Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Quick Introduction to Israel and Palestine

jewish voice peace palestine israel

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
103 replies to this topic

#61    odas

odas

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,740 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2012 - 03:21 PM

View PostErikl, on 09 December 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

As for the name Palestine, let's discuss few issues (again).

First, let us clarify who the "Palestinians" really are. The notion of a modern distinct "Palestinian people" with a language, culture and nationality of its own, is a new creation of Arab nationalist in the area, especially the PLO, in unison with the Arab League, and nurtured by the surrounding Arab nations and world media, after the ignominious Arab defeat in the 1967 war with Israel. The modern so-called "Palestinian people" are, in reality, a mixture of Arabs whose mother tongue is Arabic, whose religion is Islam, and whose culture is shared by most of the 22 surrounding Arab countries. There simply is not nor has there ever been a distinct Palestinian national entity. The term “Palestinian” has historically applied to anybody living in area, even Jews.
Second, as I have alluded to before, the name "Palestine" is the Romanized version of "Philistine," which was assigned, by the Romans to the region in the first century AD. It was a derogatory and humiliating term imposed by the Romans on the Jews, who constituted the vast majority of the people who lived there. Romans forced on the Jews and their land the name of an arch enemy of the Jews, the Philistines. Rome even went so far as to rename Jerusalem, Aelia Capitolina. Thus, the name Palestine came into prominence and remained attached to the region until the end of the British Mandate period in 1947. However, Jews have always considered the land their homeland and Jerusalem its capital. In addition, the land was never without as many Jews as the governing power would allow.
More than that, for centuries after Rome expelled the Jews and renamed the land, Jews constituted a majority in Palaestina Secunda, the northern part of the land, until the late 7th century when Islam arrived from the Arabian peninsula.
Erikl you are trying to wash the palestinians away by absorbing them into a unity of arabs. That does not work buddy. Think of the slavs for example. Serbs, croats, ukrainians, slovaks, polish, slovenians, parts of bosnians....they all are slavs and do share a base of the same language, culture, mentality......yet there are clearly defined by their nationality. Looks like for you an arab is an arab is an arab. Your mindset has absolutly no historical value. Pure Goebels propaganda at its best.
Arabs, just like slavs, romans...are a multitude of religion, natinality, ethnic, ethymology, culture...as opposed to the artifficial unity of Judaism where one has only one nationality  religion, culture...
You are arguing something that you can not argue. Palestinians are a seperate nationality, multi religious and distinguished culture.


#62    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 09 December 2012 - 03:36 PM

View Postodas, on 09 December 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Erikl you are trying to wash the palestinians away by absorbing them into a unity of arabs. That does not work buddy. Think of the slavs for example. Serbs, croats, ukrainians, slovaks, polish, slovenians, parts of bosnians....they all are slavs and do share a base of the same language, culture, mentality......yet there are clearly defined by their nationality. Looks like for you an arab is an arab is an arab. Your mindset has absolutly no historical value. Pure Goebels propaganda at its best.
Arabs, just like slavs, romans...are a multitude of religion, natinality, ethnic, ethymology, culture...as opposed to the artifficial unity of Judaism where one has only one nationality  religion, culture...
You are arguing something that you can not argue. Palestinians are a seperate nationality, multi religious and distinguished culture.

There's no point in trying to argue with this nonsense. Even the Israeli government have recognised there are and have been a Palestinian people. It is only silly deniers you find on the internet or as part of the far out Zionist camp like that try to claim such a thing.

It's a funny old situation. We have people being vilified for being holocaust deniers (99% of the time correctly vilified in my opinion), yet we have a fringe group of extremists who are entire people deniers - who aren't even nearly viewed in the same light. They deny the existence of an entire people and people don't even consider how disgusting an act that actually is!

Oh well, history is there to be read and learned. Anyone who is interested can find out the truth on their own.


#63    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 09 December 2012 - 04:50 PM

View Postodas, on 09 December 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Erikl you are trying to wash the palestinians away by absorbing them into a unity of arabs. That does not work buddy. Think of the slavs for example. Serbs, croats, ukrainians, slovaks, polish, slovenians, parts of bosnians....they all are slavs and do share a base of the same language, culture, mentality......yet there are clearly defined by their nationality. Looks like for you an arab is an arab is an arab. Your mindset has absolutly no historical value. Pure Goebels propaganda at its best.
Arabs, just like slavs, romans...are a multitude of religion, natinality, ethnic, ethymology, culture...as opposed to the artifficial unity of Judaism where one has only one nationality  religion, culture...
You are arguing something that you can not argue. Palestinians are a seperate nationality, multi religious and distinguished culture.

First, thanks for the Nazi analogue. Much appreciated... Second, with all your enthusiasm, you wrote complete nonsense.

The similarity between the Palestinians and other neighboring Arab people isn't the same as the (none) similarity between Poles and Serbs. It's even less so than the similarity between Austrians and Germans, which had centuries of different political history to diverse.

Until 80 years ago, all of these Arabic speaking, mostly Muslim people you call Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians etc., all belonged to tribes stretching for hundreds of miles, with no clear geographic boundaries. These tribes are known in Arabic as "Khamulah". They spoke exactly the same language, with slight local diversion, They didn't call themselves Lebanese or Palestinians or Jordanians until the French and British occupied the area after WW1 and divided the region according to it's geography. Many Palestinians still to these days have the same family names as Syrians or Iraqis. The entire region was all part of the Ottoman empire and before that to different Muslim caliphates and empires.

Second, and most important - I didn't deny, ever, the fact that today there are people called Palestinians. That would be complete stupidity. Just like I will not deny there are currently Arabs who call themselves Syrians, Lebanese etc. (though today it seems some citizens of Syria have more in common with the people of Gaza than their own country men).

I was, rightfully, mentioning the fact that there was no country or state called Palestine. It's a colonialist invention. The current definition of Palestine by the Palestinians is recent, and is a result of colonialism, not rooted in any lingual or historic or religious background.

Odas, you might have got me wrong here, but Ex knows exactly what I'm talking about, as he participate in this thread for few days now. So your reaction just show me how moot your argument is.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#64    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:15 PM

Where was the comparison to the Nazis?

Many nationalist identities are 'recent'. This is no way nullifies the legitimacy of them. And 100 years ago isn't even what I would consider recent.

I know you've not been one to deny that there exists a Palestinian people, but you have tried to wash away their claim to the land by essentially claiming the same thing, albeit earlier in the timeline. Even if you were correct in your claim that there is no difference whatsoever between them culturally (even though cultural uniqueness can vary from village to village, never mind across entire continents), they still lived on the land for long before 90% of new Israel's population did, and therefore it is there's to define in any which way they decide. Autonomy and self-determination, Erik. Y'know, the human rights that allowed Israel to be born in the first place.

It matters not when a people gains their national identity (or, rather, start their quest for one); what matters is whether or not they have enough of a tie to a land to justify such an identity. European Jewish immigrants back then did not. They had no more of a claim than the Japanese would have over China, or the Australians would have over Britain.

And I'll go back to what I stated at the start of this discussion: you may try to claim that Israel in its birth was not a colonial venture, but there can be no denying that what has happened since '67 in the Occupied Territories most definitely is.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 09 December 2012 - 05:16 PM.


#65    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:24 PM

Where? when odas said: "Your mindset has absolutly no historical value. Pure Goebels propaganda at its best.".

Unless you don't know who Goebels was, no further details are needed.

I didn't even try to refute their claim for the lands. It is you, on the other hand, who try to claim Jews have no real claims for the land, and that the entire Zionist enterprise is a colonial venture, or can be compared to a colonial venture.

I claim both people have exact equal rights. I only claimed, that what the Palestinians claim is "historic Palestine", and so did Yamato (and you have shown no disagreement, btw), has no historic basis what so ever. There is no "occupied Palestine", because there was no Palestine. A Palestinian state wasn't taken away from the Palestinians, who didn't even exist as a nation back then. It was a colonial administrative division, that didn't belong anymore to it's Arab inhabitants than it did to it's Jewish ones. The only ones who seem to claim that the other side has no claim, and is an invader, is the Palestinian side and their supporters, you included. This position, long abandoned by even mainstream right-wing Zionists, seem to stick on your side. And this is what keeps peace away - the fact that Arabs want to re-write history, and claim Jews have no historical ties nor legal rights to the land.

And you cannot claim you didn't know your support just that, because it's kind of screams out of your posts and the "likes" you seem to keep on giving Yamato, which to be frank is more truthful to his agenda than you are, however misguided that agenda might be.

Edited by Erikl, 09 December 2012 - 05:26 PM.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#66    odas

odas

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,740 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:07 PM

View PostErikl, on 09 December 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:



First, thanks for the Nazi analogue. Much appreciated... Second, with all your enthusiasm, you wrote complete nonsense.

The similarity between the Palestinians and other neighboring Arab people isn't the same as the (none) similarity between Poles and Serbs. It's even less so than the similarity between Austrians and Germans, which had centuries of different political history to diverse.

Until 80 years ago, all of these Arabic speaking, mostly Muslim people you call Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians etc., all belonged to tribes stretching for hundreds of miles, with no clear geographic boundaries. These tribes are known in Arabic as "Khamulah". They spoke exactly the same language, with slight local diversion, They didn't call themselves Lebanese or Palestinians or Jordanians until the French and British occupied the area after WW1 and divided the region according to it's geography. Many Palestinians still to these days have the same family names as Syrians or Iraqis. The entire region was all part of the Ottoman empire and before that to different Muslim caliphates and empires.

Second, and most important - I didn't deny, ever, the fact that today there are people called Palestinians. That would be complete stupidity. Just like I will not deny there are currently Arabs who call themselves Syrians, Lebanese etc. (though today it seems some citizens of Syria have more in common with the people of Gaza than their own country men).

I was, rightfully, mentioning the fact that there was no country or state called Palestine. It's a colonialist invention. The current definition of Palestine by the Palestinians is recent, and is a result of colonialism, not rooted in any lingual or historic or religious background.

Odas, you might have got me wrong here, but Ex knows exactly what I'm talking about, as he participate in this thread for few days now. So your reaction just show me how moot your argument is.
So where the German tribes, pruss, shawbs, hessens or the slavic tribes russians, poles, from what area serbs, croats and some bosnians come hence your misinformation about the connection, slovaks...... Then of course there are arab tribes like syrians, lebanese, palestinians...
As for the language are you aware of the difference of the german language that is spoken in munich and in berlin? Or in hessen and in hamburg. In some cases they do not understand each other unless they speak hochdeutsch.
One tribe, yet either seperated in austrians and germans as nationalities or grouped together lije bavarians, hessen, schwaben...in on country as one nation.
The same applys to arabs, slavs..
I undrstand that onesided history is a b****.
And please stop the holocoust denier crapp. The holocoust on the jews happened and lets hope it does not happen again. But by using the holocoust as an excuse your government is responsible for ethnic clensing, terrorism and massacres on the palestinians.
How long can one use the holocoust as an excuse? How can I hold a ten year old serbian child responsible for what happened twenty years ago? That would be insanity. But that is what your government is doing.


#67    odas

odas

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,740 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2012 - 08:08 PM

Btw..you are welcome.


#68    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:01 PM

In fact, his point about differing and unique tribes throughout Europe is exactly on the money. As I stated, cultural differences exist even between villages, and it does not matter when a people gain national identity. You fail to acknowledge these facts. What would you be suggesting? That the people of the Occupied Territories should absorb into other countries or something? This is nonsense. They already have a country. And it was referred to as a 'country' (not just a region of land) as far back as 1920.


#69    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:18 PM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 09 December 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

In fact, his point about differing and unique tribes throughout Europe is exactly on the money. As I stated, cultural differences exist even between villages, and it does not matter when a people gain national identity. You fail to acknowledge these facts. What would you be suggesting? That the people of the Occupied Territories should absorb into other countries or something? This is nonsense. They already have a country. And it was referred to as a 'country' (not just a region of land) as far back as 1920.

I am not, and you yourself admitted that these nationalities are new.

Plus it has nothing to do with the argument, which is that Palestine in the borders that you and others claim that the Palestinians have historic rights etc., do not exist because there was no Palestinian state, it's a colonial invention. I stand again, that both Jews and Arabs have the same rightful claim to the land. If you're looking for any Nazi-like opinions here, is the continued denial of Jews for rights in a country they currently live, let it be Israel or anywhere else.

See? it's easy to play ball with words until we reach a no-argument.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#70    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 09 December 2012 - 09:43 PM

Both Arabs and Jews that were indigenous to the land had equal claim. Immigrants did not.

This is easy for anyone looking at this without bias to understand. Immigrants would never be allowed to claim a part of a land they were not indigenous to in any other situation you could imagine happening in the World. Your bias lies in the belief that the majority of Jews in Palestine had a claim to a land they were only loosely connected to after being removed for 2000 years. It's ridiculous.

It's religious extremism, put simply. And it has spurned nothing but more religious extremism.

A nice series of quotes from Christopher Hitchens regarding this whole sorry affair:

Quote

In his 2006 debate with Martin Amis, Hitchens stated that "one must not insult or degrade or humiliate people"[100] and that he "would be opposed to this maltreatment of the Palestinians if it took place on a remote island with no geopolitical implications". Hitchens described Zionism as "an ethno-nationalist quasi-religious ideology" and stated his desire that if possible, he would "re-wind the tape [to] stop Hertzl from telling the initial demagogic lie (actually two lies) that a land without a people needs a people without a land".

He continued to say that Zionism "...nonetheless has founded a sort of democratic state which isn't any worse in its practice than many others with equally dubious origins." He stated that settlement in order to achieve security for Israel is "doomed to fail in the worst possible way", and the cessation of this "appallingly racist and messianic delusion" would "confront the internal clerical and chauvinist forces which want to instate a theocracy for Jews". However, Hitchens contended that the "solution of withdrawal would not satisfy the jihadists" and wondered "What did they imagine would be the response of the followers of the Prophet [Muhammad]?" Hitchens bemoaned the transference into religious terrorism of Arab secularism as a means of democratization: "the most depressing and wretched spectacle of the past decade, for all those who care about democracy and secularism, has been the degeneration of Palestinian Arab nationalism into the theocratic and thanatocratic hell of Hamas and Islamic Jihad".[98] He maintained that the Israel-Palestine conflict is a "trivial squabble" that has become "so dangerous to all of us" because of "the faith-based element."[100]

And to top this with a massive logic bomb:

Quote

In Slate magazine, Hitchens pondered the notion that, instead of curing antisemitism through the creation of a Jewish state, "Zionism has only replaced and repositioned"[98] it, saying: "there are three groups of 6 million Jews. The first 6 million live in what the Zionist movement used to call Palestine. The second 6 million live in the United States. The third 6 million are distributed mainly among Russia, France, Britain, and Argentina. Only the first group lives daily in range of missiles that can be (and are) launched by people who hate Jews." Hitchens argued that instead of supporting Zionism, Jews should help "secularize and reform their own societies", believing that unless one is religious, "what the hell are you doing in the greater Jerusalem area in the first place?" Indeed, Hitchens goes so far as to claim that the only justification for Zionism given by Jews is a religious one.

http://en.wikipedia.....80.93Palestine

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 09 December 2012 - 09:44 PM.


#71    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:13 PM

Wow Ex, you sound like a member of the BNP :-X.

So I guess we should make a list of countries that have no right to exist:

1. Australia
2. USA
3. Canada
4. All of South America
5. Most of Europe

It's funny how your logic works - new nations that didn't exist as such, have claims to countries and states that didn't exist before, yet immigrants that arrived before those borders were even set aren't allowed. You're right, that kind of logic works only for the biased ;)

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#72    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:32 PM

View PostErikl, on 09 December 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

Wow Ex, you sound like a member of the BNP :-X.

So I guess we should make a list of countries that have no right to exist:

1. Australia
2. USA
3. Canada
4. All of South America
5. Most of Europe

It's funny how your logic works - new nations that didn't exist as such, have claims to countries and states that didn't exist before, yet immigrants that arrived before those borders were even set aren't allowed. You're right, that kind of logic works only for the biased ;)

In their inception, yes, you would be correct. None of the above had a right to exist. But they do now, just as I believe Israel does have a right to now exist within its '67 borders. Too many generations have now been born to all of those lands, including Israel.

Quote

new nations that didn't exist as such

Just because they were not granted statehood by outside states, does not mean they did not exist. A country exists for as long as the majority of its indigenous populations say it exists. And again we're back to the same self determination that even allowed Israel to be born.



And you seriously have the cheek to accuse me of sounding like the BNP? What's that all about? Disappointed in ye wee man.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 09 December 2012 - 10:32 PM.


#73    odas

odas

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,740 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2012 - 11:11 PM

In 1500 BC I believe was the first writen document about the exictence of Palestine, found in ancient egyptian inscriptians. How many countries, nationalities and religions came after that which are accepted but not the palestines?


#74    Yamato

Yamato

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,671 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 December 2012 - 11:38 PM

History isn't a valid excuse to deny human rights, no matter what the history is.   That applies to EVERYONE of every continent and every country.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#75    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 10 December 2012 - 10:44 AM

View PostYamato, on 09 December 2012 - 11:38 PM, said:

History isn't a valid excuse to deny human rights, no matter what the history is.   That applies to EVERYONE of every continent and every country.

So let me see. Untill few posts ago, you were all claiming Palestinians are ancient nation and Palestine is an ancient state taken from the Palestinians by the Jewish invaders. You all seem to be united with the "fact" that most Israeli Jews have less rights to the land than Palestinians. Now, when that was refuted as bogus, you zig-zagged into claiming some "we are the world we are the people" crap that we all "equal" and we all deserve to be judged the same way. Sorry but you make me laugh.

I claim, as I've always claimed - both the Arabic speaking people that are now divided to 22 different countries deserve their own self-determination (it was proven 22 times after all), and both Jews deserve it. Both have the same claim for a country in the middle east. I do not accept the current, modern, definition of "Palestine", adhered by most Palestinians and many among you pro-Palestinian supporters, that they have rights to all of the colonial territory that the British named Palestine. They do not, for the simple fact that that territory was created with the mind of some of it being designated for a Jewish national homeland. That was legally validated serveral times in the past by both the League of Nations and the United Nations, since at least July 1921.

The last country to have any legal claims to the land was Turkey, as the legal descendant of the Ottoman Empire, and they've relinquished all claims to those lands (together with Syria, Lebanon and most of the other 22 Arab countries which were all part of the Ottoman Empire).

While there were administrative divisions in some historical empires called "Palestine" (and later from Latin became "Filistin" in Arabic), they weren't independent political entities. Nor was there ever a unique ethnicity with special linguistic, religious or cultural attributes specifically to such a geographical region, or any region that might resemble such a territory in the past (as opposed, for example, to the case of the Kurds). And also, none of those administrative divisions ever had the boundaries which the Palestinians claim is Palestine aka the boundaries that the British created in 1920. So the entire argument that Israel is currently sitting on an occupied Palestinian state is moot.
Even the claim that it exists on privately owned land, and thus might have taken it from it's people, is moot, as most of the land in the British Mandatory Palestine was government-owned.

Finally, Jews have been living in the land for centuries. Jews have become the most significant ethnic group in Jerusalem in the mid 19th century, decades before the secular (that's right, NON RELIGIOUS) Zionist movement was created.
Jews are an indeginous group in the middle east. Eruopean Jews have been immigrating from Europe to the region long before modern period, to study and to get close to Jewish holy sites.
Today, 50% of the Jews living in Israel have their roots in the Middle East, not Europe.
Many Palestinians today also probably arrive from Middle Easterners travelling the region during the centuries that it was all united under one single regime. This is the reason why you have Arabic speaking families stretching all the way from Israel through Lebanon to Syria etc..
Bedouins, or nomadic Arabs, have been immigrating the vast deserts in the middle east for centuries, until it was divided to the current different countries, and they'd become citizens of those countries.

So lastly, both Jews and non-Jews have valid legal and historic equal claims to the territory that was created by the British, named "Palestine".
Most Israelis accept this, and are willing to share that land in the form of two states solution.
Most Palestinians, however, do not recognize Jews' rights to the land, see them as colonialists, and Israel as a temporary, "Crusader" project that shall perish soon. And the pople of this forum, it seems, who support such nonsense, are fueling the conflict without knowing so. It's time for you to stand up and say no to this propganda.

P.S
The irony is that the only independent state to exist in the region from 60 BC to 1948, was the Crusader "Kingdom of Jerusalem" that existed from 1099 to 1291. So actually, if any of them exist today and will claim a country of their own, they have a serious case :-P.

Edited by Erikl, 10 December 2012 - 10:51 AM.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"





Also tagged with jewish, voice, peace, palestine, israel

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users