Israel confronts Gaza protesters

[Talon]

Israel confronts Gaza protesters

Israel is setting up a special unit to investigate those who call for violent resistance to the planned pullout from the Gaza Strip later this year.

The justice ministry's unit will be in charge of combating extremists who aim to derail the government's plan.

Unit leader Shai Nitzan pledged "zero tolerance" for crimes of violence.

Israel's outgoing internal security service chief, Avi Dichter, meanwhile, told MPs of an increase in death threats by opponents of the Gaza plan.

Mr Dichter said many of the threats were aimed personally at Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who initiated the withdrawal plan.

Criminal investigation

Israel's cabinet unanimously backed the proposal by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni to form the special unit on Sunday.

Some cabinet members have also been calling for potential violent offenders to be pre-emptively jailed without trial.

Police have already launched a criminal investigation into leaders of last week's anti-withdrawal rally in Jerusalem, where some rabbis likened settlers in Gaza to Jews who took up arms against the Nazis in the Warsaw ghetto during World War II.

Israel's withdrawal plan involves dismantling all 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip and four in the West Bank.

Many settlers have vowed to resist the move, but others have already decided to accept the government's compensation offer and move out.

Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip - home to about four million Palestinians - during the 1967 Six Day War.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...ast/4303605.stm

[Erikl]

Some cabinet members have also been calling for potential violent offenders to be pre-emptively jailed without trial.

A regulation that remains since 1945 (British emergancy regulation).

It was never used against Israeli civilians though .

That's weird. I'm not sure how the civil rights organization here and the courts will repsonde to such an act by the government.

But then again, after the assasination of Issac Rabin, who knows what these extremist gonna try next, so i don't feel a bit sorry for any extremist that would be treated as a terrorist and put behind bars.

Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip - home to about four million Palestinians - during the 1967 Six Day War.

"occupied" is a loaded word, that has double meaning. I think the word "captured" is more appropriate here. Israel captured those territories in a defensive war, plus those territories weren't legally part of any country (though Jordan annexed the west bank and only the UK and Pakistan recognized the annexation).

"Occupied" has a legal meaning which isn't suitable in this situation, as the land wasn't part of any country and didn't belong to any soveirgn entity, and it was taken in a defensive act against the war that was started by Jordan and Egypt (among the others).

Plus, the number of Palestinians in the west bank is more like 2.8 million, not 4 million.

But then again, we are talking about BBC here, and they live in their own little world lol.

No hurt feeling Talon, I know you just deliver the news and don't actually write them, but I just can't help but laugh of the inaccuracy that the BBC seem to have in almost any article regarding the conflict.

[Talon]

"occupied" is a loaded word, that has double meaning. I think the word "captured" is more appropriate here.

If it makes you feel better I was watching a Documentary of the Roman ethnic cleansing of the Celts an hour ago, and it kept saying 'the Romans liberated South Gaul from the Celts', 'Ceaser moved north and liberated the Gual city of Bueratix from the Celts' etc etc

WE CELTS WERE THE GAUL YOU B*STARD ROMANS!

[Erikl]

"occupied" is a loaded word, that has double meaning. I think the word "captured" is more appropriate here.

If it makes you feel better I was watching a Documentary of the Roman ethnic cleansing of the Celts an hour ago, and it kept saying 'the Romans liberated South Gaul from the Celts', 'Ceaser moved north and liberated the Gual city of Bueratix from the Celts' etc etc

WE CELTS WERE THE GAUL YOU B*STARD ROMANS!

506538[/snapback]

Let me guess, it was on BBC?

But seriously I'm afraid no one here gets it.... those weren't Palestinian lands, they were no ones land.

They happen to have non-Jewish people who spoke Arab, but they didn't own the land (they were workers who were brought here from the outskirts of the Ottoman empire), and there were Jews here as well, we were just a minority because of long period of persecuation.

Also, we bought most of those lands from the Ottoman empire fair and square, dried swamps, bloomed the desert.

If you want Talon, I'll show you a picture of my own town, which is right next to a Palestinian town, and you'll see the difference. The Palestinian town looks like it's stuck in the middle of nowhere, with almost no vegetation. My town is green and you can't tell it's in a mostly desert country by the look of it.

I think most people have the notion that Jews came to this place as european colonialists and took the land of Palestinian hands, just like the europeans have done in south africa, north africa, etc.

I'm afraid nothing is further from the truth in this case.

The only thing that might be similar is the fact that the first zionists and european colonialists came from the same continent - europe.

Anything else is so different, you can't really equate it. It's a shame people try to put it in that context when it just doesn't fit.

[Talon]

Let me guess, it was on BBC?

No, History channel.

Anyway 'occupied' and 'captured' can mean the same thing as I would agree with the writter, that occupied is just captured, only in reference to land. You shouldn't take it have some double meaning.

But seriously I'm afraid no one here gets it.... those weren't Palestinian lands, they were no ones land.

Yet they Palistinians were there. This whole issue of if its Palistine or Israel is really a differnce in opinion over self-determination. Who has rights to the land, a people who owned it a few thousand years ago and were driven out by invasion, or the people who were resident most recently.

Actually going with the first one would be good, cause its gives Scotland, Ireland and Wales claims on French, Balkan and Turkish territory as the Celts controlled those areas long before the Franks, Slavs and Arabs settled there after the Romans slaughtered us.

[Erikl]

Yet they Palistinians were there. This whole issue of if its Palistine or Israel is really a differnce in opinion over self-determination. Who has rights to the land, a people who owned it a few thousand years ago and were driven out by invasion, or the people who were resident most recently.

What is ur definition of Palestinians?

In the 18th century, for example, Palestinians was the name used in Germany for Jews.

Untill 1948, both Jews and non-Jews in the British Mandate of Palestine were called Palestinians.

The so-called Palestinians today are Arabs who came only recently, in the last 150 years, because of the development of the land.

The number of non-Jewish Palestinians who lived here before this time was very minor, and usually just nomads who would have parked here for few months or years and would have continue on their way to Damascus, Cairo or Baghdad.

Also, Jews have always lived here.

It's not that they all disappeared for two millenias, then suddenly came out of the blue to ask what was theirs.

The problem is that we became a minority here after being persecuted by so many occupators.

What I'm trying to say is, that the Palestinian nationalism is recent and artificial. Before that there were Muslims, Jews and Christians here, no Palestinians (as there was never a country called Palestine before that, and the region itself which was named Palestine was very unclear. As a matter of fact, Jews see the name "Palestine" as offensive because it was coined by the Romans after driving us out to erase the Jewish identity of the land. Next time you call this land Palestine, make sure to name Jerusalem "Aelia Cpitolina", cause the Romans named that city this way to erase it's jewish history as well).

Saying that there is a nation of Palestinians which is ancient in this land and the Jews are new commers or recent returners, is revisionist, cause Jews have always lived here, and Palestinians as nation was unheared of untill the 1950s.

[Talon]

The so-called Palestinians today are Arabs who came only recently, in the last 150 years

Exactly like I said, 'most recently', much more recently that the Europeans who entered 60 years ago. Same as I understand Jews have always been there, but so have the Arabs, and it only seperated into two nations after the European influx.

As a matter of fact, Jews see the name "Palestine" as offensive because it was coined by the Romans after driving us out to erase the Jewish identity of the land.

Yeah, but considering your not being called Palistinian I don't see how that matters. And you can't call their nationalism recent and artificial because Israel itself has only been around two generations.

[Erikl]

Exactly like I said, 'most recently', much more recently that the Europeans who entered 60 years ago. Same as I understand Jews have always been there, but so have the Arabs, and it only seperated into two nations after the European influx.

By europeans you mean european Jews? cause they started comming here long before the British came here .

Arabs weren't always here.

The term Arab itself is actually problematic, but I won't go into there.

Yeah, but considering your not being called Palistinian I don't see how that matters. And you can't call their nationalism recent and artificial because Israel itself has only been around two generations.

Yeah but when you call the land before Israel was created by the name "Palestine", and claim it was Palestinian land, it's offensive to Jews, which never used that name, for obvious reasons.

And I can call their nationalism recent because Jewish nationalism is as old as the Jewish diaspora was.

The name Israel is just the name chosen by the Jews to call their renewed country.

But Jewish nationalism, and Jews as a nation, existed long before 1948 (first as religious movement, then from the 19th century as both religious and secular movements, with the secular one eventualy being more successful than the religious one).

Palestinian nationalism, on the other hand, is a very recent creation, that has no historical base (you can't find the history of the Palestinian people before the 20th century for example), and was created by Arab nationalists to counter Israel after it's creation.

Meaning - Palestinian nationalism was forged and based on hatred to Israel and Jewish nationalism.

Nonetheless, today there is the fact that there is a nation called Palestinians, even if it is only 40 years old. We learned to deal with that, and so accept the fact that they will have a state in the future.

But all we ask is that history should stop being revisioned, and that they'll stop claiming that we took lands from them which didn't belong them in the first place, or invent a whole history of a ficitional nation.

Sure, they want to create their own ethos to create their new nation, but basing it all on hatred toward us will not make peace any closer, and will just help the bloodshed to continue.

[Talon]

But most of what your saying just is what I said, a difference in opinion over self-determination. I'm not trying to start a debate over who the land rightfully belongs to etc, I'm just saying that this is were there are in the west those who sympathise with both peoples.

[Mekorig]

*The irony hour begins*

You see, when the Spanish came to this lands (argentina), there are no-one lands. There was just some natives, but they were primitive,a nd they live in tents. The spanish create cities and a flourishing land in this region. Thta reclamations that the native has is just an artificial claim, constructed by pure hatred to the spanish settlers. You see, my town in civilazed and moders, while the native town is just a colecction of wooden shacks. Stop being revisionist, has the spanish took no one lands, the lands werent of the original natives.

*The irony hour finish*

[bathory]

your example fails because the jews were native to that area and there was a jewish population living there since always, unlike the spaniards and argentina.

[Barnacle Battlefront]

*The irony hour begins*

You see, when the Spanish came to this lands (argentina), there are no-one lands. There was just some natives, but they were primitive,a nd they live in tents. The spanish create cities and a flourishing land in this region. Thta reclamations that the native has is just an artificial claim, constructed by pure hatred to the spanish settlers. You see, my town in civilazed and moders, while the native town is just a colecction of wooden shacks. Stop being revisionist, has the spanish took no one lands, the lands werent of the original natives.

*The irony hour finish*

507408[/snapback]

you forgot to mention that the spanish also brought smallpox and other such diseases that wiped out part of the native population

[Talon]

you forgot to mention that the spanish also brought smallpox and other such diseases that wiped out part of the native population 

You say that like its was a good thing

[Erikl]

*The irony hour begins*

You see, when the Spanish came to this lands (argentina), there are no-one lands. There was just some natives, but they were primitive,a nd they live in tents. The spanish create cities and a flourishing land in this region. Thta reclamations that the native has is just an artificial claim, constructed by pure hatred to the spanish settlers. You see, my town in civilazed and moders, while the native town is just a colecction of wooden shacks. Stop being revisionist, has the spanish took no one lands, the lands werent of the original natives.

*The irony hour finish*

507408[/snapback]

Ah, but you left out few details:

What if the spaniards were the original natives of that land, unable to return in large numbers untill recently because they were an oppressed minority?

And what if there was always a spaniard population, dating back even before the alleged "natives" that the spaniards drove out were there?

There is even a more basic flaw in the point you were trying to make - what if most of those so-called natives came during the same time the spaniards returned in large numbers to their forefathers' lands, because new jobs have been created in the area (because the spaniards developed the land)?

So, as you can see, there is no parallel between what you were saying and what actually happans. And that is, my friend, nothing else but complete demagogue by your side.

The truth is that the re-creation of a Jewish independence here (that could as easily be named "Judea", "Israel", or whatever other name that was chosen, that doesn't matter) can't be equated to anything that happened in recent or even human history.

And it most certainly can't be equated to european colonialism.

[Erikl]

And just to show you all and example of how old "zionism" is (as I said, untill the 19th century it was a religious movement with a new leader\wanna-be-messiah comming every century claiming to be the saviour of our people and return us all to Israel), here's medieval jewish poem, written by Yehuda Halevi (1086-1145), the greatest Hebrew poet of his time. He lived in Toledo, Spain:

"My heart is in the east, and I in the uttermost west--

How can I find savour in food? How shall it be sweet to me?

How shall I render my vows and my bonds, while yet

Zion lieth beneath the fetter of Edom, and I in Arab chains?

A light thing would it seem to me to leave all the good things of Spain --

Seeing how precious in mine eyes to behold the dust of the desolate sanctuary."

notes:

*Edom was the name used by Jews to refer to Christian-ruled lands at the time.

*Being that this poem was written before the discovery of the continent of America, Spain was "the uttermost west" of the known world.

If anyone is interested, I'll bring here a list of religious zionist leaders throughout the last 2 millenias, which promised to gain back Israel and recreate a Jewish independence here.

Edited March 2, 2005 by Erikl

[cyberlord]

(when the people of the greek island (Kret) attacked the shores of Egypt and the egyption king Remsees the third fought with them in the known battle of Lozen , because he didn't want them to enter Egypt he sent them to south of palestinr in areas called Plest and they were called plesteniens and that's were the name Palestine or Falestine came from and it was mentioned in the holy books ..

)

Israel is the name of the prophrt Jacob , the name palestine is much older than the name Israel ......

jews didn't live in palestine for ever , arabs lived before them , and if they lived they only lived as little minorities , they didn't have an existence except of the 90 ages of Solamon Kingdom ....

if we forgetted that arabs were there from the begining , and we calculated the period of arabic islamic rule of palestine from the 7th century to the fall of the ottoman empire , we will find it's more than 1200 years , which is way more of the jewish kingdom ....

and by the way , jews couldn't enter palestine untill the fall of the Ottoman empire after the british conquest of it ......

[Erikl]

You are at it again cyberlord?

The Philistines were Greek people, probably comming from Crete.

They have disappeared (probably into the Jewish population) after the Babylonians conquered Canaan and Syria.

They were not Arabs.

You also failed to prove that the Arabs are mentioned anywhere near Canaan earlier than the 4th century BC (in which they were the Nabateans, who lived in southern Jordan, not current Israel, and which eventually adopted Aramaic, thus have no connection to the muslim invasion 1,100 years later, in the 8th century AD).

As for your nonsense about Jews being having presence here for only 90 years under Solomon - it's so easy to refute, that I don't really know why you bother to use that lie.

So let me just quote myself from an earlier message I posted here few weeks ago:

The Merenptah tablet, from Egypt, 1208 BCE, where he calims to have defeated ISRAEL while in Canaan.

The Kingdom of Judah - independent Jewish kingdom in Canaan between the years 922-587 BCE .

Roman province of Judaea - yep, even after we lost our independence, Judah continued to exist, as a province of the Persian, then Greek, then Roman empire . We even regained our independence for a short while between the Greek rule and the Roman rule.

Also, check this quote from the above article:

"Following the suppression of Bar Kokhba's revolt, the emperor Hadrian changed the name of the province to Syria Palaestina and Jerusalem became Aelia Capitolina in order to humiliate the Jewish population by attempting to erase the nation's historical ties to the region."

Maybe you should start calling Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolina", if you already refer to Judea as Palestine ... from now on, don't call it "Ursalim al-Quds", call it "Aelia Capitolina al-Quds" .

477829[/snapback]

And please, I'm getting tired to run the search engine and quote myself over and over again.... so either find new lies, or stop posting your old ones .

[cyberlord]

You are at it again cyberlord?

Untill u stop making lies ..

The Philistines were Greek people, probably comming from Crete.

They have disappeared (probably into the Jewish population) after the Babylonians conquered Canaan and Syria.

They were not Arabs.

exactly who said they were arabs ..

and thanx for proving my point , as u see u said the name palestine is a modern name , what i proved is that it is older than the name Israel ....

and by the way do u know that (Philistine or Filistine) is how we in arabic say Palestine ?

thanx again for proving my point ....

You also failed to prove that the Arabs are mentioned anywhere near Canaan earlier than the 4th century BC (in which they were the Nabateans, who lived in southern Jordan, not current Israel, and which eventually adopted Aramaic, thus have no connection to the muslim invasion 1,100 years later, in the 8th century AD).

As for your nonsense about Jews being having presence here for only 90 years under Solomon - it's so easy to refute, that I don't really know why you bother to use that lie.

So let me just quote myself from an earlier message I posted here few weeks ago:

oh , i have proved , apperently u don't read what i posted before ..

more than that , u r forgetting that Canaan were arabs ...

(The Stone Age

The history of Palestine dates back to the earliest days of human civilisation – and still remains a hotly debated topic.

Tiny grains of corn were all archaeologists needed to place Palestine as one of the oldest sites of farming in the world. As early as 9000BC, emmer wheat was being sown in Stone Age settlements and, today, fossilised husks can still be found in Jericho.

The first archaeological work to examine the Stone Age in Palestine was carried out between 1929 and 1934 by Dorothy Garrod, who excavated caves on Mount Carmel. Her work proved that Palestine had links with Europe at that stage.

In the new Stone Age (7000BC) animals were domesticated, pottery manufactured and crops cultivated.

By 3000BC the region – with a climate and fertile terrain similar to that of California - was not only being extensively farmed but it also formed a strategic hub for traders.

We know that the earliest ancestors of today’s Palestinians, the Canaanites, were sophisticated city dwellers who occupied the region from 3000BC. They had trading links with Africa, Asia and Europe. Ports, including Gaza, saw spices and luxury goods passing through their docks and across the Mediterranean to the major cities of the world.

But Palestine’s strategic position also made it a natural battleground for the great powers of the ancient world.

Ethnically diverse invaders such as the Amorites, the Hittites and the Hurrians posed a constant challenge to the Canaanite’s struggle for autonomy. But the success of the Canaanites in keeping out the invaders, together with a culturally rich society, swelled their numbers to an estimated 200,000 people.

In the 4th millennium, the Ghassulians, whose origins remain unclear, emigrated to Palestine. This group of people is known as Ghassulians because their pottery and flints were found in settlements at Tulaylat al-Ghassul in the Jordan Valley)

(The Bronze Age

The early Bronze Age saw the growth of most of the towns that were known in historic times. The Palestinian towns of Megiddo, Jericho, Tell al-Farah, Bait Sheaan, Khirbet, Kerak and Ai in northern and central Palestine hold the most significant evidence of the first phase of the early Bronze Age.

In southern Palestine, the towns of Tell ad-Duweir, Tell Bait Mirsim and Tell al-Hessi appear to have been built in the late Bronze Age. This indigenous Semitic population were called Canaanites.

The tracing of the ethno-cultural origins of the Canaanites and the other groups of the region (the Leviant) leads us to the fact that those inhabitants included the Amorites (of the southwestern desert), the Akkadians and Assyrians (Mesopotamia), the Arameans, the Habiru (Hebrews) and the Bedu (Beduin Arabs of the southern desert).

These groups spoke related languages including Hamitic, ancient Egyptian, Coptic and Ethiopian languages.

Throughout the Bronze Age, nomads from Arabia made sporadic forays into the area. Though initially hostile, the Arabs were incorporated into the existing culture. Later Indo-European groups also immigrated, intermingled with and were absorbed by the Semitic cultures.

Walled Palestinian towns appeared throughout Palestine in the third millennium. These towns remained independent city states, intermittently subjugated to Egyptian control.

Palestine was occupied by several allied tribes which had many features in common as well as their differences. They were essentially nomadic with tribal centres unlike the Canaanites who lived in the plains and the coastal areas where they practiced farming.

The middle Bronze Age

This period marked the start of Canaanite culture and the entry of the Israelites into Palestine in the 14th and 13th centuries BC. Middle Bronze Age civilization in Palestine flourished with strong links to the towns of the Phoenician-Canaanite coast.

Egyptian documents provide valuable information about the region during the 12th Egyptian dynasty (1938 to 1756BC) which saw significant Egyptian interests and influence in Palestine.

The late Bronze Age

The middle and late Bronze Ages in Palestine had no sharp differences. Egyptian armies conquered Palestine proven by administrative documents excavated in both Egypt and Palestine showing details of provincial government organisation in Palestine between 1450 and 1350BC.

In the course of the closing decades of 13th century BC, the incoming Israelites were able to occupy most of the hill country east of the Jordan river and in western Palestine. Evidence provided by archaeological research suggests that the Israelite settlement in Palestine was much more complex and disconnected than indicated by biblical accounts.)

(The Phoenician rulers

The 1200s mark a new era later referred to as the Phoenician period. The Phoenicians were major traders in papyrus and are credited with forming the alphabet we use today. Due to pressure on their land base, from tribes moving north and south into it, they became accomplished seafarers, forming bases in the Mediterranean and sailing as far east as India.

They are also remembered for completing a canal – now the Suez Canal – linking the Mediterranean and Arabian seas.

In 1125BC a confederation of Hebrew tribes, the Israelites, moving from the East, invaded and defeated the Canaanites, but their struggle with the Philistines was more difficult. They had successfully established an independent state on the southern coast of Palestine including the Canaanite town of Jerusalem.

But the history of the region, even at these early dates, is a matter of much controversy, with Biblical evidence being challenged by archaeologists and historians.

When confronted by the Israelites, the Philistines had proved to be superior in their military organisation, and with metal armoury at their disposal, they defeated the invading Israelites in 1050BC. But 50 years later, a strengthened Israelite army led by King David, in turn defeated the Philistines. Aided by the unity of the Israelites and the weaknesses of the adjacent empires, King David was able to establish a large independent monarchy with Jerusalem as its capital.

By the middle of the 10th century BC, King Solomon, David’s son and successor, was in power. His reign represented the culmination of Israelite political history. Though Solomon gradually lost control over part of the territories conquered by his father, he was remarkably successful in organising the economic life of the monarchy. After his death in 922BC, the kingdom was divided into two parts: Samaria in the north, and Judah in the south following a revolt by the Israelites.)

(The Babylonian Era

After a period of intermittent warfare between Judah and Samaria, King Asa of Judah entered into an alliance in 733BC with the kingdom of Damascus. Through this alliance Damascas attacked northern Samaria, thus relieving pressure on Judah.

The cost to the northern kingdom was to lose its territory east of the Jordan river and north of the Yarmuk, a tributary of the Jordan, provoking a long series of wars between Samaria and Damascus which ended after the capture of Damascus by the Assyrians. Ten years after the capture, with the collapse of the Samaria region, the kingdom ceased to exist politically.

In 586BC, Babylonia conquered Judah, destroyed Jerusalem and exiled most of the Jews living there, sending them to Babylon as slaves. The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar entered Jerusalem, sacked the temple, and razed it to the ground. The royal palace and other great buildings were also destroyed.

Cyrus II founded the mighty Persian empire, which in 539BC conquered Babylonia and readmitted the Jews to Judea, a district in Palestine. The Jews were allowed considerable autonomy under Persian rule. Bound to a universal monotheistic faith, they are believed to have helped rebuild part of the second temple, codified the Mosaic law, the Torah, which became the coda of social life and religious observance.

333BC

By 333BC another great historical figure, Alexander the Great of Macedonia, was making his mark on the region. He famously conquered the Persian rulers, including the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria, who had imposed a more Hellenistic (Greek) culture and religion on the population.

165BC

Led by a prominent Jewish family, the Maccabees, the Jews revolted and attempted to establish an independent state. Judas Maccabeus defeated and killed Nicanor, the Seleucid general.

63BC

The next empire to dominate the region was the Roman. At the beginning of their authority, Pompey the Great laid siege and captured Jerusalem. He imposed taxes on the Jews and curtailed Jewish dominions and granted virtual autonomy to a group of approximately 10 Hellenised cities in Syria and Palestine, known as the Decapolis, and placed them under the jurisdiction of the governor of Syria.

40BC

In Rome, Herod was recognised as king of Judea. His accession brought to Palestine the peace that it had lacked during its independence. His long reign was marked by general prosperity. But also during his reign Jesus of Nazareth was born. As an adult, Jesus began calling people back to the pure teachings of Abraham and Moses. The Roman authorities judged such teachings as subversive and he was much persecuted.

)

is that enough or u want to write to u the whole history ?

by the way, the 90 years are of David and Solamon rule , after that the kingdom divided , so it only stayed one kingdom for 90 years ...

even the divided beings ended in 740 bc ....

after that if jews existed in palestine , they were only minority

and before them many tribes ruled palestine .....

and what exactly these sites of yours should proof ?

i doubt that even someone like u would believe the lies u r saying

[Erikl]

exactly who said they were arabs ..

and thanx for proving my point , as u see u said the name palestine is a modern name , what i proved is that it is older than the name Israel ....

and by the way do u know that (Philistine or Filistine) is how we in arabic say Palestine ?

thanx again for proving my point ....

You claim all along that Arabs lived here before Jews did .

I didn't say it was a modern name (more lies? can't you even read what is being posted here?), I said it was the name the Romans gave to this land after driving the majority of Jews out in 135 AD.

It was renamed after the greatest historical foes of the Jews, the Philistines (who were no where to be found by 135 AD, as they disappeared from history some 700 years earlier), to humilate us and erase the Jewish identity of this land.

The Arab name "Palestine" is derived exactly from the fact that the Arabs came here some 600 years after the Romans renamed the land, thus they had no way of knowing what was the earlier name . You just proved my point exactly - the Arabs came here long after the land was renamed.

What I found hypocratic here is that you Arabs keep calling Jerusalem "Ursalim", but call the name "Palestine". The proper Roman name of Jerusalem is Aelia Capitolina, so please, call your desired capital city by that name, don't use it's Hebrew name .

In 586BC, Babylonia conquered Judah, destroyed Jerusalem and exiled most of the Jews living there, sending them to Babylon as slaves. The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar entered Jerusalem, sacked the temple, and razed it to the ground. The royal palace and other great buildings were also destroyed.

Oh my! what is that?! the Babylonians conquered a Jewish kingdom in 586 BC?!

But I thought that there was no Jewish kingdom by that time !

Thanks for contradicting yourself! made the life of the readers here so easy.

165BC

Led by a prominent Jewish family, the Maccabees, the Jews revolted and attempted to establish an independent state. Judas Maccabeus defeated and killed Nicanor, the Seleucid general.

LOL!

You failed to mention that the revolt was successful, and an independant Jewish kingdom existed for almost two centuries, also known as the Hasmonean period .

This is exactly the reason why Jews celebrate Hannukah .

So there you have it folks - more historical revisionism....

[cyberlord]

I didn't say it was a modern name (more lies? can't you even read what is being posted here?),

excuss me , but wasn't u the one who said this :

*The so-called Palestinians today are Arabs who came only recently, in the last 150 years, because of the development of the land.

*Palestinian nationalism, on the other hand, is a very recent creation, that has no historical base (you can't find the history of the Palestinian people before the 20th century for example), and was created by Arab nationalists to counter Israel after it's creation

*Meaning - Palestinian nationalism was forged and based on hatred to Israel and Jewish nationalism

*Nonetheless, today there is the fact that there is a nation called Palestinians, even if it is only 40 years old. We learned to deal with that, and so accept the fact that they will have a state in the future.

But all we ask is that history should stop being revisioned, and that they'll stop claiming that we took lands from them which didn't belong them in the first place, or invent a whole history of a ficitional nation.

Sure, they want to create their own ethos to create their new nation, but basing it all on hatred toward us will not make peace any closer, and will just help the bloodshed to continue

The Arab name "Palestine" is derived exactly from the fact that the Arabs came here some 600 years after the Romans renamed the land, thus they had no way of knowing what was the earlier name . You just proved my point exactly - the Arabs came here long after the land was renamed.

excuss me , in which sence u r talking ?

i have prooved that the origine of the name palestine is older than the origine of the name Israel .....

what exactly are u talking about ?

What I found hypocratic here is that you Arabs keep calling Jerusalem "Ursalim", but call the name "Palestine". The proper Roman name of Jerusalem is Aelia Capitolina, so please, call your desired capital city by that name, don't use it's Hebrew name  .

WOW ! but u see, i have never heared of this Ursalim , we use the name (Al-Quds)(Bait Al-Maqdes) to refer to the blessed land that is around Al-Aqsa .....

now who is lying

Oh my! what is that?! the Babylonians conquered a Jewish kingdom in 586 BC?!

But I thought that there was no Jewish kingdom by that time !

Thanks for contradicting yourself! made the life of the readers here so easy.

oh but there weren't , u see , if u really know about history u would know that when the Babylonians took over the Asherions kingdom , they took over palestine , and took 10000 jew slave and the assigned the ruler of jerusalem ...

ofcource , with this the true political existence of the remains of israelists kingdom was finished ....

how ever , what happened is that the ruler tried to revoluate on the babylonians , that's when they attacked and destroyed the city of jerusalem

You failed to mention that the revolt was successful, and an independant Jewish kingdom existed for almost two centuries, also known as the Hasmonean period .

This is exactly the reason why Jews celebrate Hannukah

independant , hahahahaha .... independent kingdom ! don't u know that greek where dominating the area , and the greek empreror was the one who allowed jews to enter jersulam and to make this kingdom , under the supervision of the greek , that (kingdom) was following the greek empire ...

and the period of that (from the begining of Simon's kingdom 143 to 63 the rome invasion ) is less than one century , simple math.....

[Erikl]

excuss me , but wasn't u the one who said this :

*The so-called Palestinians today are Arabs who came only recently, in the last 150 years, because of the development of the land.

*Palestinian nationalism, on the other hand, is a very recent creation, that has no historical base (you can't find the history of the Palestinian people before the 20th century for example), and was created by Arab nationalists to counter Israel after it's creation

*Meaning - Palestinian nationalism was forged and based on hatred to Israel and Jewish nationalism

*Nonetheless, today there is the fact that there is a nation called Palestinians, even if it is only 40 years old. We learned to deal with that, and so accept the fact that they will have a state in the future.

But all we ask is that history should stop being revisioned, and that they'll stop claiming that we took lands from them which didn't belong them in the first place, or invent a whole history of a ficitional nation.

Sure, they want to create their own ethos to create their new nation, but basing it all on hatred toward us will not make peace any closer, and will just help the bloodshed to continue

Yes but where did I claim that the name "Palestine" itself is a modern one?

I merely claimed that Palestinians as a nation is a modern, 20th century, invention.

As a matter of fact, untill the creation of independent Jewish country, the zionists in British Mandate called themselves "Palestinians" as well.

The truth is that before the 20th century there was no such nation as "Palestinians". It was created to counter Jewish nationalism and so is based solely on hatred towards jews and everything related to Israel.

excuss me , in which sence u r talking ?

i have prooved that the origine of the name palestine is older than the origine of the name Israel .....

what exactly are u talking about ?

You proved no such thing .

You (for the first time) accurately mentioned that the Philistines were here as long as the Hebrews where (and maybe even before), but that doesn't mean the land was called Palestine at the time.

The name was renamed into "Palestine" by the Romans who were familiar with Jewish history and knew that the biggest foe of Jews to that day were the Philistines, who by that time were long gone, in order to humiliate us and erase the Jewish identity of the land.

It's as if someone will destroy Israel today, will banish most of the Jews there, and will rename the land into "Naziland". Will that make the future inhabitants of the land "Nazis"? is it important that the Nazis disappeared some 60 years ago? ofcourse not.

WOW ! but u see, i have never heared of this Ursalim , we use the name (Al-Quds)(Bait Al-Maqdes) to refer to the blessed land that is around Al-Aqsa .....

now who is lying

You are, cause "Al Quds" simply means "the holy" (I know Arabic to some degree as you can see ), and the full name of Jerusalem in Arabic is "Ursalim Al Quds", meaning, "Jerusalem the holy".

And thanks for the help - "Bait Al Maqdes" is almost the exact transliteration from Hebrew "Beit Ha Miqdash", which is the Hebrew word (shows up like that in the bible, not modern Hebrew word) for the Temple which stood there untill the Romans destroyed it.

independant , hahahahaha .... independent kingdom ! don't u know that greek where dominating the area , and the greek empreror was the one who allowed jews to enter jersulam and to make this kingdom , under the supervision of the greek , that (kingdom) was following the greek empire ...

Well thank god we defeated the Greeks and had independence untill the Romans came along .

It's funny - even your own sources, in a twisted revisionist way, confirm that there was a Jewish presence for a long time here, with several Jewish kingdoms.

[cyberlord]

Yes but where did I claim that the name "Palestine" itself is a modern one?

I merely claimed that Palestinians as a nation is a modern, 20th century, invention.

As a matter of fact, untill the creation of independent Jewish country, the zionists in British Mandate called themselves "Palestinians" as well.

The truth is that before the 20th century there was no such nation as "Palestinians". It was created to counter Jewish nationalism and so is based solely on hatred towards jews and everything related to Israel.

and of cource the area before that was called israel , wasn't it ?

You are, cause "Al Quds" simply means "the holy" (I know Arabic to some degree as you can see  ), and the full name of Jerusalem in Arabic is "Ursalim Al Quds", meaning, "Jerusalem the holy".

And thanks for the help - "Bait Al Maqdes" is almost the exact transliteration from Hebrew "Beit Ha Miqdash", which is the Hebrew word (shows up like that in the bible, not modern Hebrew word) for the Temple which stood there untill the Romans destroyed it.

mmmm , so even twisting in our language ....

there is no such thing in arabic language that is called ursalim , jursalem means Al-Quds ,

and i can say the same that Beit ha miqdash is the exact translation of Beit al maqdis , ur are neglecting the fact that arabic and hebrew are too similar ....

and a blind translation would have no individual meaning for words , while that holds perfects sence in arabic ....

Well thank god we defeated the Greeks and had independence untill the Romans came along .

It's funny - even your own sources, in a twisted revisionist way, confirm that there was a Jewish presence for a long time here, with several Jewish kingdoms.

u defeated greek ! well done with that !!

and by the way , the folloship of other impire is not considered individual kingdom , is it ?

and also u r neglecting the fact that Arabs ruled palestine from the 7th century untill the fall of ottoman , in that period there was no jews as i can recall , that period is much larger than that claimed empire of jews