
origin - Aegean and Kasluhi.

As for a meaning of Palestine in Arabic? - ZERO.
Merely a transliteration of a foreign word, that cannot be even pronounced.

 

[rylah]

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.

Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or surnames, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai Al Balushi, Aisha Al Balushi; Al Filisṭīnī, related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini.

Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Happy to help.

...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.

Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.

Interesting....I did not know that. Missing the “informative“ choice. people were very tribal back then.

I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.

Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.

Not American tribalism, neither Arab.

 

[rylah]

what do you mean by: honor Avraham Avinu A"H as is intended.

When news reached Ishm'ael that Avraham Avinu A"H passed away,
he came from afar to pay respect and at the entrance of the Machpelah cave,
gave way to Yitzhak as recognition of his birthright, which was his ultimate Tshuvah.

Ishm'ael is called 'Adam' as well as Israel,
meaning both have a part in unique assignment in human history,
with a choice of option each of which will eventually result in the same,
but the scenarios can be either severely destructive or unexpectedly inspiring.

Again that Desert dweller Ishm'ael decided to play a Greek sea warrior for a bit,
is not allowing for his Ishmaelite identity and choices to be expressed and valued 100%.
And hopefully, that's exactly what we are seeing today, a rush of Arabian countries detaching themselves from the 'Palestinian' pretense, to the point of being an issue of honor they no longer can associate with.

That is correction of the world.
What results in playing 'Palestinians'?
The due historic justice of the enacted invaders.

Maybe that's important, but I frankly think we both have way more interesting things to do,
and could both benefit from a communication from our more natural positions.

 

[Vagabond63]

I don't actually think it matters. I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous". It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.

The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture. Not so difficult after all.

But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else. As long as that is applied equally. The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people. ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't. Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not. Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.

Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine. Full stop. They are Europeans. The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

 

[Vagabond63]

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.

Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or surnames, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai Al Balushi, Aisha Al Balushi; Al Filisṭīnī, related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini.

Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Happy to help.

...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.

Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.

Interesting....I did not know that. Missing the “informative“ choice. people were very tribal back then.

I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.

Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.

Not American tribalism, neither Arab.

Tribalism exists today just as in the past, from football fans to religious cults, to political parties, to name a few examples. Neotribalism - Wikipedia The concept of nation state only appeared in the mid 19th century with the emergence of Nationalism as a distinct ideology.

 

[Vagabond63]

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over. What's the point? Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?

Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.

“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?

Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.

The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later.

In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.

 

[MartyNYC]

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over. What's the point? Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?

Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.

“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?

Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.

The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later.

In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.

There is no evidence “the ancient Greeks” called anything “palestine.” And, last time I checked, the Greeks lived on another continent. More to the point, “palestine” does not appear in any ancient Middle East historical records. No such place existed.

 

[MartyNYC]

I don't actually think it matters. I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous". It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.

The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture. Not so difficult after all.

But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else. As long as that is applied equally. The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people. ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't. Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not. Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.

Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine. Full stop. They are Europeans. The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

Wikipedia?

 

[rylah]

Arafat, father of “palestinian“ nationalism, was born and educated in Egypt. Common ”palestinian” surnames: al-Masri, “the Egyptian,” al-Iraqi, Maghrebi (North Africa), even Bushnaq (Bosnia). Funny how nobody is named al-Palestini.

Probably because in Arabic it's "Filistin"" ... Traditional Arabic names do not include family names or surnames, but rather patronymics (nasab), where the ... Mai Al Balushi, Aisha Al Balushi; Al Filisṭīnī, related to or from the region of Palestine e.g. Abu Qatada al-Filistini.

Nisba (onomastics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Happy to help.

...They've forged a false identity, unknowingly adopting a Hebrew word that means - invaders.

Fair enough, but doesn't the word "Hebrew" come from the ancient Egyptian term "Habiru" variously translated as "thug", "mercenary", "outlaw", "filthy", and other derogatory terms from other cultures in the region? Clearly ancient Hebrews were unpopular amongst the various peoples of the region.

Interesting....I did not know that. Missing the “informative“ choice. people were very tribal back then.

I think you're injecting a modern political meaning into the word.
Tribe is merely an extended family, rather than an ideology of exclusion.
In Israel there're 12 tribes, each with its unique purpose in the life of a nation.

Not political groups fighting for rights, but families living on their tribal land,
with an economy and profession most fitting their nature and landscape.
Tribe of Zvulun was responsible for the sea ways and commerce,
sponsored the tribe of Isachar to study Torah on their behalf.
And all supported the Levy tribe of teachers.

Not American tribalism, neither Arab.

Tribalism exists today just as in the past, from football fans to religious cults, to political parties, to name a few examples. Neotribalism - Wikipedia The concept of nation state only appeared in the mid 19th century with the emergence of Nationalism as a distinct ideology.

That's exactly what I've said,
there's much more to the topic of tribalism in the context of indigenous cultures,
than injecting the term with modern political jargon of the last century.

 

[rylah]

Māori people and Israel

The Māori are the indigenous people of New Zealand.

Recently, the Māori people apologized to Israel for New Zealand's anti-Israel actions at the United Nations. They led a welcoming ceremony (Powhiri) with the message that the Jews have held a "mana whenua", meaning that the Jews are indineous to their native homeland: Israel.

 

[MartyNYC]

There never has been an actual historical place named palestine. Jews, however, are indigenous to Israel.

Pope Francis: Christianity’s Jewish origin

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for who is considered indigenous to Palestine?
⁜→ MartyNYC, et al,

BLUF: Well, that is not entirely true. You might have to qualify that statement a bit.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

(COMMENT)

There are THREE essential documents on the subject that should be required reading if you are going to broach this subject:

◈ 1922: Part I • Preliminary • Title: Palestine Order in Council (Paragraph 1)​

◈ 1948 - Memorandum "A" contained in: A/AC.21/UK/42 LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE”​

◈ 2012- UN Memo on Issue of the use of the name "Palestine." (Formerly For: Internal Use Only)​

I won't regurgitate what is already written. I doubt as to whether or not I could improve on the developments pertaining to the reality (or not) of Palestine; as outlined here.

What I would say, is that "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine" is an idea, ⁜→ in the same way, that Americans say: The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave;" - or ⁜→ the idea in the Israeli saying: "To live in freedom in the land of Zion and Jerusalem." These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.

Most Respectfully,
R

These are ideas that spring from the heart. Unlike the Arab Palestinian Idea that is kept by pure hatred and venom.

Are you saying that Israel's actions have nothing to do with this so called hate?

 

[Vagabond63]

This argument is repeated ad nauseam over and over and over and over. What's the point? Or maybe the real question is - WHY is it SO important for some to deny the existence of the other?

Jews were originally called “palestinians,” by the British, in the British Mandate. It’s a made-up word. Arabs later began using it, as anti-Israel propaganda.
PLO head honcho in 1977: “Palestinian identity is just a tactical ploy”

Erm, everyone living in Palestine was called "Palestinian" at the time, regardless of religion or ethnicity, just like eveyone in India was called "Indian", we Brits like to lump people together under one label.

“Palestine” was Britain’s fictional name for the British Mandate, and the British identified inhabitants of British Mandatory “palestine” as “palestinians.” Those names are European inventions.

Of course they are, the word "Palestine" was first used by Heroditus, if memory serves, what's your point?

Herodotus coined the word “palaistine“ (Greek) designating the Mediterranean coast occupied by Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Ancient Greeks generally called the country Judea, signifying land of the Jews. Herodotus didn’t discover a place called palestine.

The Ancient Greeks used the word "Palestine" (however they said/spelled it) since the 5th century BCE. They started to call part of the region Judea much later.

In many ways this whole, "Palestine never existed" argument is pointless. I suspect just about every piece of real estate on Earth has been known by different names at different times. the UK for example, was known as Albion, Prittain, Britannia, Great Britain, etc. France was once called Gallia, until it was conquered by the Germanic Franks and Burgundians, and so on.

There is no evidence “the ancient Greeks” called anything “palestine.” And, last time I checked, the Greeks lived on another continent. More to the point, “palestine” does not appear in any ancient Middle East historical records. No such place existed.

Oh dear. So you're saying Heroditus made things up. Okaaay. Oh, BTW, check again. ANCIENT GREEK COLONIES, TRADE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS | Facts and Details

 

[Vagabond63]

I don't actually think it matters. I think "resident" is as important if not more, than "indiginous". It's very difficult to define and determine who is "indiginous" because there is almost always someone there before and each succeeding wave of immigrants or invaders alters culture/language/religion of the current inhabitents.

The oldest, surviving, recognizable, pre-invasion culture. Not so difficult after all.

But I have no problem with your understanding that residence (current possession) of the territory trumps everything else. As long as that is applied equally. The problem that I am having is with those who want special rules to apply to the Jewish people. ie Palestinians have RoR, but the Jewish people don't. Palestinians are indigenous, but the Jewish people are not. Arab Muslims invaders and Roman invaders confer rights, but Jewish "invaders" confer no rights.

Europeans that converted to Judaism are not indigenous to Palestine. Full stop. They are Europeans. The native people that continued to live in Palestine and converted to different religions for convenience or faith over the centuries are as close as indigenous as you can get in such a busy place like Palestine.

No place “palestine“ ever existed.

Really? Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

Wikipedia?

Why not? If the article is well sourced and fact checked, Wikpedia is a conventient source of information.