You're still bickering one another? Just hopped in to see if there's any change here.
Mhm. New faces. Nothing else changed.
Goodie.
Mhm. New faces. Nothing else changed.
Goodie.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
- Thread starter Art__Allm
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
Just my thought...
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"
◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"
◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"
◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"
◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
Most Respectfully,
R
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
The PLO Charter says Israel must be pushed into the Sea. I say evert one of THEM should be scattered. There can NEVER be any peace with this scum. Being ARABS ,they could settle anywhere in the Arab world. 1000 times bigger than ISRAEL. And that obscenity on our Temple Mount should be blown away.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.
PalMedia Watch makes some frighteningly obvious points. Islamic terrorists routinely announce their intentions while westerners and Israelis choose not to believe the message.
PMW JPost op-ed: Israel must learn to speak 'Palestinese' to punish PA terror perpetrators
Itamar Marcus | Jun 28, 2020
For 27 years the names of the terrorists filling up our jails keep changing, but the few puppeteers pulling their strings remain untouched by justice, traveling through Israel with VIP cards. If Israelis and world leaders want to know what the PA is planning, who is behind the terror, and who must be punished, it’s about time they mastered Palestinese.
by Itamar Marcus
We are hearing reports from Israeli officials and media that the PA is telling them it is against armed terror in response to Israel’s expected application of Israeli law in parts of Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley. However, Palestinian Media Watch has been reporting that the PA messages to its people are openly promoting a terror campaign. Which of these two contradictory PA messages represents the current PA strategy?
The answer is that there is only one PA message and the problem is that Israeli leaders, the media and the international community have not mastered the Palestinian language – “Palestinese.”
First, the signs and messages that the PA wants Palestinian terror to accompany the Israeli announcement are sent daily and in key places. The controlled official PA TV stations are broadcasting extreme terror promotion since the Israeli coalition agreement on April 20, promising annexation. The videos and language resemble the PA TV terror promotion during the PA terror campaign 2000 to 2005, in which over 1000 Israelis were murdered.
PMW JPost op-ed: Israel must learn to speak 'Palestinese' to punish PA terror perpetrators
Itamar Marcus | Jun 28, 2020
For 27 years the names of the terrorists filling up our jails keep changing, but the few puppeteers pulling their strings remain untouched by justice, traveling through Israel with VIP cards. If Israelis and world leaders want to know what the PA is planning, who is behind the terror, and who must be punished, it’s about time they mastered Palestinese.
by Itamar Marcus
We are hearing reports from Israeli officials and media that the PA is telling them it is against armed terror in response to Israel’s expected application of Israeli law in parts of Judea, Samaria and the Jordan Valley. However, Palestinian Media Watch has been reporting that the PA messages to its people are openly promoting a terror campaign. Which of these two contradictory PA messages represents the current PA strategy?
The answer is that there is only one PA message and the problem is that Israeli leaders, the media and the international community have not mastered the Palestinian language – “Palestinese.”
First, the signs and messages that the PA wants Palestinian terror to accompany the Israeli announcement are sent daily and in key places. The controlled official PA TV stations are broadcasting extreme terror promotion since the Israeli coalition agreement on April 20, promising annexation. The videos and language resemble the PA TV terror promotion during the PA terror campaign 2000 to 2005, in which over 1000 Israelis were murdered.
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
And the more PLO bastards that get killed ,the better. They have NO right to that land. Once again ,there is no such thing as a "Palistinian". They are terrorist murderers.PERIOD.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 53,546
- 10,411
- 2,140
Because of an unverified Israeli media report, the PCHR is not only refusing to step in and help where the PA is abdicating its responsibility to save the lives of its citizens. It is actively choosing to stop the assistance it was already giving!
In other words, if Abbas wants Gazans to die, PCHR will allow them to die – and then PCHR will blame Israel. Given a choice of human lives or politics, PCHR chooses politics, seemingly hoping that dead Gazans will make Israel look bad, which makes their deaths worthwhile.
When the PA and PCHR – which is closely associate d with the PFLP terror group – say that this is fully Israel’s responsibility, they are saying something quite fantastical. Israel would have to invade and re-occupy Gaza and take over all governmental functions from security to healthcare to sanitation in order to fulfil what they say are Israel’s legal obligations as the “occupying power.” (The fact that Israel does not and cannot run all those institutions today is proof that Israel isn’t the “occupying power!”)
I’m not exaggerating. PLO Executive Committee Secretary Saeb Erekat said this weekend, “Netanyahu will be responsible for collecting garbage in Rafah, Jerusalem, and Hebron, and he will bear his full responsibility as an occupying power."
Obviously, it makes no sense to invade and re-occupy Gaza, a war that would kill thousands, in order to save a few dozen patients a year. Just as obviously Hamas would not cooperate in Israel taking over governmental functions. But this is what the PA and PCHR are saying is Israel’s responsibility.
(full article online)
elderofziyon.blogspot.com
In other words, if Abbas wants Gazans to die, PCHR will allow them to die – and then PCHR will blame Israel. Given a choice of human lives or politics, PCHR chooses politics, seemingly hoping that dead Gazans will make Israel look bad, which makes their deaths worthwhile.
When the PA and PCHR – which is closely associate d with the PFLP terror group – say that this is fully Israel’s responsibility, they are saying something quite fantastical. Israel would have to invade and re-occupy Gaza and take over all governmental functions from security to healthcare to sanitation in order to fulfil what they say are Israel’s legal obligations as the “occupying power.” (The fact that Israel does not and cannot run all those institutions today is proof that Israel isn’t the “occupying power!”)
I’m not exaggerating. PLO Executive Committee Secretary Saeb Erekat said this weekend, “Netanyahu will be responsible for collecting garbage in Rafah, Jerusalem, and Hebron, and he will bear his full responsibility as an occupying power."
Obviously, it makes no sense to invade and re-occupy Gaza, a war that would kill thousands, in order to save a few dozen patients a year. Just as obviously Hamas would not cooperate in Israel taking over governmental functions. But this is what the PA and PCHR are saying is Israel’s responsibility.
(full article online)
Palestinian Center for Human Rights stops aiding Gaza patient transfers to Israel, preferring they die
Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.
elderofziyon.blogspot.com
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 53,546
- 10,411
- 2,140
Muslims threatening Jews in public in Brussels–and Jaffa
Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.
elderofziyon.blogspot.com
Sixties Fan
Diamond Member
- Mar 6, 2017
- 53,546
- 10,411
- 2,140
On Sunday, a bunch of terror groups got together in the Gaza Strip and declared Wednesday to be a “day of rage.”
The various factions, who usually don’t agree on anything, agreed that a “day of rage” would be a wonderful display of unity.
It is unclear how this Wednesday will be distinguishable from any other Wednesday.
elderofziyon.blogspot.com
The various factions, who usually don’t agree on anything, agreed that a “day of rage” would be a wonderful display of unity.
It is unclear how this Wednesday will be distinguishable from any other Wednesday.
Wednesday is a Palestinian “Day of Rage.” Whatever shall we do?
Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.
elderofziyon.blogspot.com
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,
BLUF: Is it the function of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) to directly interfere with a governmental action? (RHETORICAL as FOOD FOR THOUGHT) I think not...
It is the duty of the Israeli Supreme Court to decide on the question as to whether or not the State of Israel has a duty or fiduciary responsibility to intervene in the matter of a dispute (escalating into an armed conflict) between the Gazan Government and the Ramallah Government. I would suppose the High Court would have to decide if there is a national interest to Israel.
Most Respectfully,
R
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,
BLUF: Is it the function of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) to directly interfere with a governmental action? (RHETORICAL as FOOD FOR THOUGHT) I think not...
(COMMENT)Because of an unverified Israeli media report, the PCHR is not only refusing to step in and help where the PA is abdicating its responsibility to save the lives of its citizens. It is actively choosing to stop the assistance it was already giving!
In other words, if Abbas wants Gazans to die, PCHR will allow them to die – and then PCHR will blame Israel. Given a choice of human lives or politics, PCHR chooses politics, seemingly hoping that dead Gazans will make Israel look bad, which makes their deaths worthwhile.
It is the duty of the Israeli Supreme Court to decide on the question as to whether or not the State of Israel has a duty or fiduciary responsibility to intervene in the matter of a dispute (escalating into an armed conflict) between the Gazan Government and the Ramallah Government. I would suppose the High Court would have to decide if there is a national interest to Israel.
Most Respectfully,
R
- Dec 6, 2009
- 77,691
- 4,168
- 1,815
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.
even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
As eminent Middle East historian Franck Salameh notes, the palestinian identity was a phony European invention originally applied to Jews...
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
Palestine was a European Christian name for Jews’ homeland, like Terra Sancta or Holy Land. The British adopted the name, as well. The British Palestine Exploration Fund founded in the 19th century still exists in London.
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
Palestine was a European Christian name for Jews’ homeland, like Terra Sancta or Holy Land. The British adopted the name, as well. The British Palestine Exploration Fund founded in the 19th century still exists in London.
But It STILL never really existed in History. Except as a hissy fit done by Caesar. There never was a 'Race" of "Palistinians". Or Ethnic group. Or whatever. That is the point I am making. Yasser Arafat was a terrorist murderer worse than Hitler.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
Palestine was a European Christian name for Jews’ homeland, like Terra Sancta or Holy Land. The British adopted the name, as well. The British Palestine Exploration Fund founded in the 19th century still exists in London.
But It STILL never really existed in History. Except as a hissy fit done by Caesar. There never was a 'Race" of "Palistinians". Or Ethnic group. Or whatever. That is the point I am making. Yasser Arafat was a terrorist murderer worse than Hitler.
The name palestine was coined by a Greek writer Herodotus designating the Mediterranean coast inhabited by the Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Later, the Romans applied the name palaestina to Jews’ country, and Europeans anglicized it to palestine. So, it has been a European term for land associated with other Europeans. There never was a place palestine founded by any Middle Eastern people.
San Souci
Diamond Member
- Feb 4, 2020
- 5,760
- 4,539
- 1,940
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
Palestine was a European Christian name for Jews’ homeland, like Terra Sancta or Holy Land. The British adopted the name, as well. The British Palestine Exploration Fund founded in the 19th century still exists in London.
But It STILL never really existed in History. Except as a hissy fit done by Caesar. There never was a 'Race" of "Palistinians". Or Ethnic group. Or whatever. That is the point I am making. Yasser Arafat was a terrorist murderer worse than Hitler.
The name palestine was coined by a Greek writer Herodotus designating the Mediterranean coast inhabited by the Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Later, the Romans applied the name palaestina to Jews’ country, and Europeans anglicized it to palestine. So, it has been a European term for land associated with other Europeans. There never was a place palestine founded by any Middle Eastern people.
We seem to be on the same page. Once again. I will go one further. The term "Philistine" is a translation from an Aramaic word meaning "Invader". What these invaders called themselves is not really known. They came from Crete. Phoenicians? Maybe. They were defeated by Israel and then TOTALLY wiped out by Sargon 2 of Assyria. The ARABS are not "Palistinians ,or Philistines ,or anything else. Just Arab Terrorists who have NO claim to Israel.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ San Souci, et al,
I think that largely, what you say is true. But I always look at the intent of the pro-Arab Palestinians when they use these names. The common usage is already a matter of fact(no matter who or when it came into being).
(COMMENT)Still bogus. The Jews who LIVED there never called it that. There is no "Palistine" in the koran. There is no verse that the vile usurper Mohammad ever WENT to Jerusalem. The Ottoman Empire did not really emphasize that vile name. It was always "The Holy Land" to the Crusaders. The Byzantines called it The Holy Land. But it does not matter. There have never been, are not ,and will never BE Palistinians. They are ARAB Terrorists. PERIOD. As far as Land? Before the 6 day war, Gaza was owned by Egypt. West Bank was owned by Jordan.
In the Blue Book titled the UNQuestion of Palestine is a classic example. On page 5 • Paragraph 1, the UN uses phrases like:
◈ "Mandate over Palestine"◈ "Jewish Agency for Palestine"◈ "spoke for the Palestinian Arabs"
We may disagree on the meaning, application, or the usage, but the name is here to stay (notwithstanding its origin). To discuss its etymology is a futile effort to put forward a point. Even the International Criminal Court (ICC) uses the terminology:
◈ "State of Palestine"◈ "occupied Palestinian territory"◈ "Palestine Situation"
Just my thought...
View attachment 355829View attachment 355830
Most Respectfully,
R
Historian Bernard Lewis on the invention of the palestinians...
The Israeli conquests in the Six Day War in 1967 had another important consequence--the emergence of the Palestinian Arabs as a combatant force in the conflict, with a strong and growing sense of a common Palestinian identity and, ultimately, nationhood. The formation of this sense of identity began with the establishment of the British Mandate and the creation of a new and separate political entity called Palestine with different rulers, different institutions and above all different problems from those of the neighboring lands with which they had previously been associated. Already in the 1920s, Arab journalists and politicians began to speak of "the Palestine National Movement" and sometimes even of the Palestinian nation. But this was exclusively in the context of the struggle against British rule and Jewish immigration. Their 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 thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine, the few exceptions being textbooks prepared for use in the Mandatory government's schools.
The establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus accelerated and transformed the development of Palestinian national consciousness.
A new era began with the establishment of Israel and the Arab exodus. From the manner of their departure from Israel, perhaps still more from the manner of their reception in the neighboring Arab countries, where they were for the most part confined in camps and, with the exception of Jordan, refused citizenship, the Palestinian Arabs acquired a much stronger sense of identity, based on common experience, and a sense of common suffering, need, and destiny.
The Palestine Liberation Organization was founded in 1964, but it did not become a factor until after the war of 1967. The policies of the Arab governments had failed; their armies had been defeated. The PLO offered a new policy and aspiration, and a new method of waging war against the Israeli enemy. Both of these won considerable support among the Palestinians, especially in the camps which before long came under PLO control.
From 1967 onward the PLO played a prominent, some indeed would say the leading role, in the Arab war against Israel. The Arab states, naturally enough, we're now principally concerned with the recovery of their own lost territories, and, increasingly, with the open pursuit of their own national interests.
While the Arab governments and armies projected an image of defeat and impotence, even to their own peoples, the PLO in contrast was creating a new image of the Arab as a daring revolutionary freedom fighter. In this image, the Arab was portrayed as fighting alone against vastly superior forces instead of, as previously, fighting unsuccessfully against a smaller and weaker enemy. Correspondingly, the Israeli David fighting boldly against the Arab League Goliath suddenly became a Jewish Goliath trying to kill the PLO David.even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after thirty years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine,
It was a Brittish COLONY . And the "Palistinians" ,according to the Brits ,were the Jews.
Not even a British colony: Palestine was merely Britain’s nickname for the British Mandate, created at the urging of Jews in order to implement the Balfour Declaration for the establishment of a Jewish National Home. British Mandate and palestine ceased to exist in 1948 with Israeli statehood.
I am aware of this. But I am a bit more hard line on this subject ,since my old man immigrated here from Israel in 1949.
Palestine was a European Christian name for Jews’ homeland, like Terra Sancta or Holy Land. The British adopted the name, as well. The British Palestine Exploration Fund founded in the 19th century still exists in London.
But It STILL never really existed in History. Except as a hissy fit done by Caesar. There never was a 'Race" of "Palistinians". Or Ethnic group. Or whatever. That is the point I am making. Yasser Arafat was a terrorist murderer worse than Hitler.
The name palestine was coined by a Greek writer Herodotus designating the Mediterranean coast inhabited by the Philistines, raiders from the Greek world. Later, the Romans applied the name palaestina to Jews’ country, and Europeans anglicized it to palestine. So, it has been a European term for land associated with other Europeans. There never was a place palestine founded by any Middle Eastern people.
We seem to be on the same page. Once again. I will go one further. The term "Philistine" is a translation from an Aramaic word meaning "Invader". What these invaders called themselves is not really known. They came from Crete. Phoenicians? Maybe. They were defeated by Israel and then TOTALLY wiped out by Sargon 2 of Assyria. The ARABS are not "Palistinians ,or Philistines ,or anything else. Just Arab Terrorists who have NO claim to Israel.
The word philistine is German in origin, from philister. The philistines didn’t even call themselves philistines. The Hebrew Bible calls them peleshtim, meaning invaders, from Crete. DNA research confirms their Aegean origin.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 112
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 219
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 109
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 87
- Views
- 620
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 68
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8037
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 468
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-