Israeli Columnist Is Fired

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

The Jews were in Palestine before the Arabs and Muslims. Palestine was founded before Islam - a relatively young religion - was founded.

No, you are wrong, The Arab Canaanites, lived in palastine for thouthends of years before the jews , the whole land is arabian,

just like (china is for chinese people) for example,

[Corp]

Well the debate on who was there first depends on if you accept the theory that Canaanites = Arabs. I personally think that Canaanites were Canaanites and that Arabs was we view them today didn't enter the area in large numbers until the Muslim conquests. And Jews have been living in Israel/Palestine for a hell of a lot longer than 400 years.

In terms of religion while Islam traces its roots to Adam and Eve, just like Jews and Christians do, it didn't really form as a separate and organized faith until Muhammad came along. Just like Christianity didn't truly form on its own until Jesus showed up. Of course you'd think that the fact that all three faiths worship the same God they'd be just a little less eager to mindlessly butcher each other. But seems to be the pattern that the more two religions are alike the more their followers want to kill each other.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Corp

[Persia]

That religions have come first? Zartosht (Zarathustra ), Judaism and then ...

[Erikl]

The Arab Canaanites, lived in palastine for thouthends of years before the jews , the whole land is arabian

You are the 2nd Arab or Muslim to come up with this argument on this board.

Let's tackle this issue for a moment, shall we?

We already established that Islam as a religion came long, long after Jews have already lived in what is called now Israel.

Now, let's define what is an Arab. From wikipedia, An Arab can be defined as following:

Genealogical: someone who can trace his or her ancestry to the tribes of Arabia – the original inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula – and the Syrian Desert. This was the definition used in medieval times, for example by Ibn Khaldun, but has decreased in importance over time, as a portion of those of Arab ancestry lost their links with their ancestors' motherland. In the modern era, however, DNA tests have at times proved reliable in identifying those of Arab genealogical descent. For example, it has been found that the frequency of the "Arab marker" Haplogroup J1 collapses suddenly at the borders of Arabic speaking countries.[22]

Linguistic: someone whose first language, and by extension cultural expression, is Arabic, including any of its varieties. This definition covers more than 300 million people. Certain groups that fulfill this criterion reject this definition on the basis of non-Arab ancestry; such an example may be seen in the way that Egyptians identified themselves in the early 20th century.[23][24]

Political: in the modern nationalist era, any person who is a citizen of a country where Arabic is either the national language or one of the official languages, and/or a citizen of a country which may simply be a member of the Arab League, thereby having Arabic as an official government language, even if not used by the majority of the population. This definition would cover over 350 million people. It may also be the most contested definition, as it is the most simplistic one. It would exclude the entire Arab diaspora outside of the Arab world and include people who do not identify themselves as Arabs.

Now obviously the political criteria isn't relevant to that time, because, well, there were no Arab countries back then (and not until the 20th century).

Let's tackle the Genealogical one, then. You claim that the "whole land is arabian". A bold claim. You also created the anachronistic term "Arab Canaanites", which somehow assumes that the Canaanites were Arabs, back in biblical times, right?

Let's see what wikipedia has to say about Canaanites, a biblical term:

The Biblical scholar, Richard Friedman, argues that this part of Genesis showing the origin of the Canaanites was written by the hypothetical Priestly Source.[24][25]

The Sidon whom the Table identifies as the firstborn son of Canaan has the same name as that of the coastal city of Sidon, in Lebanon. This city dominated the Phoenician coast, and may have enjoyed hegemony over a number of ethnic groups, who are said to belong to the "Land of Canaan".

Similarly, Canaanite populations are said to have inhabited:

the Mediterranean coastlands (Joshua 5:1), including Lebanon corresponding to Phoenicia (Isaiah 23:11) and the Gaza Strip corresponding to Philistia (Zephania 2:5).

the Jordan Valley (Joshua 11:3, Numbers 13:29, Genesis 13:12).

The Canaanites (Hebrew: כנענים, Modern Kna'anim Tiberian Kənaʻănîm) are said to have been one of seven regional ethnic divisions or "nations" driven out before the Israelites following the Exodus. Specifically, the other nations include the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the jesusites (Deuteronomy 7:1).

Well, that doesn't say anything about Arabs. But it does say that the Canaanites were somehow related to the Phoenicians, or the people of the city of Sidon.

So, let's check who were the Phoenicians. Were they Arabs? Did they speak Arabic?

Phoenicia(UK /fɨˈnɪʃə/, US /fəˈniːʃə/;,[2] from the Greek Greek: Φοινίκη: Phoiníkē), was an ancient civilization in Canaan which covered most of the western, coastal part of the fertile Crescent. Several major Phoenician cities were built on the coastline of the Mediterranean. It was an enterprising maritime trading culture that spread across the Mediterranean from 1550 BC to 300 BC. The Phoenicians used the galley, a man-powered sailing vessel, and are credited with the invention of the Bireme.[3] They were famed in Classical Greece and Rome as 'traders in purple', referring to their monopoly on the precious purple dye of the Murex snail, used, among other things, for royal clothing, and for their spread of the alphabet (or abjad), upon which all major modern alphabets are derived.

In the Amarna tablets of the 14th century BC, people from the region called themselves Kenaani or Kinaani (Canaanites), although these letters predate the invasion of the Sea Peoples by over a century. Much later, in the 6th century BC, Hecataeus of Miletus writes that Phoenicia was formerly called χνα, a name Philo of Byblos later adopted into his mythology as his eponym for the Phoenicians: "Khna who was afterwards called Phoinix".[4] Egyptian seafaring expeditions had already been made to Byblos to bring back "cedars of Lebanon" as early as the third millennium BC.

That's pretty much establishes that the Canaanites were indeed Phoenicians.

However, what was their language? Where did they come from?

Phoenician was a language originally spoken in the coastal (Mediterranean) region then called "Canaan" in Phoenician, Arabic, Hebrew, and Aramaic, "Phoenicia" in Greek and Latin, and "Pūt" in Ancient Egyptian. Phoenician is a Semitic language of the Canaanite subgroup; its closest living relative is Hebrew, to which it is very similar; then Aramaic, then Arabic. The area where Phoenician was spoken includes modern-day Lebanon, coastal Syria, Palestine, northern Israel

According to this, Phoenician's closest living related language is Hebrew, then Aramaic (which is also very close to Hebrew), and only then, being that it's a Semitic language, to Arabic. So obviously their language wasn't Arabic. Nor did they arrive from Arabia, but were the indigenous people of Canaan (hence their name - "Canaanites").

So it settled that Canaanites WERE NOT Arabs, nor did they speak Arabs. But what about other languages, spoken around the Middle East, before and after Canaanite? Surely, according to you belief, Arabs lived in the entire region from time immemorial, or atleast before Jews came to the scene.

Well, let's see - according to wikipedia's entry on Semitic languages, this is what followed:

2nd millennium BC

By the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC, East Semitic languages dominated in Mesopotamia, while West Semitic languages were probably spoken from Syria to Yemen, although Old South Arabian is considered by most to be South Semitic and data are sparse. Akkadian had become the dominant literary language of the Fertile Crescent, using the cuneiform script which was adapted from the Sumerians, while the sparsely attested Eblaite disappeared with the city, and Amorite is attested only from proper names.

For the 2nd millennium, somewhat more data are available, thanks to the spread of an invention first used to capture the sounds of Semitic languages — the alphabet. Proto-Canaanite texts from around 1500 BC yield the first undisputed attestations of a West Semitic language (although earlier testimonies are possibly preserved in Middle Bronze Age alphabets), followed by the much more extensive Ugaritic tablets of northern Syria from around 1300 BC. Incursions of nomadic Aramaeans from the Syrian desert begin around this time. Akkadian continued to flourish, splitting into Babylonian and Assyrian dialects.

[edit]1st millennium BC

In the 1st millennium BC, the alphabet spread much further, giving us a picture not just of Canaanite but also of Aramaic, Old South Arabian, and early Ge'ez. During this period, the case system, once vigorous in Ugaritic, seems to have started decaying in Northwest Semitic. Phoenician colonies spread their Canaanite language throughout much of the Mediterranean, while its close relative Hebrew became the vehicle of a religious literature, the Torah and Tanakh, that would have global ramifications. However, as an ironic result of the Assyrian Empire's conquests, Aramaic became the lingua franca of the Fertile Crescent, gradually pushing Akkadian, Hebrew, Phoenician, and several other languages to extinction (although Hebrew remained in use as a liturgical language), and developing a substantial literature. Meanwhile, Ge'ez texts beginning in this era give the first direct record of Ethiopian Semitic languages.

[edit]Common Era / AD

Syriac, a descendant of Aramaic used in the northern Levant and Mesopotamia, rose to importance as a literary language of early Christianity in the 3rd to 5th centuries and continued into the early Islamic era.

With the emergence of Islam in the 7th century, the ascendancy of Aramaic was dealt a fatal blow by the Arab conquests, which made another Semitic language — Arabic — the official language of an empire stretching from Spain to Central Asia.

And this map is shown, which shows which languages were spoken around the middle east in the 1st century AD:

So, obviously until the 7th century AD, Arabic was limited to the Arabian peninsula, and spread only together with Islam, which we already established arrived the region much, much later than Jews.

[supervike]

I think everybody should be kicked out, and we make a giant nature reserve out of the area.

There will never be a resolution to the hate that both sides harbor.

[Persia]

I think everybody should be kicked out, and we make a giant nature reserve out of the area.

There will never be a resolution to the hate that both sides harbor.

You mean, after that, the Palestinians and Israelis to come and live in America?

[Erikl]

I think everybody should be kicked out, and we make a giant nature reserve out of the area.

There will never be a resolution to the hate that both sides harbor.

I disagree.

As an Israeli, I can say the reason Israelis do not look into the Middle East as their place, is because of Arab alianation. Most of the Israeli descion making is based on Israeli insecurity. Don't forget that Israel was built on the ruins of European and Middle Eastern Jewish communities. People remember the Holocaust and talk a lot about it, but since the 1930s Jews were harshly persecuted in the Arab world as well, and with the creation of Israel (something that was on the way since 1880s) - the Arabs literally destroyed their Jewish communities.

Arabs on the other hands are not free people. Never have been. They are prisoners to their dictators and Imams. Most of the current leaders in the Arab world are direct ideological descendants to the same leaders that persecuted Jews in those Arab lands back in the 1930s. So Jews and Israel are their natural scapegoat, further alienating Israel from wanting to do anything with it's neighbours. This is a magic circle.

The only way to break this, is:

1. Real democratization of the Arab world, not just Islamization. Arabs need to adapt the Turkish model of democracy, at least, and Arabs can look at Israel on how to create a real democracy in the middle east. After all, 20% of the Israelis are Arabs. Further 50% of the Jews in Israel are direct descendants from the Arab world. This means that about 70% of current Israelis, that live and play the democratic game for more than 3 generations now, have Arabic cultural background. Arabs can learn a lot from that on how to create democracies in their own countries.

2. Israel needs to be stopped pressurized. You have to understand that Israel is afraid of a Palestinian country, really is. It doesn't hold the land simply for ideological or imperial reasons - otherwise we wouldn't have gave up on Sinai or Gaza. It's afraid that a Palestinian country will try to eliminate Israel. This fear is justified, judging from what I've written above, about hatred towards Israel as an instrument of control. I think many here think that Israel holds the West Bank simply because it wants to. Judging from where most of these posters are coming from - ie Europe, that doesn't surprise me. In the mind of the European Israeli criticizers, Israelis are colonialists, and so they conquer and occupy for colonialist reasons, nothing more to it. Well, I'm afraid that's dead wrong. And the more Israel feels isolated, the more the voices inside our minds keep telling us "that's it, the world is against us again, and our current adversaries are warming up the ovens again". This is the Israeli mentality. So much is the Israeli alienation from the Middle East, despite it being in the Middle East, that most Israelis do not speak Arabic.

When these two processes are complete, there will be peace in the Middle East.

[Corp]

Given that neither the Arab or Israeli leadership seem to have any interest in peace I don't see it happening in my lifetime.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

Erikl,

look at it this way, see the middle east history is a salad of (Canaanites, Phoenicians, Arameans...)

this far history is not precisely been written, and no one knows exactly how things happend,

and there's a lot of theories about the origins of people in the middle east, now for me

i have read theories that suggest Arabs organs are from aram (sound like arab), and also some suggest that

Arabs are Phoenicians, and some suggest they are Canaanites, and there is absolutely no sure way to actually

tell which came from which,

but what historians seem to agree on is that arabs are from sam one of the three childrens of noah

meaning arabs are definitely Semites, and Semitic civilizations since 9000 bc has been all around the middle east

so the arabs origins is definitely related to all the middle east not just the Peninsula

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

i just want an answer to this: is Judaism a race or a religion ?

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

20% of the Israelis are Arabs. Further 50% of the Jews in Israel are direct descendants from the Arab world. This means that about 70% of current Israelis,

well there, you said it, if they are arabs why should they become hebrew

[make me believe]

i just want an answer to this: is Judaism a race or a religion ?

It seems to be either or, especially when necessity dictates they be viewed as a 'religion' and not an exclusive 'tribe', but for internal purposes and amongst themselves, there are no doubt deep genetic ties. Evidence of this is Tay-Sachs disease, an ailment that only Ashkenazi Jews seem to get. If you talk to hard line Likudists in Israel, they place the utmost importance on Israeli racial purity. That is why they are going nuts over recent waves of Sub-Saharan African refugees taking up residence in their cities.

.

Edited September 1, 2011 by make me believe

[Erikl]

Erikl,

look at it this way, see the middle east history is a salad of (Canaanites, Phoenicians, Arameans...)

this far history is not precisely been written, and no one knows exactly how things happend,

and there's a lot of theories about the origins of people in the middle east, now for me

i have read theories that suggest Arabs organs are from aram (sound like arab), and also some suggest that

Arabs are Phoenicians, and some suggest they are Canaanites, and there is absolutely no sure way to actually

tell which came from which,

but what historians seem to agree on is that arabs are from sam one of the three childrens of noah

meaning arabs are definitely Semites, and Semitic civilizations since 9000 bc has been all around the middle east

so the arabs origins is definitely related to all the middle east not just the Peninsula

The history is well, well documented. It is documented in Akkadian and Assyrian cuneiforms found in the thousands from some 4000 years ago. It is documented in Egyptian hieroglyphics. It is document in the Ugarit tablets, in Phoenician writings (they did invent the alphabet), and, if you clean the mythology, in the Jewish bible. Some 2500 years ago it is also well documented by the Greeks, which were heavily influenced by the Phoenicians/Canaanites.

And ofcourse, all of the 1st millenia AD is well documented in that region, during Byzantine and later Arab scholars themselves.

So no, the Arab culture and language are not native to the Mashriq (Levant in Arabic) - it conquered that region, under the flag of Islam, during the 7th century, destroying all other identities and cultures.

As for the name "Arab" itself - it comes from the etymology of West in Semitic - GARAB, which is where the pre-Islamic Arab raids came into contact with the Assyrians of Mesopotamia (ancient Iraq). Another source is the Arabah desert, which historically is on the border between Canaan and the Arabian desert, and which the Hebrews and the Canaanites encountered Arabs. It has nothing to do with Arameans.

i just want an answer to this: is Judaism a race or a religion ?

It is an Ethnoreligious group, which, as defined by wikipedia means:

An ethnoreligious group (or ethno-religious group) is an ethnic group of people whose members are also unified by a common religious background. Ethnoreligious communities define their ethnic identity neither exclusively by ancestral heritage nor simply by religious affiliation, but often through a combination of both[citation needed] (a long shared history; a cultural tradition of its own; either a common geographical origin, or descent from a small number of common ancestors; a common language, not necessarily peculiar to the group; a common literature peculiar to the group; a common religion different from that of neighbouring groups; being a minority or being an oppressed or a dominant group within a larger community).[citation needed]

Examples of ethnic groups defined by ancestral religions are the Jews, the Druze of the Levant, the Copts of Egypt, the Yazidi of northern Iraq, and the Zoroastrians of Iran and India.

So Jews are most certainly not alone in this category. Btw, what unites all of these groups is antiquity, and indeed back in ancient times ethnic belonging was synonymous with the religion you were practising. The notion of ethnicity vs. religion is a Christian innovation as a true universal religion, and even Islam has strong ethno-religious element - although there are much more non-Arab muslims around the world, Arabic and the cultural elements of it are tightly connected with Islam.

well there, you said it, if they are arabs why should they become hebrew

You do realize there are NON ARABS living in what is known today as the Arab world, right? It's merely a political definition. But again it reflects the Arab colonial thinking that everyone in their land should accept the Arab identity, even if they are indigenous to that region and lived there thousands of years before it became Arabic.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

well Erikl, your arguments is about proving to me that the Arab world which is numbered about 300 million people

are not purely arabs from the race point of view, and that go's for palastinians, is that what you are trying

to explain ?

well that is well known across all the arabic world, we know that,

the word arabic is meant as Panethnicity term rather than a pure race

this is what Panethnicity mean from wiki

Groups that have similarities in background, language, and other characteristics in turn might form groups that come to be panethnic as a way to form group solidarity. Likewise, some groups choose to embrace the panethnic labels that have already been given to them by outsiders.

Arab, in its common modern definition, is also a widely employed example of panethnicity. Arabs themselves are a grouping of peoples of various ancestral origins, religious backgrounds and historic identities, whose members identify as such on one or more of the grounds of language, culture, or genealogy.[3]

Those self-identifying as Arab, however, rarely do so on its own. Most hold multiple identities, with a more localized prioritized ethnic identity — such as Egyptian, Lebanese, or Palestinian — in addition to further tribal, village and clan identities.

now the same way you can argue the purity of the arabic race, i can also argue the purity of jews as a race also, so we are even in that perspective

but any way, the purity of the race was never a problem to us, the only Reason why i'm arguing that issue with you is becouse you the jews

keep bringing the (jews was there before the arabs) argument, and that's wrong becouse first it's racsim, second you imply that jewish is

a race rather than religion, third you wanna imply that the people in palastine are not arabs or that thier roots any way are not Origin

from the middle east which is wrong

[Erikl]

No, the-Unexpected-Soul, no one cares about the purity of races (except perhaps make me believe which is obsessed with 1930s German racial theories). Jews are a very diverse "race" (I dislike this term anyhow). Some of us as pale as the Germans, other as dark as Ethiopians. The majority, however, are middle eastern in look, because this where we originate from.

But that doesn't matter.

Your view is the view of imperialists. This is the sad truth many Arab apologists in Europe miss - Arabs view themselves as the lords of the land, even though they are recent conquerors.

The Romans also claim there are no different nations, everyone is Roman (unless they were a slave or non-Roman). Same did the Ottomans before you. This is chauvinistic view. You first try to prove that all the people there were always Arabs. Then you go on and dismiss diversity as "they all speak Arabic and live in the Middle East, so they all belong to the same identity, which is Arabic ofcourse".

No, my friend. Berbers ARE NOT ARABS.

Kurds ARE NOT ARABS.

Assyrians ARE NOT ARABS.

Copts ARE NOT ARABS.

Syriac people of Lebanon and Syria ARE NOT ARABS.

Jews ARE NOT ARABS.

All of them live under Arab occupation, except Jews, and all of them are under huge pressures from their occupiers to abandon their identity and religion and join the superb Arab "Panethnicity".

What you don't know, is that most of the Lebanese, Syrians, Egyptians etc., are genetically NOT ARABS as well. They are mostly the same people that lived there for thousands of years, ofcourse with the addition of any other nation that passed there. However, the fact that both Egyptians, which were not Semitic people, and Lebanese, which were Canaanites speaking another Semitic language but Arabic, now both consider themselves Arabs is the result of centuries of Cultural imperialism, Cultural genocide, and Language genocide carried on by the Arab invaders since the 7th century. Even to this day, Christians are fleeing the Middle East in millions. And example are the Assyrians, which are only 3% of the Iraqi population, but comprise almost 50% of the emigrants since 2003 (as a result of terrorism against them).

The fact that Kurds, until Saddam was toppled, were not recognized as a nation, and were under a modern campaign of Arabization.

The Syriac Christians in Lebanon, once 50% of the population, are now mere 30%, after the Muslims won the Civil war there. Christian Lebanese are over represented in Lebanese emigrants anyhow.

Berbers are unrecognised as a nation in all of North Africa, even though they are the indigenous population.

And Druze as well are unrecognised in both Lebanon and Syria, but are recognized in Israel.

And as for the term panethnicity - a lot of people in the 20th century adhered to this "Pan-" ethnic rubbish. The Germans, the Turks etc.. It's all racial supremacy bogus. And usually, it goes hand in hand with the group of people that lead these pan-ethnic movements. For example, the Germans believed in pan-Germanic ideas, that were supposed to unite all the Germanic people - Scandinavians, Austrians, Dutch, English etc. under one empire. But ofcourse they would lead and in affect dominate these groups. The Soviets also advanced pan-Slavic ideas, but ofcourse all of the Slavic countries needed to learn Russian, not the other way around. And so on and so on. So does your precious pan-Arabism: not all of the so-called Arabs in the middle east are really Arabs, and if you believe in pan-Semitic ideas, then why should all of these people adopt the Arabic culture, and not the other way around?

[Corp]

Erikl,

look at it this way, see the middle east history is a salad of (Canaanites, Phoenicians, Arameans...)

this far history is not precisely been written, and no one knows exactly how things happend,

and there's a lot of theories about the origins of people in the middle east, now for me

i have read theories that suggest Arabs organs are from aram (sound like arab), and also some suggest that

Arabs are Phoenicians, and some suggest they are Canaanites, and there is absolutely no sure way to actually

tell which came from which,

but what historians seem to agree on is that arabs are from sam one of the three childrens of noah

meaning arabs are definitely Semites, and Semitic civilizations since 9000 bc has been all around the middle east

so the arabs origins is definitely related to all the middle east not just the Peninsula

Phoenicians are not Arabs. They are Phoenicians. Seems like the popular theory in Syria (based on your views and that of another Syrian member) is that the only people to really populate the Middle East over the whole of its history are Arabs and at times Israelis.

[make me believe]

No, my friend. Berbers ARE NOT ARABS.

Kurds ARE NOT ARABS.

Assyrians ARE NOT ARABS.

Copts ARE NOT ARABS.

Syriac people of Lebanon and Syria ARE NOT ARABS.

Jews ARE NOT ARABS.

What?

Are you saying that Sunni Muslims (See: Al Saud, Al Tikriti) are the only 'Arabs'? That Persians, Kurds, Palestinians, and all non-Sunni ethnic groups are not Arab?

.

Edited September 3, 2011 by make me believe

[meryt-tetisheri]

There is a lot of confusion between religion and ethnicity! Islam, whether Sunni or Shiite, is a religion, a belief system adopted by various peoples of different ethnicities, as part of their cultures.Indonesian Muslims can be Sunni without being Arab for example. During the early history of Islamic expansion, a clear distinction was made between '3arab' (Arabs), and 'musta3rab' (Arabized). I use the '3' to stand for a gutturalArabic letter 'ayeen'. The question of ethnicity can only be addressed using historical/archaeological evidence and genetic studies. Mixing beliefs and belief based 'truths' with historical facts only confuses the issue; a clear line of demarcation must be drawn between historical facts and beliefs, whether in a divine promise, or if the origins of Islam can be traced back to 'Adam &Eve'.

[Erikl]

What?

Are you saying that Sunni Muslims (See: Al Saud, Al Tikriti) are the only 'Arabs'? That Persians, Kurds, Palestinians, and all non-Sunni ethnic groups are not Arab?

.

Kurds and Berbers are both mainly Sunni Muslims, yet they are not Arabs. Persians are non-Arabs and non-Sunni. Most of the people of Qatar and Kuwait are non-Sunni and Arabs. 30% of the Lebanese are non-Sunni and Arabs. And also 60% of current Iraqis are non-Sunni Arabs.

What I claim though is that both Lebanese Muslims and Iraqi Muslims weren't Arabs originally, but a result of centuries-long cultural and identity genocide. These attempts to eradicate non-Arab minorities in the Arabs world continues well into the 21st century, and I gave here several examples.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

so let say palestinians are cannaties, cannaties was there before the jews LOL

[Erikl]

so let say palestinians are cannaties, cannaties was there before the jews LOL

You have no proof that Palestinians are indeed Canaanites, because they lost any meaningful connection to that culture (if they ever had one).

Also, you have no proof that the majority of Jews weren't Canaanites that converted to Judaism, as back in the 1st century AD Judaism was a very popular religion in the eastern Mediterranean.

Judging from the last known ethnic groups before Arabization and Islamization took place in the 7th century, we know that there were three main groups in where is now Israel:

-Byzantine Greeks.

-Samaritans.

-Jews.

In the 7th century there were as many as 150,000 Jews in Israel. About 500,000 Samaritans. And about 1 million Byzantine Greeks. This region experienced massive immigration of Bedouin from north Arabia, Mongols, and later on Crusaders.

In the beginning of the 19th century, there were only 200,000 people living in the three Ottoman districts that were later carved into British Palestine.

Also, in the early 20th century there was a vast immigration from surrounding Arab countries to the developing British Mandate (roughly on the same scale as Jewish immigration).

You have a lot of Palestinian last names which denote where these tribes came from:

Al-Misr - Egypt.

Al-Kurd - from the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq.

Al-Bosni - from Ottoman Bosnia.

Sudani - from Sudan.

Hurrani - from the Hurran region in southern Syria.

Etc.

In the late 19th century, Western visitors through the land recorded many, many different languages. It is well possible that all of these non-Arab groups became one, Arabic-speaking people which later in the 20th century developed a since of nationhood called Palestinian.

But there is no point in discussing ancient heritage, because even if it exist, and even if the majority of Palestinians are descendants of Jews and Samaritans (both Israelites), it's impossible to tell, as it was all lost.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

you are the one who was trying hardly to prove to me that syrians, palestinians, and lebanese are not arabs

but of (Aramaic, Phoenician, Canaanite) origins,

how quick did you flip your opinion, when i approved on that (for argument sake), and the result wasn't on your side still!

is it like every time i give you a room, you try to expand more

so now where this people came from, aliens? , let's just say they have no pre historic origins!!!

yeah now i feel how palestinians feel

how come the people whom been living on this region and didn't gave it up, have to be kicked out,

and you the jews who didn't care and was Scattered in europ and every where else, have no shame

in comeing back so so late and delayed, and you just want every one out of here, and how can we be sure

that you are actually a real jews whom ancestors was living here in (pre history)

plus the (Aramaic, Phoenician, Canaanite) was here befor the jews, and you have two options:

if the jews are a new race, then you lost your argument becouse the (Aramaic, Phoenician, Canaanite) was here before you

and if the jews are of (Aramaic, Phoenician, Canaanite) then just admit it and stop calling your race a (jew) and you will

be just like everybody else here in the region without any superiority

Edited September 3, 2011 by the-Unexpected-Soul

[Wyvernkeeper]

Unexpected Soul, Your own Syrian government oppresses Arabs on a daily basis... Perhaps that should be your foremost consideration..

But you would rather blame the Jews I suppose... Hardly surprising!

Also why are you deliberately refusing to understand the points that Erik is making when he writes in a far more articulate fashion that yourself. His points are coherent, you seem to base your 'logic' upon circular reasoning and intentional cherry picking of facts.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

Unexpected Soul, Your own Syrian government oppresses Arabs on a daily basis... Perhaps that should be your foremost consideration..

But you would rather blame the Jews I suppose... Hardly surprising!

Also why are you deliberately refusing to understand the points that Erik is making when he writes in a far more articulate fashion that yourself. His points are coherent, you seem to base your 'logic' upon circular reasoning and intentional cherry picking of facts.

because i struggle with english, i'm using google translator,

i'm just playing his game, i don't care about pre history, he jumped and said that certain people are not arabs but Canaanite

i told him that's okay, Canaanite was there before the jews,and suddenly these people are not Canaanites any more !

[Wyvernkeeper]

because i struggle with english, i'm using google translator,

i'm just playing his game, i don't care about pre history, he jumped and said that certain people are not arabs but Canaanite

i told him that's okay, Canaanite was there before the jews,and suddenly these people are not Canaanites any more !

Read what he wrote again, I think you have missed the point.