Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ reporter says Palestinians must make ‘concessions… they have long avoided’

US Politics
on 234 Comments

The front page of the New York Times today carries a long news analysis by Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren on the Palestinians’ bid for international recognition. The thrust of the article is that the Palestinians are going too far, too fast.

We learn that the strategy has “upset Washington,” and a former Israeli general at a pro-Israel DC thinktank explains that the world is being “ushered into a new era of political and legal conflict” — and that’s “a dangerous game.”

But let me focus on two egregious statements in the article. Second paragraph:

International recognition, by 135 countries and counting, is what Palestinians are betting could eventually force changes on the ground — without their leaders having to make the concessions or assurances they have long avoided.

I have a question for the Times. What “concessions” should an occupied people make whose land has been continuously stolen and whose people are routinely being killed extrajudicially and jailed without trial?

As for “long avoided,” the PLO recognized Israel more than 25 years ago, inside the 1967 borders. What more assurances does Israel need?

And late in the piece there is this sop to Israel over possible war crimes charges:

Israel, which has already undertaken 13 criminal investigations of its military’s behavior during this summer’s war with Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, could also deter the International Criminal Court by proving its own justice system deals seriously with suspected offenders.

Don’t bet on it. Consider how well these investigations have gone in the past. Remember the Gaza onslaught of ’08-09, when hundreds of Palestinian civilians were killed and the world demanded accountability (of both Israeli and Palestinian forces)? Human Rights Watch tells us:

To date, neither Israel nor Hamas has held the perpetrators of these violations to account, despite recommendations… that Israel and Hamas conduct credible, independent investigations.

In Israel, only one soldier has been convicted for a wartime abuse: he got seven months in prison for the theft of a credit card.

The New York Times should have provided this “context,” so we could judge how well these investigations are likely to go.

James North
About James North

Other posts by .


Posted In:

234 Responses

  1. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 6, 2015, 10:38 am

    “In Israel, only one soldier has been convicted for a wartime abuse: he got seven months in prison for the theft of a credit card. ”

    I think he bought beer with it.

    The IDF seems to take looting by its troops much more seriously than killing. It’s almost like they’re saying “hey, guys, don’t steal from the natives…that’s the government’s job!”

    As to the “investigations” the only purpose they serve is to provide Israel’s supporters with the claim that Israel is a nation of laws and on one is above them. But has any IDF personnel ever served significant jail time for murder of an Arab? No, never.

    • mariapalestina
      mariapalestina
      January 7, 2015, 1:09 pm

      That was just one of many crimes committed by IDF commandos who attacked civilian passengers on the first Freedom Flotilla, killing ten unarmed passengers on board MAVI MARMARA. These pirates stole cameras, money, credit cards & cell phones from passengers on all the boats. I guess murder was OK; using a stolen credit card not OK.

  2. Boomer
    Boomer
    January 6, 2015, 10:39 am

    Perhaps the quotation marks should go around “reporter” instead of around “NYT.”

    As with the recent deplorable piece by Dennis Ross, it is good that NYT airs these perspectives. It is good that people can clearly see what mentality, what morality, what values have shaped U.S. policy for so many years.

  3. John O
    John O
    January 6, 2015, 11:14 am

    Once again, the NYT readers’ comments are instructive. How long can they keep on offending them like this? You can bet that for every reader who comments or recommends a post online there are a score more who quietly agree.

  4. Atlantaiconoclast
    Atlantaiconoclast
    January 6, 2015, 11:17 am

    Stop reading the NYTimes! I avoid all mainstream media. I can’t take the lies anymore. Eventually, if enough of us leave their viewing or reading pool, they will have to change.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 6, 2015, 1:11 pm

      “Eventually, if enough of us leave their viewing or reading pool, they will have to change.”

      Unfortunately, if the newspaper or media outlet’s owners determine that the message is worth the monetary loss, it’ll keep on going. And if there isn’t some other revenue stream to the publication which can keep it going…

  5. joemowrey
    joemowrey
    January 6, 2015, 11:38 am

    “The New York Times should have provided this context, so we could judge how well these investigations are likely to go.”

    Once again, a writer who assumes that the NYT is something other than a blatant propaganda tool. Why we continue to legitimize this rag is beyond me. The only thing that should be written about the Times, the only time it should be quoted or referenced as concerns Israel or any foreign policy issue, is to point out the lies and misinformation that are its stock in trade. North does this, but then he reinforces the notion that the Times is an actual News source by suggesting that all we need to do is remind them that they should provide a context for their propaganda smears. This is particularly true of any thing written by Judi Rudoren. To even suggest that she is a journalist is offensive. Her articles are so absurdly transparent as to be downright criminal. She should be ridiculed and dismissed out of hand.

  6. Les
    Les
    January 6, 2015, 11:38 am

    Any Times reporter who actually reported on Israel’s neve ending efforts to wipe out the Palestinians whould soon be canned. Faster if the reporter were Jewish.

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 6, 2015, 7:01 pm

      Can Rudoren be unaware of what this will do to her reputation? Oh well, she would probably say ‘I got two words for you, Mooser: Judith Fucking Miller!’

  7. W.Jones
    W.Jones
    January 6, 2015, 1:08 pm

    The “pro-Israeli” position is that the Palestinians must agree to Israeli demands that Palestinians mus have no army, and since Palestinians don’t agree and Israelis have no compulsion to make peace, then negotiations are deadlocked.

    If Palestinians do accept Israeli demands, what is to say that the settler movement will stop and so will other abuses? The Israeli government and the international community has done such a good job blocking the settlers and protecting Palestinians’ rights so far, that when Palestinians take the step of agreeing that the Israeli government can have total military control, block the refugees, and everything else, that there will be no question of stopping the settler movement and protecting Palestinian rights. Right?

    The “pro-Israeli”/Dennis Ross/Rudoren position is at best naive about Palestinians’ rights. But they already downplay abuses of Palestinians and the NAKBA, so it’s not surprising.

    • annie
      annie
      January 6, 2015, 1:58 pm

      “pro-Israeli” position is that the Palestinians must agree to Israeli demands that Palestinians mus have no army,

      palestine already agreed to a de-militarized state. exposed once in the palestine papers and another time in 2011 in their proposal requested by the quartet.

  8. JustJessetr
    JustJessetr
    January 6, 2015, 1:13 pm

    This is the hard-nosed business of peace-making. Both sides have to give up something they don’t want to give up. Even if one side has something they shouldn’t have to start with.

    • annie
      annie
      January 6, 2015, 1:22 pm

      israel has already taken everything from palestine. you can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip. israel has to return some of what it’s stolen including palestinian riparian rights, lots of things. the whole “both sides” narrative is a hasbara talking point. it’s never gonna fly. remember the palestine papers? they all ready offered israel everything. the only thing israel would settle on is palestinians moving to jordan. we’re not idiots.

      • JustJessetr
        JustJessetr
        January 6, 2015, 1:28 pm

        Both sides claim to have agreed to peace and the other side didn’t accept. So now what?

        Yes, Israel has to give up something. But they won’t do it without at least the appearance of the PA doing the same. What will that be? Forget rhetoric and supply something tangible.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 6, 2015, 6:48 pm

        “you can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip.”

        But as you pointed out to me on another thread, you can squeeze blood out of a Palestinian. So the concessions could included a couple of pints of blood and an organ or two from each Palestinian as a contribution to the Israeli spare parts trade.

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 6, 2015, 7:17 pm

        “Yes, Israel has to give up something. But they won’t do it without at least the appearance of the PA doing the same. What will that be? Forget rhetoric and supply something tangible.”

        If we do, does that make Israel a moral beacon and a light unto the nations? Or maybe just a blackmailer?
        Such high aspirations you have for the Jewish State. But of course, the chance to sound like a thug in a cheap gangster movie (“Forget rhetoric and supply something tangible” Blow it out your ass, Jesset) is one a Zionist never misses. That’s what makes it all worth it.

        Oh, that and Holocaust Mad-Libs, I guess.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 7, 2015, 7:20 am

        JustJessetr ” Israel has to give up something”

        The Palestinians ask only for their LEGAL rights, which does not involve Israel giving up anything Israeli

        ” But they won’t do it without at least the appearance of the PA doing the same”

        Palestine is ready to conceded the 56% of Palestine Israel proclaimed May 15th 1948 and is also willing to accept only 22% of what remained for peace with Israel http://pages.citebite.com/e9p5s8u2yhcd A point people like you MUST ignore to continue posting your idiotic propaganda mantras

        “What will that be? Forget rhetoric and supply something tangible”

        The majority of Palestinian territory isn’t tangible? WOW! Going for the greed record R U ?

    • piotr
      piotr
      January 6, 2015, 1:36 pm

      In my mother tongue, this type of situation is described as “negocjacje [dialog] dupy z batem”, which translates ” negotiations [dialogue] of an arse with a whip”. Note the favorite pundit phrase “necessary painful concessions”.

      • Boomer
        Boomer
        January 6, 2015, 4:07 pm

        @piotr, re “negotiations [dialogue] of an arse with a whip”

        interesting, and certainly an apt expression.

        As for “painful concessions,” for as long as I can recall, the pain and the concessions have been very much one-sided.

    • Boomer
      Boomer
      January 6, 2015, 4:11 pm

      This isn’t about “peace making.” It’s not a war. It’s about the steady, inexorable process of stealing land and resources, “redeeming the land,” aka “ethnic cleansing.”

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        January 6, 2015, 4:14 pm

        It’s about piss-taking. Zionism is a complete joke

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      January 6, 2015, 6:01 pm

      The Israelis demand that the Palestinians give up any presence in Jerusalem, completely abandon the “right of return,” accept the big settlement blocs, accept Israeli control of borders, water and airspace, and formally renounce any possibility of seeking a better deal at a later date. In exchange they will evacuate a few more small isolated settlements (with maximum drama), allow a modest expansion of the ghettoes under PA control, and grant the formal dignity of a “Palestinian state” (Palestinostan). They are living in cloud-cuckoo land to imagine that the PA could retain the minimum of legitimacy that it needs to perform its functions for Israel if it signs such a lopsided settlement. But then they are used to having their own way in everything. To discover that the Palestinians do have a few factors working in their favor and that they are not quite so totally at the mercy of Israel as they thought is therefore painful to them and they talk gibberish about how terrible it is that the Palestinians have some leverage.

  9. pabelmont
    pabelmont
    January 6, 2015, 1:29 pm

    I wonder who else, on what other story, finds the NYT to be a propaganda machine? It can hardly be only I/P, can it? In the 1980s, NYT did a better job. Sometime since then they’ve joined the ranks of the hasbaristas (on at least this topic).

    • G. Seauton
      G. Seauton
      January 6, 2015, 11:38 pm

      The Times has been conducting a major propaganda campaign on the events of the past year in Ukraine. See some of the recent articles in Consortium News (consortiumnews.com), an excellent independent news source, as well as comments by Stephen Cohen, professor of Russian Studies at Princeton. (Cohen has been interviewed on Democracy Now! on this topic.)

      Times coverage of economics — with the exception of the columns of Paul Krugman — is less propagandistic than simply piss-poor. See the comments of Dean Baker on his blog Beat the Press at cepr.net.

      Besides, Noam Chomsky has taken the Times to task for decades for whitewash and propagrandistic coverage of just about every American intervention since Vietnam (and before).

      So yes, there’s quite a bit of evidence of the Times’ propaganda efforts in a number of areas.

  10. W.Jones
    W.Jones
    January 6, 2015, 1:45 pm

    The NY Times is pushing this line in reaction to the Palestinians’ joining the ICC that Palestinians can *now* being charged by the ICC”

    But the path forward may be slow and bumpy. International Criminal Court investigations take years, and the court’s involvement also opens Palestinians to war-crimes charges for, among other things, firing rockets at Israeli civilians. Shurat HaDin, an Israeli legal group, filed complaints with the Hague-based court on Monday against three Palestinian officials, including the prime minister and security chief, after earlier doing so against Mr. Abbas and Khaled Meshal of Hamas.
    ~From Rudoren’s article

    Palestinians Set to Seek Redress in a World Court

    But the step could have major repercussions, not least because Palestinian officials could also be charged by the court. “It is the Palestinian Authority — which is in a unity government with Hamas, an avowed terrorist organization that, like ISIS, perpetrates war crimes — that needs to be concerned about the International Criminal Court in The Hague,” Mr. Netanyahu said in a statement after the signing.

    Shurat HaDin, an Israeli legal group, has already filed war-crimes complaints at The Hague against Hamas. Mr. Abbas said Wednesday night that the Palestinian move meant that other Palestinian officials “will be able to be sued as well.” Naftali Bennett, Israel’s economy minister, said that Mr. Abbas, too, could find himself charged. He warned in a statement, “Someone who has terrorism smeared all over his head should not stand in the sun.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/01/world/middleeast/palestinians-to-join-international-criminal-court-defying-israeli-us-warnings.html?mabReward=RI%3A11

    If the ICC wants to stay credible among people, including its cosmopolitan intellectual base, in the rest of the world the ICC would not focus on detaining Abbas or Palestinian officials, because people, particularly those intellectuals, in the rest of the world see the Israeli state as the aggressor and abuser. I understand that the argument could be made that Abbas or others were involved in terrorism at some point, but the rest of the world is looking at Israeli abuses as the main aggression. Besides that, if the ICC wanted to detain Palestinians, I don’t see why they wouldn’t have already just because their country wasn’t a member. After all, I don’t think Serbia needed to have joined the ICC for the ICC to charge Milosevic.

    I see the NY Times as needlessly trumpeting a claim that the beneficial step of joining the ICC would be inherently adverse. But this is mistaken, since the Palestinians, not the Israelis, see it as beneficial. So why would Rudoren and the NY Times want to portray joining the ICC as inherently threatening to Palestinians?

    • Whizdom
      Whizdom
      January 16, 2015, 5:13 pm

      Heh ShuratHaDin has sued Jimmy Carter and the Presbyterian Church. They sued Carter over alleged inaccuracies in his book under NYC consumer protection statutes protected consumers from misleading facts.

      The ICC declined to investigate the Mavi Marmara massacre because *only* 10 civilian deaths didn’t rise to the level of severity to trigger jurisdiction.

  11. mondonut
    mondonut
    January 6, 2015, 1:48 pm

    “I have a question for the Times. What “concessions” …”

    1. Jerusalem
    2. RoR

    • Mooser
      Mooser
      January 6, 2015, 7:03 pm

      Ah, it’s the Palestinians who can give Jerusalem to the Israelis? I did not know that.

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 6, 2015, 10:28 pm

        You were unaware that the Palestinians demand the division of Jerusalem? That they have made it a red line issue? I seriously doubt that. But nice attempt at a snarky comment.

      • annie
        annie
        January 7, 2015, 12:12 am

        demand the division of jerusalem? you mean relinquish their right for their capital there so jews can continue ethnically cleansing palestine from the very people who built the city?

        oh no, you gotta another thing coming. that aint gonna happen big shot. how ’bout palestine buy you out. what’s jerusalem worth to you, name you price. and don’t say it’s not for sale, that line’s been taken.

        what chutzpa!

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 7, 2015, 7:10 pm

      @ mondonut
      // What “concessions” …”//

      “1. Jerusalem
      2. RoR”

      2) They’re Israelis who have RoR to Israel as it was proclaimed May 15th 1948 in order to be recognized “as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947” as requested, by the Israeli Government!

      1) Jerusalem is legally a part of the Arab territories according to the binding Laws emphasized in UNSC res 476 and;
      corpus separatum was never instituted and;
      Israel’s territorial acquisitions by war and its unilateral annexations of non-Israeli territory acquired by war are ALL illegal!

      You keep posting propaganda nonsense! Why?

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 7, 2015, 9:42 pm

        @talknic You keep posting propaganda nonsense! Why?
        ——————————————
        In a futile attempt to provide some balance in this echo chamber that you and your friends have constructed (“To publish a diversity of voices to promote dialogue on these important issues.” Flat out lie )

        There is nothing in 476 that defines part of Jerusalem as the State of Palestine. There is nothing that precludes it from finally being recognized as Israel by treaty. It does refer to Arab territories (noticeably avoiding the name of a State, thereby admitting it is not Palestine) but I reject your RACIST conclusion that it therefore belongs to Arabs.

      • annie
        annie
        January 7, 2015, 10:33 pm

        There is nothing in 476 that defines part of Jerusalem as the State of Palestine. There is nothing that precludes it from finally being recognized as Israel by treaty. It does refer to Arab territories (noticeably avoiding the name of a State, thereby admitting it is not Palestine) but I reject your RACIST conclusion that it therefore belongs to Arabs.

        There is nothing in 476 that defines Jerusalem as the jewish state. There is nothing that precludes it from finally being recognized as The State of Palestine. I reject your RACIST conclusion that it therefore belongs to Jews.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478

        United Nations Security Council Resolution 478, adopted on 20 August 1980, is one of seven UNSC resolutions condemning Israel’s attempted annexation of East Jerusalem. In particular, UNSC res 478 notes Israel’s non-compliance with UNSC res 476[1] and condemned Israel’s 1980 Jerusalem Law which declared Jerusalem to be Israel’s “complete and united” capital, as a violation of international law. The resolution states that the Council will not recognize this law, and calls on member states to accept the decision of the council. This resolution also calls upon member states to withdraw their diplomatic missions from the city.

        The resolution was passed with 14 votes to none against

        (“To publish a diversity of voices to promote dialogue on these important issues.” Flat out lie )

        you need to review the entire comment policy. we don’t promote dialogue denying the holocaust nor nakba denial. we don’t debate whether israel has committed ethnic cleansing. you can’t say “there is no ethnic cleansing” (your words) on this site when israel blatantly steals land, demolishes homes, builds jewish only settlements on palestinian land after having expelled palestinians while the judaization of jerusalem is in full swing. you can’t do that here. you have to get creative if you want to insert racist ideas seeded with or from this lie in order to disguise it, otherwise we won’t publish it. so my advise to you would be to review the comment policy and especially avoid violating the rules surrounding the most inflammatory accusations and denials.

        also, unlike dkos, we don’t publish reams of bandwidth debating comment policy or moderation here, it clogs the threads and is distracting. it’s rather non negotiable sans contacting adam or phil.

        this echo chamber that you and your friends have constructed

        you’re free to leave anytime. there must be something about us you like, or perhaps you just prefer environments for masochistic reasons. but you can’t win here. the deck is stacked against you because we have truth on our side. ciao

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 8, 2015, 12:37 am

        @annie

        Hmmm…
        I never claimed that 476 defined what was Jewish or Israeli, I was simply replying to Talknic’s bogus interpretation. And you are correct, all or part of it could be Palestine by treaty, but that is hardly a position endorsed on this blog, it is mondocorrect to declare East Jerusalem as Palestinian.

        And I have read the entirety of the comment policy including the part concerning personal attacks which you personally routinely ignore in favor of your like minded friends. Rarely does a pro-Israeli comment pass without torrents of juvenile name calling (who says stupid, stupid man anyway?). It is abundantly clear that the site preference is not to encourage discussion between opposing views but to chase off whoever disagrees.

        But of course this is Adam and Phil’s site and they make the rules. And they obviously give you wide latitude in interpreting those rules. Including an overly generous interpretation of site violation. BTW, nothing in comments policy about ethnic cleansing so I guess you get to make up some of your own rules.

        So lets stick with bare facts. Muslim population of Jerusalem…
        1967 54,963
        2011 281,000
        That’s strange, it seems to be increasing.

        And regarding “Judaization”, Jerusalem has been majority Jewish for over a century and the Jewish people are indigenous to the area. That’s liking making water wet.

      • Whizdom
        Whizdom
        January 16, 2015, 5:15 pm

        The Muslim population of Jerusalem has expanded since 1967 largely because Israel has on at least three occasions redefined the municipal boundaries outward.

  12. eljay
    eljay
    January 6, 2015, 1:48 pm

    Like all Zio-supremacists, Ms. Rudoren would like for the victim to make more concessions to the rapist: Less struggle, keep herself clean and pretty, show more appreciation.

    Meanwhile, the rapist is absolved of all responsibility and accountability for his past and ON-GOING crimes. After all, he’s a “moral beacon” who’s just exercising his “right” of “self-determination”.

  13. hophmi
    hophmi
    January 6, 2015, 4:00 pm

    Do you ever actually read the whole article, or just the parts that support your view? The thrust of the article was that Palestinian efforts internationally are putting pressure on Israel.

    “And late in the piece there is this sop to Israel over possible war crimes charges”

    How is this a sop? It’s merely a statement of the complementarity principle. The ICC cannot step in when national investigations have taken place or are ongoing.

    • just
      just
      January 6, 2015, 5:13 pm

      Israel’s “national investigations” are a complete and total FARCE.

      • Kay24
        Kay24
        January 6, 2015, 11:29 pm

        Israel’s investigations fizzle into nothing. Any criminal that has perpetrated crimes against an Arab is treated like a privileged citizen, and never held accountable for any crime.
        It is indeed all a farce, a false show of fooling the world it is so concerned about the crime, that it adheres to international laws, and holds endless internal investigations. We know how far that goes. Time these international bodies ignored these stalling tactics, did not allow the US to influence them, and independently continued their investigations, which should end with holding the criminals accountable.

    • amigo
      amigo
      January 6, 2015, 6:47 pm

      “The ICC cannot step in when national investigations have taken place or are ongoing. ” hopknee

      Nonsense.

      “As a court of last resort, any ICC investigation will defer to national proceedings, by reference to the principle of complementarity. In order then to protect its nationals from possible ICC prosecution Israel must itself undertake timely, genuine and independent investigations into the crimes of its nationals in the “State of Palestine.”

      http://electronicintifada.net/content/what-would-happen-if-palestine-joined-international-criminal-court/13783

      Note! timely, genuine and independent , (not the IDF ).

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 6, 2015, 7:00 pm

        more food for thought hopknee.

        “It was the explicit recognition of the criminal nature of the “transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” (Article 8.2.b.vii) which led Israel to vote in 1998 against the adoption of the Rome Statute.

        Israel’s chief delegate at Rome, Eli Nathan, said “can it really be held that such an action as that listed in Article 8 above really ranks among the most heinous and serious war crimes, especially as compared to the other, genuinely heinous ones listed in Article 8?”

        The 2013 report of a UN Human Rights Council Fact-Finding Mission confirmed that “The transfer of Israeli citizens into the OPT [occupied Palestinian territories], prohibited under international humanitarian law and international criminal law, is a central feature of Israel’s practices and policies,” and that Palestine’s ratification of the Rome Statute “may lead to accountability for gross violations of human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law and justice for victims.”

        Israeli civilians are being transferred into settlements, whose seizure or construction gives rise to the applicability of two additional war crimes relating to Palestinian property rights, as noted in the Goldstone report.
        140820-gaza-city-bus.jpg

        These are the war crimes of “Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly” (Article 8.2.a.iv) and of “Destroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war” (Article 8.2.b.xiii). It is difficult to see what defense any indicted Israeli political or military commanders can rely upon in the face of these charges.

        http://electronicintifada.net/content/what-would-happen-if-palestine-joined-international-criminal-court/13783

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 6, 2015, 7:06 pm

        “more food for thought hopknee.”

        Hophmi never eats food for thought, it might effect his appetite!

        But I would like to get it straight about all the poor schlimazels that Israel (“The transfer of Israeli citizens into the OPT”) allows into the ‘settlements’? On what basis do these folks believe that the Government of Israel will go to any length and all lengths to eventually incorporate them into Israel?
        Okay, it’s just a tangent, but that has always mystified me, and maybe somebody could explain it.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 6, 2015, 7:11 pm

        Hophmi never eats food for thought, it might effect his appetite! ” Mooser

        Or worse still .Soak up the ziocaine and cause reduced desired effects.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 6, 2015, 7:48 pm

        “On what basis do these folks believe that the Government of Israel will go to any length and all lengths to eventually incorporate them into Israel?.Okay, it’s just a tangent, but that has always mystified me, and maybe somebody could explain it. Mooser

        Yahweh is great.

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 7, 2015, 7:46 am

      hophmi ” The thrust of the article was that Palestinian efforts internationally are putting pressure on Israel”

      So what? Negotiations haven’t worked, Israel just keeps on upping the ante with demands that have no legal basis and continues to create its obstructive illegal facts on the ground.

      UNSC resolutions haven’t worked, Israel simply ignores the binding International Laws they emphasize and re-affirm. Never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

      Palestinian offers of to accept only 22% of their rightful territory for peace with Israel haven’t worked, Israel simply ignored the offers and kept on building its illegal facts on the ground.

      What would you suggest that the Palestinians should do to get their LEGAL rights?

  14. just
    just
    January 6, 2015, 5:53 pm

    Time for Max to have a front- pager in the NYT after the ‘unmasking’ of Ross and the screed from Rudoren.

    Just saying.

  15. Kay24
    Kay24
    January 6, 2015, 11:19 pm

    You realize how disconnected these zio journalists are when you read their ridiculous articles.

    Never in the history of a military occupation will one find the brutal occupier expecting the occupied to give in so much, sacrifice so much, pretending to be the victim, and expecting the majority of the powerless people to keep assuring the OCCUPIER (the side with the power, brutal armed forces and the deadliest weapons) that IT will be secure and safe. This is sheer bull shet, and Rudoren rolls in it. When it comes to the I/P situation, the NYT’s has lost all credibility, for publishing totally biased articles, all showing concern not for human rights and basic rights, but for protecting a war criminal.

  16. Bornajoo
    Bornajoo
    January 7, 2015, 10:45 am

    Atlantaiconoclast, joemowrey and G Seauton, for what it’s worth I fully agree with you. The Nyt is a disgraceful piece of Establishment propaganda designed to make you think it is a genuine left leaning intellectual and honest news source.

    This has recently been confirmed again by tracking it’s coverage of the situation in Ukraine (as G. seauton pointed out). The Nyt along with nearly all the msm is printing the false crap dictated by the evil doers in Washington and has nothing to do with reality, just as we see with the i/p issue

    I tend to stay away from the msm as a real news source these days but I track their coverage on a few issues.

  17. Robert in Israel
    Robert in Israel
    January 7, 2015, 4:36 pm

    The author asks a very legitimate question: Why should the Palestinians have to make concessions.

    The answer is that while the Palestinians are said to have nothing to lose, the Israelis have *everything* to lose. And therefore, if the Palestinians expect Israel to risk its entire future by giving land and control to them, they need to make concessions that ensure that the Palestinian entity (state or territory) does not constitute a major threat to the security of Israel.

    • mariapalestina
      mariapalestina
      January 7, 2015, 5:38 pm

      @RobertinIsrael

      If Israelis have “everything to lose” it’s because they have stolen just about everything in Palestine they could get their hands on, and they aren’t willing to give any of it back.

      “If the Palestinians expect Israel to risk its entire future by giving land and control to them…”

      The Palestinians have never expected Israel to give them land or anything else. They have merely asked for what is mandated under international law. They would like that which has been stolen from them to be returned.

      As for Israel “making sure the Palestinian entity does not constitute a major threat to the security of Israel” there is nothing on earth that will get Israel to ever feel secure. Feeling insecure is essential to Israel’s needs. Feeling insecure has justified every massacre conducted by Israel in Gaza, every attack on any Palestinian, every demolished Palestinian home, every illegal settlement built on Palestinian land, every denial of Palestinian human rights or human dignity. In short, every violation of international law committed by Israel is defended on the basis of its need to feel secure. Feeling insecure has garnered tens of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to protect Israel’s security.

      The ones who are desperately in need of security are the Palestinians.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 7, 2015, 7:55 pm

        First, I encourage you to read my response below to bornajoo. Second, your basic argument is that Israel has to make concessions because it is a big thief. But we don’t see it that way. In fact, many of us see it exactly the opposite. The Arabs maintained the occupation of the Jewish homeland and our dispossession and torture on and off for 1,400 years, and the Arabs who live here now are settlers. So why should we give them anything? So if we’re talking justice, the Jews should get everything. But if we’re talking about how to reach an agreement, both sides have to recognize each other’s concerns.

        Could I feel secure with a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip? Sure. Here are my minimal needs for that:

        1. All Palestinian leaders must forbid incitement to genocide of the Jews. Example: Palestinian preachers who encourage their listeners to prepare for the killing of all the Jews should be put in jail, not paid salaries. Palestinian media should also be forbidden from gross incitement. The current situation is the exact opposite.

        2. The leaders should announce that they are prepared for an eternal peace with Israel, and not just 10 years as limited by extremist Islamists. This attitude should be taught in schools, and not as taught now that one day they will conquer everything.

        3. The leaders should announce that in a permanent settlement, whatever number of Arabs are allowed to settle in Israel proper (<250k) will be the final number, and that future repatriations will have to suffice with settling in the Palestinian state.

        4. The leaders should announce that the Palestinian state will protect the rights of those Jews who choose to stay in those Jewish towns and villages that end up in Palestinian territory. They should not demand a Judenrein Palestinian state.

        5. No advanced weapons or missiles for the Palestinian army.

        I think those 5 conditions are all reasonable, and would suffice for nearly all Israelis in terms of providing the sense of security that is now totally lacking. The most important elements are those related to education and the media.

        One last point. Ultimately, I know that the Islamists and those sympathetic to Islamism, will never give up their fight. That's why I personally would like to see a 6th element, which I believe is actually the most important for success in the real Middle East. To wit, Palestinian preachers must preach about the natural Zionism of the Quran and the Islamic sources. If Palestinian Muslims (who are over 90% of the Palestinians after all) were to contemplate regularly on verses such as 5:21, where Moses says to the Children of Israel, "O My People, enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned you," and to quote the Islamic sources that explain that the Holy Land is Palestine, that would be invaluable in creating an atmosphere of peace and preparedness for an eternal rapprochement with the Children of Israel.

      • mariapalestina
        mariapalestina
        January 7, 2015, 9:42 pm

        Robert, I hate to break it to you, especially when you are so generously conceding your willingness, under certain “minimal” ludicrous conditions, to live with a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza…

        But that old two states idea is past its sell-by date. There is increasing acceptance, including among Palestinians in their homeland and in the diaspora, that it will be a single state. I know this is scary for people like you, Robert, who are so frightened of having to share your homeland with them, especially knowing it’s just a matter of time before Jews are a minority. But it’s coming, Robert, so get used to the idea.

        I know the One Democratic State, when it comes, won’t be exactly democratic, even as Israel today has never been exactly democratic. But Palestinians are very patient. They know they aren’t going anywhere. Someday they will be free.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 5:00 am

        Why is insisting that Palestinians not call for genocide “ludicrous”? Do you think it’s OK?

        I too believe that one day there will be a single state. The Muslims will have accepted the Quran’s statements about Allah’s designating the Holy Land for the Jews, and the Palestinians cum Israeli Arabs will have full political and religious rights, just as guaranteed in the current Israeli Declaration of Independence. But they will not have national rights, nor will they even want to assert such rigthts, just as I wouldn’t assert national rights if I chose to live in Jordan or Egypt. Civil rights are not the same as national rights. Just ask the Qataris, who are the minority in their own country, but the sole sovereigns. So I second the song you posted, Mariapalestina; a true change is gonna come.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 7, 2015, 8:40 pm

        >> Robert in Israel: … Second, your basic argument is that Israel has to make concessions because it is a big thief. But we don’t see it that way.

        Of course you don’t: You’re Zio-supremacists.

        >> In fact, many of us see it exactly the opposite.

        Of course you do: You’re Zio-supremacists.

        >> The Arabs maintained the occupation of the Jewish homeland …

        The geographic region of Palestine was not and is not the “Jewish homeland”. It was and is the homeland of people – non-Jews and Jews alike – born in or up to n generations removed from the geographic region of Palestine.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 7, 2015, 9:24 pm

        Gosh golly, you’re right, Bumblebye. This website is not about China or Tibet. Sadly for you, it’s also not about Grimms’ Fairy Tales or Khazars, so you too have to find another site. After all, this site doesn’t allow using outside examples or references. A wise policy indeed, for we wouldn’t want to overtax anyone’s brain with having to contemplate analogous situations or metaphors.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 8, 2015, 9:46 pm

        “The Arabs maintained the occupation of the Jewish homeland and our dispossession and torture on and off for 1,400 years, and the Arabs who live here now are settlers. So why should we give them anything? So if we’re talking justice, the Jews should get everything.”

        This is seriously loopy.

        It is rather like arguing that the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Vikings maintained the occupation of the Welsh homeland for 1,400 years, and the people who live in England are settlers. Welsh people like Shirley Bassey and Richard Burton have the right to take over Norwich and drive out people who were born there. (Or should the Welsh reclaim their lost Celtic homeland on the Upper Danube and drive out the Germanic, Slavic, and Magyar settlers?)

        Ancient Palestine is where the Jewish religion originated. It is the place where a bunch of ancient people who followed the Jewish religion lived. Indeed, many of the people living there now are their descendants.

        But how does that give Modern European and American Jews any rights there?
        If you claim that some of those Europeans are descended from the people who live there, and the rights come from a combination of religion and descent from previous residents, then you will find there are equally good non-Jewish claimants.

        Don’t forget, it is also where the Christian religion originated, and the ancestors of Palestinian Christians have lived there for (on your showing) 1400 years at least. Palestine was a Christian Kingdom for a while, so there are non-Palestinian Christians in Europe who are descended from Christians who were born in that Kingdom. They too will have a claim.

        Now you are much more sensible when you start arguing for peace education. You could start with all those crazy rabbis who incite violence against Arabs.

        And I’m glad you want a unified state in Palestine, though that will only come when Israeli Jews recognize the wrong they have done and accept that Palestinians have equal right to live there.

        “But they will not have national rights …. Civil rights are not the same as national rights.”

        Could you explain (a) what you mean by “national rights”, and (b) why Palestinians will not have them?

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 4:29 am

        Why do European and American Arabs claim they have a right of return and a right of sovereignty in the Holy Land? Just because their great-grandfather once lived there?

        The Palestinians proudly proclaim that they will never give up their claims, no matter how long they live outside Palestine. Why is that OK, but not for the Jews?

        Your comparison to Viking invaders doesn’t work. A better comparison would be if American Indians demanded being returned to their ancestral homelands that they were kicked out of. I support such claims. Ditto for the Aborigines and Australia.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 8, 2015, 11:43 pm

        Robert. that the fact that you and other zionist thieves don’t see yourselves as thieves is rather irrelevant. its an irrefutable fact you are.

        and that you see those 5 conditions as reasonable shows you for the thug you are

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 8:45 am

        It’s relevant if you want to correctly predict how we are likely to react to various actions. A thief who believes he’s a thief acts one way, while those who believe they are the ones who have been robbed will act quite differently.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 9, 2015, 11:26 pm

        “Why do European and American Arabs claim they have a right of return and a right of sovereignty in the Holy Land? Just because their great-grandfather once lived there? …Why is that OK, but not for the Jews?””

        You will have to ask them why they claim it. You might get different answers from each one. I would say that if they or their ancestors explicitly renounced their Palestinian citizenship, then they do not have that right. Those who or whose ancestors acquired another citizenship without such renunciation may (or may not) be able to claim Palestinian citizenship by right of descent.

        Note that they are able to show direct descent from Palestinian citizens.

        How many European or American Jews can produce family trees and supporting documents to show descent from citizens of Palestine?

        “A better comparison would be if American Indians demanded being returned to their ancestral homelands that they were kicked out of. … Ditto for the Aborigines and Australia.”

        Well, both the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines live in countries where it is recognized that they were wronged and where they now have full rights as equal citizens.

        Let’s see Israel follow that lead.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 8:25 pm

        Seriously? You want Israel to follow the lead of those who gave small-pox infest blankets to the native Americans, killed tens of thousands in wars, and moved the survivors hundreds of miles to more convenient lands? And you want us to follow the lead of those who decimated the Aboriginal population, and then stole babies from the surviving families?

        Sorry, but we Jews have no intention of doing what the British settlers did in America and Australia in order to set up their new countries in foreign lands.

        BTW, 20% of Israel’s population is Arab, and they DO have full civil rights. And we did it without the kind of mass murder that the British used, and without settling in a foreign land, but rather our eternal homeland, which we liberated as is the legitimate right of dispossessed nations.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 2:29 am

        @ robert. your seriously going to bring up the native americans? you do realize the native tribes are pro palestinian. they know who the indeginous people are. and its not you in your stolen house. so I ask why is it ok for some native population in your mind to get there land back but not the native population you currently support the occupation and disspossesion of. because as a jew of assumingly european orgin you are not native and have zero claim to palestine.

        its irrelevant before the law. i fully understand you and the rest of warcriminal terrorist country men’s motives. I’m a student of history you’d be wise to be one too. tyrant conquerors usually meet bloody ends and they always end up badly.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 11, 2015, 2:12 am

        “Sorry, but we Jews have no intention of doing what the British settlers did in America and Australia in order to set up their new countries in foreign lands.”

        “You Jews” did – and are still doing – that sort of thing to set your country in a land foreign to a lot of you.

        “BTW, 20% of Israel’s population is Arab, and they DO have full civil rights.”

        Except for 50 or so discriminatory laws and practices. Not much in the way of rights for those in the occupied territories, though.

        ” but rather our eternal homeland, which we liberated as is the legitimate right of dispossessed nations.”

        Jews in general are not a nation in any normal sense of the word (even if they call themselves one) but let that pass. Where do you get that idea that ‘dispossessed nations’ have a right to liberate their ‘homeland’? On what principles is this alleged right based? And does that right include the right to dispossess legitimate long-term residents?

        The Palestinians are far more a “nation” (nineteenth century connected group sense) than Jews are, but they do not have the right to drive out the Israeli Jews. They do have a right to live in Palestine (all of it, from the Jordan to the sea) as full and equal citizens.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 6:30 pm

        RoHa, you claimed that Israel has “50 or so discriminatory laws and practices” in response to my statement that Arab Israelis have full civil rights. Please cite even just 1 of the 50.

        Hint: Don’t bother quoting the laws found on the Adalah website (which of course is where you lifted the line about 50 or so laws). First, Adalah confuses affirmative action with violations of civil rights. That’s a false conclusion, but at least it’s not laughable. However, that’s just one part of Adalah’s dishonest claim. Here’s a great example of what I mean:

        Former Arab MK Azmi Bishari aided terrorist organizations, and when he knew he’d be prosecuted, he fled the country. Knesset members receive salary and benefits even when they’re abroad, and get a pension and certain funding, such as health insurance, for life. The Knesset realized that it was an oversight that an MK under suspicion of a serious crime could keep all his/her current salary, plus pension and benefits by simply skipping the country to avoid prosecution. So a law was passed to suspend all salary and benefits until an MK under serious investigation agrees to cooperate with the investigation and if need be go to trial. This is standard practice around the world, both in gov’ts and in businesses and schools. But Adalah has the nerve to label this law “Economic Discrimination”! It’s actually quite sick what Adalah is saying here. In general, Adalah attacks any law that Israel passes to make terrorism and supporting terrorism more difficult by claiming that it is “discriminatory”.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 11, 2015, 10:56 pm

        funny how the native voice you found was a christian zionist. can you find a non christian zionist one? again that you found one voice doesn’t negate the truth of mine statement that native american as a group show very high levels of support for the palestinians. both are oppressed indigenious peoples who were dispossessed by colonial forces.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 7:41 pm

        OK, how about this: http://www.firstnationsvoice.com/index.php?action=article_details&title=How+Israel+Changed+My+Life&id=303

        “How Israel Changed My Life”

        “The Israel trip assisted in a healing of our people’s past. Seeing how far the Israeli people have come in the development of their country and freedom healed the small part of me that was affected by the residential school system…. As First Nations people, we can learn from the Jewish people, and we too can accomplish a lot. We can overcome our past and become stronger as First Nations people. We can make changes on the reservations and come together as a community to give our children a positive future. We can work together to restore the lost connections that were broken in the dark era of residential schools.”
        (After doing some research, the “residential schools” were boarding schools where Indian children were indoctrinated with various forms of Christianity. I haven’t found yet what percentage identify with Christianity, but it seems that many do, though without foregoing their original spiritual beliefs.

        It’s interesting to note that the Wikipedia article states, “Native American spiritualism exists in a tribal-cultural continuum, and as such cannot be easily separated from tribal identity itself.” That really reminded me of Judaism and Jewish national identity.

        Be that as it may, my impression from the various hits I saw on Google is that most American Indian organizations don’t really feel very strongly about the Arab-Israeli conflict, but when one group or representative comes out in favor of one side, then Indians from that same tribe or association will come forth from the other. So ultimately I don’t think either Jews or Palestinians can legitimately claim a sizable following of American Indians.

    • RoHa
      RoHa
      January 7, 2015, 7:25 pm

      “they need to make concessions that ensure that the Palestinian entity (state or territory) does not constitute a major threat to the security of Israel. ”

      And how are concessions supposed to achieve that?

      The best way to ensure a state is not a threat to your state is to have friendly relations with that state. The Swedes do not see Norway or Denmark as security threats. The US does not expect to see columns of Canadian tanks pouring into North Dakota.

      And a good starting point for friendly relations is justice.

      • mariapalestina
        mariapalestina
        January 9, 2015, 7:04 pm

        For Robert’s comment above (no reply option showing there)

        “It’s relevant if you want to correctly predict how we are likely to react to various actions. A thief who believes he’s a thief acts one way, while those who believe they are the ones who have been robbed will act quite differently. ”

        Completely agree with you there, Robert. The road to hell must be littered with thieves & murderers & genocidal maniacs & terrorists & torturers & racists who saw themselves as blameless or misunderstood. Often they actually got away with their crimes (in this life anyway.) Sometimes, regardless of their personal conviction they are without guilt, the accused are held accountable based on the evidence, and it is left to others to render judgment.

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 7, 2015, 7:46 pm

      @ Robert in Israel ” the Israelis have *everything* to lose.

      Strange. There are no UNSC resolutions against anyone for ever having threatened Israel’s actual proclaimed and recognized borders because no one has.

      Although they refused to recognize Israel, (recognition is not mandatory) the surrounding states had “respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of” Israel and its “right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force” according to International Law and the UN Charter http://wp.me/PDB7k-6r#unscresolution242 (Israel’s boundaries were “recognized” before Israel joined the UN)

      All of Israel’s war have been fought in territories the Israeli Government itself claimed on May 22nd 1948 were “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

      ” if the Palestinians expect Israel to risk its entire future by giving land and control to them”

      Israel expecting to be able to illegally acquire other folks territory for its own self defense is A) Illegal, and; B) idiotic and; C) a cause for and of war and; D) the victims have a legal right to use violence against Israeli forces in order to restore their territory.

      Put simply, states, even if Jewish, cannot illegally acquire other folk’s territory for their own self defense.

      “they need to make concessions that ensure that the Palestinian entity (state or territory) does not constitute a major threat to the security of Israel”

      A) Palestine has never constituted a major threat to Israels security. Israel being in and illegally acquiring non-Israeli territory constitutes a threat to Israeli security!

      B) All states have an equal legal right to armed forces for their own protection

      C) Israel has been illegally acquiring Palestinian territory for the past 67 years, it is Palestine needs protecting, not Israel!

      D) Palestine offered at the UN in front of the world to accept only 22% of its rightful territory for peace with Israel. Israel ignored the offer and continued to expand its illegal facts on the ground.

      IOW You’re spouting sh*te!

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 7, 2015, 8:22 pm

        You completely missed my point about Israel having everything to lose. It is irrelevant if you are right that Israel is just a big thief. We want to live in security, whether you like it or not. You think we’re invincible. That’s very flattering, but we don’t think so at all. We see that we’ve lost over 20,000 soldiers and citizens in our wars with those who would happily destroy us. And we see that even with limited freedom of movement, Hamas’ missiles improve in quality and lethalness every couple of years. In the last war, Israel’s tourism industry was basically frozen. And that’s just with simple rockets. Do you seriously expect us to experiment with a full-blown state capable of launching far more powerful guided missiles? You can pretend that the Palestinians don’t want to harm Israeli civilians, but the truth is they do and they will. So if you want to ensure that there is never an agreement, just keep telling the Palestinians not to make any concessions.

        And BTW, I noticed your point “C” and its reference to 1947, so its clear you don’t think the Jews have any claim to their homeland or any national rights. Why do you deny the Jews the right to their homeland? Isn’t that racist?

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 8, 2015, 10:34 am

        Why do you deny the Jews the right to their homeland? Isn’t that racist? “Robert in Israel.

        Could you please provide us with a map of this so called Jewish Homeland .One that is recognised by the International community , that is.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 11:30 am

        Amigo, I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here, but for your convenience, here is the official UN map of Israel:
        http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/israel.pdf

        Like many Israelis, I don’t think these lines are just, but they are internationally recognized.

        Now I’ve got an exercise for you, Amigo. Could you please post a pre-20th-century reference to the Palestinians? I’d appreciate that.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 8, 2015, 10:52 am

        @ Robert in Israel “You completely missed my point about Israel having everything to lose”

        You don’t have a point about Israel having everything to lose. The Palestinians don’t claim anything Israeli. They ask for less than their legal rights and that Israel adhere to the law.

        “We want to live in security, whether you like it or not.”

        Israel’s leaders should have thought of that before they embarked on illegally acquiring, illegally annexing, illegally settling territories the Israeli Government claimed on May 22nd 1948 were “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

        You’re moaning to the wrong people buddy. Israel is responsible for your safety, but Israel can’t guarantee the safety of its citizens while it illegally claims occupied territories as its own and encourages its citizens to illegally settle in occupied territories in contravention of laws that were adopted to protect civilians, including those of the Occupying Power from the expected violent consequences of occupying another people and their territory.

        Go yell at the Israeli Government.

        “You think we’re invincible”

        Er, no pal, I don’t. No one is invincible. I do know for a fact that Israel has been more than capable of defending itself over the last 67 years. Not only has Israel defended its own territory, it has managed to illegally acquire some 50% of what remained of Palestine after Israel’s borders were proclaimed and recognized http://wp.me/pDB7k-Xk

        “We see that we’ve lost over 20,000 soldiers and citizens in our wars with those who would happily destroy us”

        When you illegally take other folks territory, while attempting to dispossess them of course they’d happily destroy you. Go moan to the Israeli Government!

        We were given given completely gratis, 56% of Palestine for our Jewish People’s Homeland state, more than enough territory for every Jewish person on the planet today.

        What remained of Palestine was according to the Israeli Government of May 22nd 1948 “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine” Not Israeli.

        “And we see that even with limited freedom of movement, Hamas’ missiles improve in quality and lethalness every couple of years”

        Statistics showing an increase in Israeli deaths from Hamas’ missiles would be nice … thx … I’ll wait ……

        Meanwhile, the occupied have a right to armed resistance. Go yell at the Israeli Government, they’re responsible for occupying non-Israeli territories and illegally claiming, illegally annexing and illegally settling in occupied territories. http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument

        ” In the last war, Israel’s tourism industry was basically frozen. And that’s just with simple rockets. “

        Tough. Go yell at the Israeli Government. Tell ’em to get out of all non-Israeli territory.

        BTW what ‘last war’? There has never been a peace treaty between Israel and Palestine, the same war between Israel and Palestine has been raging since 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) when Israel’s boundaries came into effect with Jewish forces under Plan Dalet already outside of those boundaries

        “Do you seriously expect us to experiment with a full-blown state capable of launching far more powerful guided missiles?”

        All states have equal right to self defense by arms. You expect people to live without defenses next to Israel, a rogue state that threatens by having nukes? A state in breach of hundreds of UNSC resolutions? A state that has been illegally acquiring other folks territories for 67 years?

        “You can pretend that the Palestinians don’t want to harm Israeli civilians, but the truth is they do and they will”

        So get out of their rightful territories. It is quite simple. They only claim 22% of what is rightfully theirs http://pages.citebite.com/e9p5s8u2yhcd Go yell at the Israeli Government

        BTW The IDF memorial site shows us that more Israeli military have been targeted, injured and killed than have Israeli civilians.

        “So if you want to ensure that there is never an agreement, just keep telling the Palestinians not to make any concessions”

        They’re not legally obliged to forgo any of their legal rights so Israel can keep what is not legally Israel’s. However, unlike Israel who has only offered to take non-Israeli territory, the Palestinians have offered in front of the world at the UN, to accept only 22% of their rightful territory for peace with Israel. http://pages.citebite.com/e9p5s8u2yhcd

        An incredibly generous offer. Israel ignored it and continued to illegally expand its illegal settlements. Go yell at the Israeli Government

        “And BTW, I noticed your point “C” and its reference to 1947, so its clear you don’t think the Jews have any claim to their homeland or any national rights. Why do you deny the Jews the right to their homeland? Isn’t that racist? “

        How clever … You’re spouting bullsh*te http://mondoweiss.net/profile/talknic

        We have our Jewish People’s homeland state, it was proclaimed and recognized as “an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947” it’s called Israel.

        Whatever lay outside Israel isn’t Israeli. For Israel to covet and steal what isn’t Israeli has and will continue to endanger Israelis.

        Neither Jews or Israelis are a race BTW

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 8, 2015, 10:53 am

        >> Robert in Israel: Why do you deny the Jews the right to their homeland?

        No-one denies the right of Jewish Americans to live in their homeland of America, of Jewish Germans to live in their homeland of Germany, of Jewish Israelis to live in their homeland of Israel, etc.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 5:37 pm

        Or of the Arabs to live in Arabia…

        BTW, calling us “Jews” means we are Judaeans, so the Land of Judah is where we should go.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 8, 2015, 1:33 pm

        Robert in Israel.
        Your map has Jerusalem in Israel.Jerusalem is not recognised as sovereign Israeli Territory by any nation except Israel which is evidenced by the absence of any Embassy of any other nation.Not even the USA.

        “Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980 (see Jerusalem Law) and the Golan Heights in 1981 (see Golan Heights Law) has not been recognised by any other country.[11] United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 declared the annexation of Jerusalem “null and void” and required that it be rescinded. United Nations Security Council Resolution 497 also declared the annexation of the Golan “null and void”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

        Map you link to is therefore not the UN officially recognised map of Israel.

        Nice try.

        “Now I’ve got an exercise for you, Amigo. Could you please post a pre-20th-century reference to the Palestinians? I’d appreciate that” RII.

        Don,t be an idiot.

        Talknic has already made several attempts to show you what Israel,s legal borders are . Please read his posts and stop wasting our time with your links to spurious maps.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 7:04 pm

        Typical of superficial thinkers like you to call me an idiot rather than admit that the term “Palestinian” originally referred to the Jews, and occasionally to the foreign invaders living here. The invention of the Palestinian national myth is central to the racist rejection of Jewish national rights, and since you are strongly attracted to that racist rejectionism, you encounter serious cognitive dissonance when historical facts run counter to your position. Hence the emotional outburst.

        And for the record, I do not think you are an idiot, but your emotionalism is blocking your ability to debate rationally. Disagree with me as much as you please, but eschew ad hominem attacks.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 8, 2015, 1:41 pm

        “Amigo, I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here, but for your convenience, here is the official UN map of Israel:
        link to un.org – “Robert in Israel

        Sorry to burst your zionist bubble but I suggest you read the note at the lower left corner of your map.Oh hell, let me save you the trouble.

        “The designations employed and the presentation of material on this
        map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the
        part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal
        status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities or
        concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.”

        Over to you bobby .

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 7:45 pm

        Amigo, you’re the one that asked the cryptic question about where there might be an internationally recognized Jewish homeland. With the map I was just trying to give some sort of answer. The standard caveat in the corner is just to prevent testy people like you from attacking them for any errors. The real point is that the UN voted Israel in as a country, and recognizes its right to exist right where it is. What is disputed is the status of the the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and East Jerusalem.

        Now perhaps what you’re trying to say is that the international community never recognized the concept of a Jewish homeland per se. Is that it? If so, read the preamble and articles 2 & 4 of the League of Nations Mandate forPalestine, which became the basis for the creation of Israel:
        http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

        You’ll see that the international community explicitly recognized the right of the Jews to reconstitute its national home, the most explicit quote being from the preamble:

        “recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;”

        That term “reconstitute” is political and legally significant. Mark it well.

        It should also be noted that UN Resolution 181 which allowed for the Jews and Arabs to declare their respective states derived its force from the guidelines set forth in the Mandate document. And 181 explicitly refers to “the Jewish State”, lest you claim that the UN only recognized a secular state coincidentally called “Israel”.

        Does that answer your question?

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 8, 2015, 8:57 pm

        “BTW, calling us “Jews” means we are Judaeans, so the Land of Judah is where we should go.”

        No, it doesn’t. It means you are followers of the Jewish religion, or descended from such. Yes, the religion gets its name from the place, but that no more implies that you should go to Judea than being a Welsh Methodist implies that you should go to Wales, or being Hindu implies that you should go to India.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        June 28, 2015, 8:38 am

        Hi RoHa, Just came across this comment of yours from January in my inbox. You would be right if being Jewish were defined strictly by beliefs. But as you know all too well, many Jews reject the religion outright while strongly affirming their Jewishness. Ever met a Christian who rejects Jesus and the NT? Ever meet a Muslim who hates Muhammad and the Quran? Illogical, right? But there are many Jews who reject and even hate Moses and the Torah. So how come they and everyone else considers them to be Jews?

        Simple answer: Jewishness is at its root a form of nationhood. Once upon a time, every nation had its national religion. Religion was as inseparable from nationhood as language, geography, biological connectedness and culture continue to be today. But when Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam became completely international, it became necessary to literally separate between church and state. After all, how could, for example, two Christian countries attack each other if they were one nation? Ironically, the West has little tolerance for religio-nationhood, even though the separation of church and state happened not out of principle, but out of the ad hoc need to justify attacking fellow Christian countries, and not out of some profound ethical awakening.

        So as I stated back in January, and unlike Welsh Methodists and Hindus, the Jews really are a nation: the Judaeans, AKA the Children of Israel — a nation that has lasted for three millennia, and G-d willing, will continue to blossom as a free and independent nation in all of its ancestral homeland forever. Amen.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 8, 2015, 9:02 pm

        >> Robert in Israel: Or of the Arabs to live in Arabia…

        If you mean “Or of the Jewish Saudi Arabians to live in Saudi Arabia”, correct.

        >> BTW, calling us “Jews” means we are Judaeans, so the Land of Judah is where we should go.

        No, calling you “Jews” means that either you converted to Judaism or are descended from someone who converted to Judaism. It’s a religion-based appellation. Your nationality is defined by the second part of the name (i.e., American, Israeli, Canadian, German, etc.).

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 4:44 am

        As I’ve explained elsewhere, your definition of “nation” is skewed by your cultural bias. The Jews are an ancient nation, and therefore religion is integral to the national identity. Ditto for other ancient nations like the Armenians. Modern nations had to reject religion as integral because they had to fight against other ethnic groups of the same religion. So it was natural to see religion as distinct. But that’s not a moral case, just a politically expedient one.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 8, 2015, 9:52 pm

        “The invention of the Palestinian national myth is central to the racist rejection of Jewish national rights”

        I’m not sure what you mean by “Jewish national rights”, but I presume they are founded on the invention of the Jewish national myth, which is central to the racist rejection of the rights of the Palestinians.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 8, 2015, 11:56 pm

        talknic. jews weren’t given a state. they illegally seized one

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 8:46 am

        Like it or not, the UN voted for Israel, and continues to host Israel as a member nation.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 8, 2015, 11:59 pm

        @ robert
        the term palestinian never meant jew. that’s be rather difficult considering the etymology of the word predates archeological evidence of a jewish state. the term means the samething its always meant a person who resides in palestine. you could argue it means legal resident. but no your point is nothing but a self serving lie palestinian never meant or refered to solely jews.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 9:07 am

        You ought to check your facts before you lie. Here’s just one example of thousands:
        https://books.google.co.il/books?id=BOg9AQAAMAAJ&q=palestinians&dq=palestinians&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XN-vVL9twaw9tsKAyAM&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBjge

        The term “Palestinians” was most often used to describe the Jews who lived in Palestine, as opposed to the Babylonian Jews. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a pre-20th century usage of “Palestinians” in reference to the Arabs of Palestine. But you’re welcome to search Google Books or any other database for such a rare reference.

        As for your other comment about the evidence for an ancient Jewish state, it does not even merit a response. OK, one: go read.

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 6:16 pm

        pjdude: the term means the samething its always meant a person who resides in palestine.

        exactly, regardless of religion.

        robert: You ought to check your facts before you lie. …The term “Palestinians” was most often used to describe the Jews who lived in Palestine

        your supporting link, to the 2009 book “A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Volume II” doesn’t support an idea or notion it was “most often used to describe the Jews who lived in Palestine”.

        plus, it’s lost on no one you called pjdude a liar and then repeated what his allegation!

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 9, 2015, 5:22 am

        @ Robert in Israel “The standard caveat in the corner is just to prevent testy people like you from attacking them for any errors”

        No buster, it’s so people like you can’t claim it to be a UN map “concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.” including Israel! The fact that Israel didn’t even exist as a legal entity at the time the map was drawn seems to escape you.

        “The real point is that the UN voted Israel in as a country, and recognizes its right to exist right where it is. “

        Uh huh. That recognition did not include any territories the Israeli Government of May 22nd 1948 said were “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

        “What is disputed is the status of the the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and East Jerusalem”

        The word ‘disputed’ is not apparent in any UNSC resolution on the question of Palestine. In fact, the UNSC says “Israel, the Occupying Power”

        Also used to describe Israel’s actions are no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;”

        Even the Israeli Government used the term “occupied”, way back in 1948 Jerusalem Declared Israel-Occupied City- by Israeli Government Proclamation 12 Aug 1948

        And the Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 Art. 42 SECTION III tells us that “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army”

        ” read the preamble and articles 2 & 4 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which became the basis for the creation of Israel”

        A number of problems arise when someone wades around in Zionist bullsh*te then puts both their feet in their gaping wailgob.

        1) The name of the mandate for example is “The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and throughout the entire document there is no mention of a Jewish ‘state’

        2) First line refers to the provisional recognition of Palestinian statehood per the LoN Covenant Article 22 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp#art22

        “You’ll see that the international community explicitly recognized the right of the Jews to reconstitute its national home, the most explicit quote being from the preamble””

        Uh huh … As Palestinian citizens per Article 7 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp#art7

        “It should also be noted that UN Resolution 181 which allowed for the Jews and Arabs to declare their respective states derived its force from the guidelines set forth in the Mandate document.”

        Care to quote where in UNGA res 181 … thx … I’ll wait

        One cannot be independent while under any form of control by another party. Under the Mandate the British administered Palestine (for Palestinians). It was not within the mandate to form two states and a corpus seperatum. The Mandate for Palestine had to end before either party could declare independence.

        “And 181 explicitly refers to “the Jewish State””

        That’s right, a Jewish State and an Arab State, neither of which had at that time been named.

        “lest you claim that the UN only recognized a secular state coincidentally called “Israel””

        Problem with your bullsh*te. The UN does not recognize states. There is no UN vote to recognize states. The UN admits (or not) already recognized states to its membership.

        More problems with your ziodrool. UNGA res 181 was written BEFORE any state was proclaimed and before any state was recognized.

        Nothing you have brought to the table survives scrutiny, nor does any of it justify Israel’s illegal acquisition of or its illegal behaviour in non-Israeli territories.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 6:45 pm

        It’s abundantly clear that you’re intellect is subservient to your hatred. So it’s basically a waste of time talking to you, not to mention having to put up with your abuse. Besides, you get so angry that your logic circuits fail you. Like quoting that Art. 7 about the “Palestinian citizenship”, when in context it is clearly talking about the Mandate period, not beyond. The goal of the mandate was to create “such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble.” (Art. 2). There’s only one legitimate reading of that, and its a pro-Zionist reading.

        Anyhow, it’s clear that there is no chance of having a real dialogue with you. But one good thing came out of this exchange: you are an excellent example of how anti-Zionism is a form of unjustified group hatred (commonly called “racism”). Yes, you may not necessarily be an antisemite, but being a rabid anti-Zionist isn’t one whit better. And in using a term like “ziodrool”, it’s clear where your heart is at.

        Actually, one other good thing came out of this: I learned the word “eleemosynary”. (Art. 16)

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 9, 2015, 5:36 am

        @ pjdude “talknic. jews weren’t given a state. they illegally seized one”

        Like it or not, legal or not, justifiable or not, a specific territory was allocated for a Jewish state by a majority vote resulting in the adoption of UNGA res 181.

        Since proclaiming its sovereign extent in order to be recognized, the State of Israel has illegally acquired territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

        Had consecutive Israeli Governments from the outset adhered to the legal obligations of statehood, adhered to its boundaries, adhered to its declaration, withdrawn its forces from all non-Israeli territories, not had illegal expansionist policies, honored its obligations to all its citizens, honored its promises to help implement UNGA res 181 instead of trashing it via Plan Dalet before even proclaiming statehood ….

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 9, 2015, 5:46 am

        I’ll retract this “The fact that Israel didn’t even exist as a legal entity at the time the map was drawn seems to escape you.” – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/01/reporter-palestinians-concessions#comment-736275 Apologies. I was looking at another map ..

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 6:22 pm

        calling us “Jews” means we are Judaeans, so the Land of Judah is where we should go.

        there are lots of looney-tune christian zionists who agree with you, but clearly most american jews do not or else they would move there.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 9, 2015, 8:35 pm

        I addressed it elsewhere…
        Robert… you do know that “Jew” is an English word do you?
        DON’T mix that up with the name of the region, that term got mixed up recently. Ioudaios meant not only Judeans and not all of the Judeans were Jews!
        There is a whole debate about the term “ioudaios”.

        Ioudaios before and after “Religion”, by Annette Yoshiko Reed
        http://marginalia.lareviewofbooks.org/ioudaios-religion-annette-yoshiko-reed/

        or: On the Meaning of the Term “Jew” in Greco-Roman Inscriptions, Ross S. Kraemer

        CONCLUSION
        This brief study, when added to the work already done by Kraabel,suggests that the terms loudaia, loudaios, ludaeus, and ludaea, especially when applied to individuals, must be interpreted with care. While inscriptions demonstrate that one could be called Jewish by ethnicity, or Jewish by religion or belief, some lend themselves to Kraabel’s suggestion that geographic origin is intended. Most of the other inscriptions lend themselves to the explanation that non-Jews who affiliated with Judaism either took on the term, perhaps as a self-designation, or gave the term as a proper name to their children. And it may well be that the term was necessary especially in situations where the Jewishness of the individual might not be apparent,not only in cases of burial near pagan graves (as Frey suggested) but in cases where the individual did not begin life as a Jew.

        http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1509511?sid=21105037794891&uid=3738840&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=2129 It is free
        OR:

        MARTIN HENGEL, Ioudai/a in the Geographical List of Acts 2:9-11 and Syria as “Greater Judea”
        The appearance of Ioudaia in the geographical list presented in Acts 2:9-11 has puzzled interpreters almost from the time of the publication of the book of Acts. It will be argued that this word should be retained in the text and should be understood in the light of traditional and especially messianic ideas about the extent of the promised land. The close association of Judea and Syria is especially important for understanding the meaning of Ioudaia in Acts 2:9-11.
        …The “Judea” introduced between Mesopotamia and Cappadocia and the “Cretans and Arabs” at the end remain a complete riddle. First, however, one must differentiate clearly between the purpose of the list provided by the evangelist Luke—who certainly intentionally shaped it this way, and who, as a well-traveled doctor and as traveling companion to Paul, possessed solid geographical knowledge—and the many-sided speculations concerning its derivation and its original meaning….. You don’t have to agree with him about the whole interpretation, he incongruously uses the term “nation” to ancient times, but the text is informative and interesting.
        https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_2000_b_01_Hengel_IoudaiaGeography.pdf

        And about that Arab thing of yours: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/01/reporter-palestinians-concessions#comment-736466
        I must add to what I wrote there: “Inhabitants weren’t magically replaced by Arabs FROM THE PENINSULA AND OTHER REGIONS… IN VII CENTURY.”. There were few waves of immigrants over many centuries, even studies about Arabic show that.
        I wrote earlier that being considered “Arab” should be understood more as being part of Arab culture (especially language) not some homogeneous ethnic group of some sorts (or race). Its only the national discourses that make “Jews” “Arabs” etc a coherent different group that must have originated from 1 place.

        More about the language (and bibliography about it can be found in B. Ra’ad’s Hidden History). Some info here: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/04/limbaugh-company-blumenthal#comment-660103

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 2:49 am

        @ robert
        your only proving my point. and i did read actual archeologically based evidence. so i tell you read something other than your big book of jewish fairy tales and maybe you’ll quit demanding Israel be given borders to represent a fictious state. the united monarchy never existed. there was a kingdom of Israel and a kingdom of judah which were eventually absorbed into more powerful states. the fact remains the palestinians are the true indigenous people and modern jews for the most part interlopers.

        @talknic. I’m not saying it wasn’t but at the end of the day GA 181 is a clear violation of the UN charter requirment that states only be created via self determination. the moment the majority of legal resident of palestine said they didn’t want their country divided anything else was illegal. launching a war of conquest via armies created by european jews to conqueror territory. I’m sorry but inside “Israel” or out its was still gained via conquest. we should be willing to concede it but don’t lie and say it was given to jews they stole it with blood and iron just like everything else. now I’m not saying at this point we should take a completely hardline stance if only because actualy trying to comply with the law now would require to much bloodshed. but if we want a just resolution we need to call the spade a spade and that was all of the territory Israel has was gained via conquest.

        so even if Israel never annexed anything out side of its borders it would still be illegal. because it would be declaring territory belong to another state as belonging to it. the moment the mandate ended sovriegnty and control immiedently was vested into the provisionally stated country of palestine. the Israelly decleration of independence was nothing less than a decleration of war and intent to conqueror.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 10, 2015, 5:15 pm

        @ Robert in Israel
        “Like it or not, the UN voted for Israel, and continues to host Israel as a member nation”

        The UN voted to accept Israel as a member based on the FACT that Israel had proclaimed its boundaries per UNGA res 181 and was recognized as such and; that Israel would adhere to the UN Charter in its entirety inclusive of adhering to International Law and; adhere to its proclaimed and recognized boundaries. Israel hasn’t adhered to its boundaries and hasn’t adhere to the UN Charter or International Law.

        The same US veto on Chapt VII resolutions against Israel for having broken the Law and UN Charter as outlined in hundreds of UNSC resolutions reminding Israel of its legal obligations, can be used to prevent Israel being tossed out of the UN. However, all that does is allow the stupid frog to remain in the pot while it turns the heat up on itself.

    • pjdude
      pjdude
      January 8, 2015, 9:01 pm

      your answer is bs. the true question isn’t Israels security from palestine. it neither deserves nor should expect security from it. it should be what needs to be done to protect palestinian security from Israel. the criminals “rights” are less than that of his victim

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 2:47 am

        You and most other posters here are very good at expressing their anger at Israel and its supporters, but not very good at all at actually having a real dialogue. When I say that “Israel has everything to lose”, I’m speaking a psychological truth, not an opinion that Israel is justified or not.

        Bottom line: if the Palestinians and their supporters continue to insist that “the Palestinians have conceded too much”, then you have guaranteed that the conflict will continue with pretty much the same results.

        The sad thing is that what Israel demands has a lot less to do with territory and physical security, and much more to do with psychological security. But Israel haters insist that the Palestinians shouldn’t have to make concrete guarantees about stopping incitement, stopping tunneling, dropping demands for limitless immigration to Israel, and not building a full-fledged army because they’ve agreed to only 22% of Western Palestine. Well, if they would concede on the aforementioned issues, they could probably get more than 22% with land swaps. So the 22% figure is a red herring.

        Call it speculation, but my personal analysis of Palestinian intransigence regarding Israel’s red lines is that their overarching goal is Israel’s destruction, precisely as stated in both the Fatah Charter and the Hamas Charter.

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 8:44 pm

        But Israel haters insist that the Palestinians shouldn’t have to make concrete guarantees …

        the palestine hater speaks! what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. how ya like those ad hominems applied to you.

        Call it speculation, but my personal analysis

        i’ll call it highly biased bs

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 3:00 am

        wrong it is you who is incapable of dialogue. repeating insane sociopathic demands is not dialogue recognizing peoples wants and needs is and actually talking is dialogue. you want to have a real dialogue its simple quit issuing criminal demands and start acting like a decent human beings. I’m sorry you feel people not kowtowing to your and your your countries demands but dialogue requires a give and take. all you want is to take.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 10, 2015, 5:47 pm

        @ Robert in Israel

        “Bottom line: if the Palestinians and their supporters continue to insist that “the Palestinians have conceded too much”, then you have guaranteed that the conflict will continue with pretty much the same results”

        The spokesperson for the thief has spoken. Israel could simply get out of all non-Israeli territory. It has never been tried.

        “The sad thing is that what Israel demands has a lot less to do with territory and physical security, and much more to do with psychological security.”

        Uh huh. The sad thing is your drivel doesn’t pass . So why is Israel building ILLEGAL settlements in non-Israeli territory. Why has Israel remained on the same illegal territorial lusting clusterf*ck for 67 years http://wp.me/pDB7k-l5

        “But Israel haters insist that the Palestinians shouldn’t have to make concrete guarantees about stopping incitement, stopping tunneling, dropping demands for limitless immigration to Israel, and not building a full-fledged army because they’ve agreed to only 22% of Western Palestine.”

        The incitement is from Palestine being gobbled up by Israel and Palestinians being dispossessed. Nothing of Israel’s has ever been taken or claimed by the Palestinians, the Palestinians have never prevented Jews from settling in Israel’s actual territory.

        Tunneling is legal against an occupying power. End the occupation.

        The demand for RoR is under UNGA res 194 (1948). UNGA res 194 was adopted before UNRWA (1949), the UNRWA figure is irrelevant to res 194 and the Palestinian claim. Furthermore, people with RoR to within Israel ‘s actual sovereign boundaries are Israelis.

        All states have equal right to arms and self defense.

        None of those claims by Israel have any actual legal basis and in fact Israel’s demands go against its own Declaration of Statehood.

        ” if they would concede on the aforementioned issues, they could probably get more than 22% with land swaps. So the 22% figure is a red herring”

        Why? They are not legally obliged to concede ANY of their legal rights! Meanwhile Israel IS legally obliged to end the occupation, withdraw from all non-Israeli territories, stop illegal settlements, take all its illegal settlers back to Israel, pay compensation. Your land swaps are swapping what is now Palestinian territory for what is now Palestinian territory so Israel can keep what is now Palestinian territory. It’s a non starter ‘offered’ by a thief.

        Unfortunately Israel has never been able to afford compensation for its theft and settlement of non-Israeli territory and now, after 67 years of building illegal facts on the ground would be sent bankrupt were it to now adhere to the law. That is why Israel insists on negotiations in order to circumvent the laws it has trashed.

        “Call it speculation, but my personal analysis of Palestinian intransigence regarding Israel’s red lines is that their overarching goal is Israel’s destruction, precisely as stated in both the Fatah Charter and the Hamas Charter”

        A) Your personal analysis is based on propaganda bullsh*te
        B) Article Thirty-One: “As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly.”

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 8:37 pm

        If you think that if Israel withdrew to the 1947 Partition Plan lines, the Palestinian terrorist organizations and the Islamo-fascists would leave Israel alone, then you are one naive person. I mean, just look at all the non-Palestinians on this website who can’t stand Israel and believe it should never have been created. You can imagine that the hardline Palestinians feel a thousand times more hatred and anger. Forget about how noble or purely practical such an Israeli retreat would be. It’d basically be an act of national suicide for Israel to retreat to such borders. Not only would we be compromising our security, we’d be sending a message that the terrorists should keep applying the pressure.

        Do you really think that organizations like Hamas, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, etc, are going to one day just say, aw heck, let’s drop our fight for ousting the Jews from Palestine?

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 10, 2015, 11:00 pm

        >> Robert in Israeleee: If you think that if Israel withdrew to the 1947 Partition Plan lines, the Palestinian terrorist organizations and the Islamo-fascists would leave Israel alone, then you are one naive person. …

        Withdrawing to Partition borders would be the just thing to do, but Zio-supremacists don’t like justice. Or accountability. Or equality.

        Zio-supremacists seem to think that because the rapist’s victim might come after him with the cops – or with a knife – if he were to set her free, the rapist is entitled:
        – to keep the victim chained in his basement; and
        – to continue raping her.

        This they call “morality” (goal + methods).

      • oldgeezer
        oldgeezer
        January 11, 2015, 2:33 am

        @Robert in Israel
        “When I say that “Israel has everything to lose”, I’m speaking a psychological truth, not an opinion that Israel is justified or not.”

        Perhaps your honest conversation, wherein you resorted to name calling, could be advanced if you would define what a psychological truth is.

        I understand some psychological issues. I understand phobias. I understand the fear of clowns, open spaces, people, spiders. I understand that they are all forms of mental illness which need counselling and treatment.

        I can only assume you aren’t claiming that Israelis aren’t mentally ill. Perhaps you are. Feel free to correct me on that.

        At the same time a psychological truth would imply that it is in the mind and not tangible or in the real world.

        Israel is the oppressor. Israel is a thief.

        Please explain how we need to pander to their mentality in order to arrive at a peaceful and just solution to the situation.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 11, 2015, 9:29 am

        @ Robert in Israel “If you think that if Israel withdrew to the 1947 Partition Plan lines, the Palestinian terrorist organizations and the Islamo-fascists would leave Israel alone, then you are one naive person”

        I believe as did Schwebel Lautherpacht and Herzog that if you illegally acquire other folks territory by force of arms, dispossessing the inhabitants of the territories you lust after, which Israel has done since the day its proclaimed boundaries were 1st recognized, those enemies Israel has created have a right to restore their territory by force of arms and;
        only when people are aware of Israel’s actual proclaimed boundaries, can they see who the real culprit is and where the answer to peace actually lies

        Hamas, rightly has a caveat. One idiots for Israel will never cite Article Thirty-One: “As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly.” (The Tried – verse 8).

        “just look at all the non-Palestinians on this website who can’t stand Israel and believe it should never have been created”

        While a state is in breach of International Laws and a UN Charter adopted in large part because of the treatment of our Jewish fellows under the Nazis, what’s to like about it? Israel is such a state. BDS is not to destroy, it’s to get that state as Sth Africa did, to change course.

        “You can imagine that the hardline Palestinians feel a thousand times more hatred and anger”

        Yes I can because the UN and the US and the other bastions of freedom have done NOTHING to deliver the Palestinians LEGAL rights. They’re LEGAL rights under the laws Israel obliged itself to uphold by A) becoming a state with specific boundaries, B) Occupying non-Israeli territory and C) Pleading to become a UN Member state.

        ” Forget about how noble or purely practical such an Israeli retreat would be. It’d basically be an act of national suicide for Israel to retreat to such borders”

        They’re the borders accepted and proclaimed and recognized. Go bitch to the Jewish Agency and the Zionist Federation or demanding a separate Jewish state when Jews already had the right to a homeland as Palestinians. Even before Balfour Jews could AND DID immigrate, buy land, settle anywhere in the Jewish People’s historic homeland and become citizens

        Go bitch to the Jewish Agency and Zionist federation for planning to colonize all of Palestine. Go bitch to consecutive Israel Governments for digging a deeper and deeper ‘illegal facts on the ground’ hole and LYING to its citizens about its borders for 67 years

        “Not only would we be compromising our security, we’d be sending a message that the terrorists should keep applying the pressure.”

        You’re spouting drivel. Israel compromised its security the moment it started taking other folks territory for its own purposes. If security was the actual concern, why has Israel populated the territories it claims for security with civilians?

        Palestine cannot become an independent state and retain the features you treasure in order to perpetuate the occupation and justify the acquisition of even more non-Israeli land.

        “Do you really think that organizations like Hamas, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, etc, are going to one day just say, aw heck, let’s drop our fight for ousting the Jews from Palestine”

        Aw heck, Israeli propaganda mantras are so f*(king patheic.The Zionist plan to Colonize Palestine began 1897 DECADES before Hamas, ISIS, alQaeda.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 5:02 pm

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1834_looting_of_Safed

        Also the fault of those awful post-1897 Zionists?

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 14, 2015, 2:51 am

        @ Robert in Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1834_looting_of_Safed

        Also the fault of those awful post-1897 Zionists?”

        ??? If you say so Robert…

        BTW Wikipedia can be
        A) written by anyone. Wikipedia’s editorial policy favors 3rd hand opinion, based on verifiable 2nd hand opinion, even if it is contrary to the truth contained in verifiable primary documents. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22verifiability,+not+truth%22+Wikipedia

        B) The Wikipedia article addresses nothing in my post

        C) What happened prior to 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) when Israel’s proclaimed boundaries came into effect and were recognized http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf , is completely irrelevant to the current legal status of Israeli sovereignty and its illegal activities as the Occupying Power since 1948 over territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 16, 2015, 3:49 am

        Talknic, you are the worst kind of hypocrite. You cite any source you like, and usually none at all for your claims, but you feel that’s OK. But every time I try to give a normal source, you feel no need to investigate. You just mock away and go on living in the little fantasy world you’ve designed for yourself.

        But on the really off-chance you’re willing to actually deal with some serious cognitive dissonance, try reading 19th-century travel journals of visitors to Palestine, and see what you find. CAUTION: READING ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS CAN BE DAMAGING TO YOUR ILLUSIONS

        P.S. Interestingly, in looking for a link to an original description of the attack on the Jews of Safed, I came across a footnote recorded in 1843 of a letter written by someone who lived through the incident, but in Jerusalem, which was also hard hit. Here’s that link:
        https://books.google.co.il/books?id=Pw0pAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA411&dq=arabs+jews+palestine+1834&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cMu4VPypDoS5OJqNgaAM&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=arabs%20jews%20palestine%201834&f=false (If the link doesn’t work, the book is “Sacred History of the World” by Sharon Turner. Vol. 2, p. 411, 2nd paragraph of the footnote.)

        But this is just one more case. I’m challenging you to read a lot of such journal entries from a range of periods. I can assure you from personal experience that the evidence will become overwhelming. Then you’ll just have to decide whether you can deal with reality or not. And that’s why that one incident I cited is indeed an eloquent response to all of your baseless accusations. Zionism isn’t to blame for Arab/Muslim violence, because the latter started way before Zionism. Period.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:37 pm

      I apologize in advance for a the change in the subject and for the length of comments, but they can’t be short, I need to clarify the senseless things Robert wrote. Robert you wrote: “The standard caveat in the corner is just to prevent testy people like you from attacking them for any errors”- you made lots of them!
      Where to start?!
      ABOUT NATION AND NATIONALISM
      There is no such thing as an ancient nation. Nationalism as the development of the idea of a nation is modern. There are different theories about when or from where it originated but the fact is that it is a modern idea, practice, etc- it is indisputable in the academic world. Some argued that English national idea was one of the first, others that the idea originated in South America. Anthony Smith first argued that something like the modern idea of a nation can be found in ancient times, but later he changed his theory, since he admitted that he himself mixed the idea of an ethnic identity with modern national one, an idea he himself warned against. Community, ethnic group or any other group is not a nation. They can be a start for it, to develope, but nation can’t be reduced to them. There are many studies about national identity development in Europe, America, Asia etc that confirm that.
      More to that- “Jews” (who do you refer that term?) never had 1 culture, identity, etc- come on…there are many books about it, why not study them? The idea that Jews have 1 culture, religious tradition was promoted by Zionism, and not even by every Zionist, read about cultural Zionists! “Jews” don’t share 1 thought/identity or whatever (as one of the pro-israeli commentators here even wrote) “JEWS” ARE NOT BORGS FROM STAR TREK! (there are not a race, and are not 1 ethnic group)

      Also Zionists from Europe didn’t give much damn about local Jews in Palestine (and from other ME countries) and vice versa. Zionists view them as primitive and that they didn’t represent their view of how Jews should act, believe, etc. Why? Well…they spoke Arabic, shared even some of the tradistions with Palestinian Arabs, both Muslim and Christian… You should read about how Zionists treated local Jews in Hebron (and the slobdoka yeshiva)! Local Palestinian Jews were often anti-Zionist, local rabbis in public preached about the danger coming from Zionists (especially in the 20s and 30’s), even the term “sabra” was used by local Jews as a negative term for new immigrants! Read about late Ottoman period- how local Jews interacted with other Palestinians- Zionists didn’t care much about local Jews and their identity, traditions, etc… Read the books by Salim Tamari or Yuval Ben-Bassat “Late Ottoman Palestine” also AMMIEL ALCALAY “After Jews And Arabs: Remaking Levantine Culture” and “Lives in Common: Arabs and Jews in Jerusalem, Jaffa and Hebron”, by Menachem Klein and “We Look Like the Enemy: The Hidden Story of Israel’s Jews from Arab Lands” by Rachel Shabi.

      1.Keith W. Whitelam, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History
      2.Thomas L. Thompson,The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology And The Myth Of Israel
      3.Ohana,The shaping of Israeli identity:myth,memory,and trauma
      4.Orr,Israel:Politics, Myths and Identity Crises
      5.Oz,The Sabra: the creation of the new Jew;
      6.Sternhell,The Founding Myths of Israel:Nationalism, Socialism and the Making of the Jewish State
      7.Zerubavel,Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition
      8. D.B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times
      Those are only a few from many other great books on the subject.

      About natonalism itself you can read: Craig Calhoun “Nationalism”,A. Giddens, Charles Tilly, J. Breuilly, R. Brubaker, Anthony Smith, Michael Billig and many others. Many books you can download.
      About communities and nationalism: Benedict Anderson
      About ethnicity a great summary of modern works about it you can find in “Ethnicity”, by Steve Fenton.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 7:36 pm

        Listing authors with a political agenda to deny or support the Jews’ nationhood isn’t going to do much good in a discussion where the two discussion participants reject the political agenda of the respective authors on both sides. So I suggest you give me your definition of a nation, I’ll see if I have anything to add or subtract from your definition, and then if we can agree on a working definition of nationhood, we can then discuss what may or may not be lacking in the Jewish experience that would determine whether or not it is a nation. Sound fair?

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:40 pm

      About Palestinian identity, history, term, etc. I wrote:
      http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/million-palestinians-feiglin#comment-732760
      http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/million-palestinians-feiglin#comment-732844

      So you were wrong when writing about Palestinian myths in that regard. You should read about modern Zionists ones though, since you use those myth as “facts”.
      1.Kimmerling B., The Invention and Decline of Israeliness: State, Society, and the Military, University of California Press, 2001
      2.Ohana D., The shaping of Israeli identity: myth, memory, and trauma, Routledge
      3.Orr A., Israel: Politics, Myths and Identity Crises, Pluto Press, 1994
      4.Oz A., The Sabra: the creation of the new Jew, University of California Press, 2000
      5.Piterberg G., The Returns of Zionism: Myths, Politics and Scholarship in Israel, Verso, 2008
      6.Shabi R., We Look Like the Enemy: The Hidden Story of Israel’s Jews from Arab Lands, Walker & Company, 2008
      7.Sternhell Z.,The Founding Myths of Israel: Nationalism, Socialism, and the Making of the Jewish State, Princeton University Press, Nowy Jork 1999
      8.Yehuda N., Masada Myth: Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel, University of Wisconsin Press, 1995
      9.Yehuda N., Sacrificing Truth: Archaeology and the Myth of Masada, Humanity Books, 2002
      10.Zerubavel Y., Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition, University Of Chicago Press, 1995

      And many others…

      Meron Benvenisti’s Sacred Landscape, after describing the Zionist fabrication of a “Hebrew map” intended to eradicate the Palestinian character of the landscape, gives several instances of other actions where a variety of excuses and strategies were used to Judaize sites and buildings even when they had no previous Jewish tradition associated with them at all. Such excuses were used to ensure control of a number of major sites belonging to the monotheistic
      tradition that had been preserved in Muslim sacred geography. This applies of course to El-Khalil/Hebron, at the place where tradition says Abraham and other members of his clan were buried, now a mosque called Al Haram el Ibrahımi. After the occupation of the West Bank in 1967 and then infiltration by Jewish extremists in the 1980s, supported by the Israeli army, the mosque was forcibly divided and eventually more than two-thirds of it turned into a synagogue. This in effect repeats the process of the site’s previous forced transformations. Thus, association with a name (Ibrahım/Abraham)—presumably dating back to the second millennium bce—not with a fact, was manipulated to generate a claim and so create an unwieldy kind of reality and a point of contentious attachment. That Muslims incorporated other burials into this site, such as Sarah’s, adding many exaggerated stories about Abraham well beyond the qur’anic account, does not of course explain or excuse Israeli actions. However, the religious pretext has made it easier for the Zionists to dupe and intimidate local Muslim authorities and believers into grudging acquiescence in accepting the site’s authenticity on their terms. Israeli actions to appropriate the site seem to be motivated by the intent to control through colonial presence rather than by sincere religious devotion. It is not new in history that one power would use a previous tradition to supplant that tradition itself and to exploit a site for its own uses. Nevertheless, it is ironic that the imaginings of Muslims served as pretexts for their being supplanted by Jewish extremists, for the benefit of new Israeli claims.MORE in (B. Ra’ad, Hidden Histories).

      Or: Ricca S., Heritage, Nationalism and the Shifting Symbolism of the Wailing Wall- you can download it A MUST READ!

      NEVER EVER in history the historical Palestine was inhabited only by Jews [as followers of the Jewish religion, DON’T mix that up with the name of the region Judah, that term got mixed up recently. Ioudaios ment not only Judeans and not all of the Judeans were Jews….].
      So it is wrong to say that only Jews (that is especially those actually from Palestine…)lived there until Islam “came”. SINCE WHEN CHANGE OF RELIGION = CHANGE OF ETHNICITY??? INHABITANTS WEREN’T MAGICALLY REPLACED BY ARABS (YOU DO KNOW THERE WERE SEVERAL “WAVES” OF IMMIGRANTS RIGHT? ARABIC (AS ANCIENT FORM OF THE MODERN ONE)FOR EXAMPLE FUNCTIONED THERE EVEN BEFORE THAT WAVE in VII century!!
      Even the Bible say Jews didn’t only live on that land… it is hardly only a Jewish “ancient land”. MORE, for example: In Hebron, as elsewhere, pagan practices were hard to erase. Both contemporaneous and later writers tell us that the people continued to remember and offer pagan sacrifice for more than
      a hundred years after the Christianization of the sites. One is the eyewitness report of Sozomen, a fifth-century ecclesiastical historian and native of Gaza, which is corroborated by earlier descriptions of polytheists celebrating around a tree and a spring at Mamre given in Eusebius’ Onomasticon (B. Ra’ad, Hidden Histories).

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:43 pm

      Those “ancient” borders of yours… are the ones that no archaeologist can agree upon. Even they don’t agree: if there was a big united kingdom, where its borders really went, how far, etc. All we have now are theories… Every one, even the biblical maximalists admit they don’t have proof that there was an exodus, or that David or Solomon existed (they weren’t Jews by the way), or that the Wall is actually THE Wall!! It is one of the examples of appropriating Muslim traditions by Jews and later Zionists… That is why every year we have big hurrah that some archaeologist found sth that will prove sth, but at the end others come along and verify it…
      1.Friedman R.E., Who Wrote the Bible?, HarperOne, 1987
      2.Friedman R.E., The Bible with Sources Revealed, HarperOne, 2005
      3.Finkelstein I., The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the History of Early Israel, Society of Biblical Literature, 2007
      4.Finkelstein I., Silberman Z.A., David and Solomon: In Search of the Bible’s Sacred Kings and the Roots of the Western Tradition, Free Press, 2007
      5.Garaudy R., The Founding Myths of Modern Israel, Inst for Historical Review, 2000
      6.Silberman N.A., Finkelstein I., The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, Touchstone, 2002
      7.Whitelam,The Invention of Ancient Israel
      8.The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts
      9.The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel
      10.Stories from Ancient Canaan, Second Edition
      11.E.L. Martin, The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot, Academy for Scriptural, Portland 1994.

      Not to mention the problem that you so freely just link Jews from Palestine to those from all over the world (especially Europe). We all know how Zionist used even genetic studies to prove they have connections but those projects also connected not-Jews (depending who they choose as a Jews for reference) to that region… so those projects are no help for the Zionists whatsoever….Zionists use only Jewish tradition (well to be more specific the image what that traditions is from their own perspective… Jews from Ethiopia or even Jews from Middle East had/have other visions of it- read about it) to link them to the ancient history of the land- TYPICAL NATIONALIST DISCOURSE…

      In “The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics” or in Falk, “Zionism, Race and Eugenics” you can read about all that. Also: “There is no biological marker that is unique to Jewish people,” Raphael Falk, professor emeritus of genetics at Hebrew University. “There are no markers that can define an individual, man or woman, as a Jew or as belonging to any other community.” In: “Zionism and the Biology of the Jews”.
      Genetic studies are often used for the purposes of israeli nationalist narrative. Their aim is to clarify who can refer to a specific cultural heritage. In this context, race, ethnicity and nation are interconnected.
      Genetic studies are sometimes highly controversial and the subject of academic and political debate. Tsvi Misinai finances genetic testing to prove that the Palestinians are actually descendants of the ancient Israelites. According to him, it will help to accept Palestinians as equal citizens of Israel.
      Misinai believes that Palestinians have a false “Arab” identity. Moreover, many Palestinians are not aware of their “Jewish” origin. Misinai thus supports the idea that Jews have the right to live in Palestine who are the descendants of its ancient inhabitants. In this form of discourse national culture is based on biology. These studies, in practice try to legitimize the Zionist historical narrative. But you can see Zionists have lots of problem with the fact that those studies confirm that Palestinians aren’t “alien” as the Zionist want to see them….

      Also what was considered by Zionist as “Jewish” and “Arab” changed in time, because at first “Arab/Muslim- Palestinians” were seen as descendants of ancient peoples (for example the work by Ben Gurion and Ben Zvi, from 1918, a Yiddish book, title: Eretz Yisrael in the Past and Present). Later it changed when Palestinians didn’t accept the Zionist policy and narratives. As you can see what is called “Jewish” and “Arab” is very fluid, and the same goes for ancient times- today lots of traditional narration about ancient times is now being reconsidered, basing on new evidence.

      In “The Canaanite Factor: (Un)Defining Religious Identities in Palestine and Israel”: Some recent DNA studies seem to be headed toward answering such questions. One study by a group of Israeli and US scientists (Nebel et al 2000) came to the conclusion that Palestinian Arabs have close genetic similarity to Jews and that the findings agree with historical records indicating that Moslem Arabs in this country [Palestine and Israel] descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD. More recent research by the same group (2001) found Jews to be more closely related to populations in the northern Fertile Crescent.
      Another genetic study (Antonio Arnaiz-Villena et al) recently caused a furor after its publication in Human Immunology. The journal took the unusual step (under pressure) of asking subscribers and libraries to disregard or preferably tear out the article. This study found that Jews and Palestinians share a very similar HLA genetic pool … that support a common ancient Canaanite origin. The study also hypothesized other close relatives to the Palestinians in people like Cretans, Egyptians, Iranians, Turks and Armenians. Then follows the well-meant conclusion:
      The Eurocentric confusion Arab=Muslim has also lowered the Palestinian identity by identifying the country were Mohammed was born (Saudi Arabia) with the Muslim religion; it also has artificially divided peoples both coming from ancient Canaanites (Jews and Palestinians). (Arnaiz-Villena et al 2001: 897)
      As obvious from this quotation, the published study is replete with editorial errors, and it also confusingly uses Palestinians to refer to Philistines. Nevertheless, its conclusion is important and worth pursuing in future studies.
      DNA studies have the potential to show unexpected human commonalities. But careful sampling criteria should be adopted, and efforts made to avoid historical preconceptions.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 9, 2015, 4:02 pm

        Those “ancient” borders of yours… are the ones that no archaeologist CAN’T agree upon…

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:44 pm

      Why would you even base an “ideal” state with borders based on some inconsistent historical myths and symbols ignoring contemporary situations? Since when more land=more safety?
      You forgot already?: A report co-authored by senior Israeli defense officials argues that Israel doesn’t need to control West Bank territory to keep Israel secure:
      This idea that Israel needs to control large swathes of territory in the West Bank in order to protect itself — which is described as “territorial strategic depth” in the Security chapter of “Is Peace Possible?” — has been most prominently advocated by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, run by Netanyahu advisor Dore Gold, in a report entitled “Israel’s Critical Security Requirements for Defensible Borders.” Its authors have made numerous trips to Washington to propagate their perspective (particularly on Capitol Hill), and their arguments have gone largely unaddressed.
      This void is filled by a new report by the Council for Peace and Security, an Israeli organization that includes over a thousand former high-ranking officials in Israel’s national security establishment, including the Israel Defense Forces, the Mossad, and Shin Beth security services. The group provides a sober alternative (with unimpeachable security credentials) to those who seek to use security arguments to justify political goals — particularly goals that are incompatible with a two-state solution. Their new report, “Defensible Borders and Strategic Depth,”is written by three former major generals and three brigadier generals.
      The paper cuts to the heart of the argument made by Netanyahu and his surrogates about defensible borders… The report points out that the Israeli need for control of the Jordan Valley is based on an outdated assessment of Israeli threats…They also explain about how the regional assessment has changed due to the Arab Peace Initiative and Israel’s undisputed military advantage in the region.- READ ABOUT MORE YOUSELF.

      So all your arguments are based on myths, symbols, lack of knowledge, etc.

      You write about maximalist visions of Palestinians? And what are those? in addition to the borders (as Talknic wrote about many times) that allegedly Israel officially agreed on Israel took additional 12% – ILLEGALLY. The same in 1967 and till this day they continue to build more illegal settlements. You even add some biblical visions of the borders and you dare talk about the maximalist visions of Palestinians?
      How can you be taken seriously?

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 7:47 pm

        I think you can take me seriously if you don’t read into my writings what I didn’t write explicitly, though you are of course entitled to interpret my intentions. One small point since I’m answering dozens of posts from almost the same number of posters.

        I described the Biblical borders in answer to a query about whether or not I envision any limits at all to the Land of Israel. Borders are indeed a problem since place names that were clear 3.5 millennia ago were already unclear by 2 millennia ago, and all the more so today. But I gave my interpretation just to be open about my ideas. At the same time, I carefully stated that in a peace agreement, I wouldn’t expect that Israel would get my ideal borders. I think I was being pretty reasonable for an unapologetic rightwing Zionist Jew, no?

      • straightline
        straightline
        January 11, 2015, 2:58 am

        Reasonable unapologetic rightwing Zionist Jew is an oxymoron.

        Zofia – this is amazing. I’m in absolute awe of your erudition. Lots for me to read.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:45 pm

      When it comes to that UN Israel “Jewish state” thing of yours….
      Well, for starters read: The Myth of the U.N. Creation of Israel, by J.R. Hammond.
      UN partition plan envisioned that there would be a Palestinian Arab majority in the “Jewish” part (Arabs=509.780, Jews= 499.020 in Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question. Report of Sub-Committee 2: unispal.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf on page 41)- Zionists knew that very well… Palestinian support for the partition wouldn’t change much regarding Zionist political strategy… Plus, right after the vote Jews attacked Palestinian villages and people. Gurion even ordered to attack the villages that signed a non-aggression pact- he wanted to provoke Palestinians to fight (in Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel).

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 9, 2015, 4:40 pm

        I thank you for the reference to a book about the Wall symbolism – I’m working on that problem at the moment and will maybe see if I can get Phil to publish something.
        I tried in the article of mine that appeared here in June 2013 to argue that Palestine is the only properly attested pre-Roman name for Palestine and that over the whole sweep of ancient history it was a remarkably multicultural place.
        If you wish to restore one particular past situation you need to argue, surely, that that situation was, among all that have occurred, exceptionally legitimate. I see no one even beginning on that task, let alone defining terms like ‘historic homeland’ and (above all) ‘self-determination’. I think that everyone has, utterly regardless of what happened in ancient times, the right to enfranchised existence as the subject of a sovereign power in the place where (s)he exists, unless there is special reason to regard that person’s presence as temporary or contrary to established law or the result of invasion and marauding. There is no international committee that has or ever had the right to change that.
        Invasion and marauding did happen in ancient times – RoHa mentions the English and the Welsh. (I was born in Wallasey, ‘little Wales beyond England’. I sometimes imagine the horror that some of my ancestors on both sides of the fifth century conflict would feel if they had foreseen my mongrel ancestry, partly from the hated alien race.) I would think that the Kingdom of England did not gain full legitimacy until all Welsh individuals had full rights within all the former kingdoms of Britain.
        At any event, Zofia, thank you for all the learning you bring to this discussion. You take up arms against the sea of unreason. The dark waves still rise but let good prevail.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 9, 2015, 7:12 pm

        Thank you MHughes976 :)
        You are right! Palestine was always multicultural and multiracial! There never was only “Jewish”, “Arab” (etc.) presence. Also cultures there developed by drawing from each other: symbols, practices, etc. Like it is shown here: The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts; The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel and many other books that I have listed and in many others I haven’t read yet :)
        Even the terms “Jewish” and “Arab” are the results of various group interactions over the centuries and are now debated over (that is, their meaning for diff groups, etc).Also interesting is the book by Gil Anidjar “Semites. Race, Religion, Literature”.
        If you are interested in Jerusalem:
        http://www.palestine-studies.org/jq has free articles about Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Quarterly. Emek Shaveh has fine articles too.
        Ricca’s article in “the Jerusalem Quarterly”:
        S. Ricca, Heritage, Nationalism and the Shifting Symbolism of the Wailing Wall, “The Jerusalem Quarterly”, issue 24, 2005

        1.M. Benvenisti. City of Stone: The Hidden History of Jerusalem (Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1996).
        2.S. Ricca, Reinventing Jerusalem: Israel’s Reconstruction of the Jewish Quarter after 1967 (London: I. B.Tauris 2007)
        3.N. Abu el-Haj. ‘Translating Truths: Nationalism, the Practice of Archaeology, and the Remaking of Past and Present in Contemporary Jerusalem.’ American Ethnologist 25 (1998): 166-88.
        4.N. Abu El-Haj. Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and
        Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society (University of Chicago Press, 2001).
        5..E.L. Martin, The Temples That Jerusalem Forgot, Academy for Scriptural, Portland 1994.
        6.B. Ra’ad, Hidden Histories…,
        7.Even book by Hershel Shanks- he is clearly pro-zionist but his book: Jerusalem’s Temple Mount: From Solomon to the Golden Dome is ok. Despite his pro-Jewish biases the book can be informative :)
        His article: H. Shanks, I Climbed Warren’s Shaft (But Joab Never Did) is also interesting. But his discussion with Christopher A. Rollston about “Jezebel” Seal I see as unprofessional (Shanks was very condescending towards him, not addressing the issue at hand properly), so I agree with Rollston’s opinion, he is more convincing.
        8.Hezekiah’s Tunnel Reexamined. The dates assigned the Siloam Inscription and Jerusalem tunnels are questioned
        http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/jerusalem/hezekiah%E2%80%99s-tunnel-reexamined/
        9.V. Zink, A Quiet Transfer: The Judaization of Jerusalem, “Contemporary Arab Affairs” 2009, vol.2, issue 2
        10.R. Greenberg, Y. Mizrachi, From Shiloah to Silwan. Visitor’s Guide to Ancient Jerusalem (City of David) and the village of Silwan, Emek Shaveh, Jerusalem
        11. I know you are interested in ancient times, but this is also an interesting article:N. Sawhney, R. Yacoub, J. Norman, Jerusalem and Belfast: Envisioning Media Arts for Cultural Identity and Urban Renewal in Divided Cities, „The Jerusalem Quarterly”, issue 38, 2009.

        Good luck with your article! If you will need sth just write :) I will try to help:) I like searching for new info:)

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:47 pm

      EDUCATION:

      Since the first Palestinian curriculum the content is devoted to national identity, rather than to historical detailed facts, etc. Its core contents are defined by national values, Islamic religion, national heritage, customs and traditions and the Declaration of Independence. It includes subject on civic and national education, technology, home economics, health and environment, all of which will support Palestinian people to build and develop their national home.
      However much external criticism of the new curriculum has been focused on how peaceful or not are the new schoolbooks, rather than typical curricula concerns, and it received widespread attention outside the Palestinian Authority. UNESCO and other institutions in the education field, state that it seems that virtually all the charges of incitement can be traced back to one group, the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace-CMIP (it changed its name to Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance). The Institute is a non-profit organization, which was established in 1998. It specializes in research of school textbooks, teacher’s guides and curricula used in the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran. Its first director (1998-2000) was Itamar Marcus an Israeli counter terrorism analyst and the founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch. He was appointed by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu to a joint committee with the Palestinians on incitement. He lives in an Israeli settlement Efrat in the West Bank. Marcus previously lobbied to keep West Bank aquifers under Israeli control. Professor Nathan Brown, a noted professor at the George Washington University, who served as an adviser to the PA Constitutional assembly and other critics of the Institute charge that it is overly critical and even anti-Palestinian. Analysts such as Avenstup and Moughrabi have found the arguments used by CMIP to be inaccurate and characterized by questionable interpretations of text. But yet as professor Brown points out almost every discussion in English on Palestinian textbooks is based on CMIP reports, which are widely circulated and cited, and persistently charge them of incitement. Policy-makers have officially used its allegations. They managed to release a negative report on the newest PA schoolbooks at a press conference in Washington in 2007. The implications of these allegations have been tremendous. As a direct result donors have sometimes shifted funding away from curriculum development and schoolbook productions.

      TO READ ABOUT PALESTINIAN TEXTBOOKS BETTER TRY: The Israeli Palestine Education Center for Research and Information (IPCRI), The Georg Eckert Institute for International Textbook Research, Project on Israeli-Palestinian Textbooks, and books of noted scholar professor Nathan J. Brown.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:48 pm

      Palestinian textbooks focused on the themes of identity and values. It was found that the curriculum has a noticeable positive impact on students since they are studying their history and are being secured in their identity as Palestinians and citizens of the Palestinian Authority and their future state, moreover students have a strong sense of identity anchored in being a member of a Palestinian family, with strong values based on Islamic and Christian beliefs, which includes tolerance, faith in God, etc. However the topic of identity wasn’t an explicit issue of any observed lessons. Identity is expressed for example by reading poems, references to Palestine in Geography, English or Mathematics. The land is equaled to their identity. For this reason students see the basis of the conflict in land and therefore they defend their country and struggle against the occupation. Their identity is a mean against the daily humiliations they endure, but they don’t perceive themselves as hopeless, they rather are fully aware of their suffering, oppression caused by the occupation. That is also why they strongly bound their Palestinian identity to desire for freedom. Moreover the Islamic and Arabic culture are also strongly viewed as the ones that help them define what makes them Palestinian. Those elements help them to understand their culture and show how to develop and build a future society. It is worth noticing that parents are somewhat criticizing some existing gaps in history or geography, they wish it would be more detailed about history of Palestine and of 1948 year, focus on the current situation under occupation and also on the grave refugee problem along with displacement, illegal settlement and border problem.The focus on the Arab nature of geography and ethnic dimensions of Palestinian identity is not based on any hostile denial of other interpretations of history. Alternative versions are ignored not refuted. Non-Arab populations receive almost no attention. The historical selectivity is aiming at building a strictly Palestinian national identity. Since modern and contemporary history carries lot of controversies for both Palestinians and Israelis, they are not described in detail, which is seen outside of the Palestinian Authority as an unusual approach. That is so, probably because any approach to those historical cases, not following the official Israeli interpretation of facts (for instance almost total responsibility for the refugee problem lays on the Arab side, etc.) is followed by accusation of subjective than false approach, hence the little attention is given to these vital events.Crucial history cases will probably be covered when an independent Palestinian state will be created, when borders and the question of Holy Places will become clear, and an historical approach will be possible to be conducted, with no threat of external influences demanding a specific political interpretation.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:49 pm

      Jerusalem is presented as the capital of the future state. It is described as Palestinian city, built by Arab Canaanites and named Jebus and which later was called: Urushalim, City of Justice, or Noble Jerusalem. The predominant name is al-Quds. Whole Jerusalem is mentioned only in historical context, some schoolbooks exclude West Jerusalem, and the claim is made only for East Jerusalem. Geographical maps show generally all historical Palestine, however administrative maps show the West Bank and Gaza.
      As geography and maps are concerned, they are presented in great detail in different context across the schoolbooks. Historical Palestine is reflected as geographic entity in most cases and it doesn’t include detailed borders. Regional maps show Palestine as part of the Arab world, and in isolation, with no label included. Maps are used for multiple purposes, like to situate Palestine with reference to Arab or Islamic context, for identifying directions, locating cities – which is essential – in historical Palestine. Administrative maps include the boundaries of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Some of them also show names of cities that were predominantly inhabited by Arabs before the establishment of the State of Israel. Political geography yet still includes some gaps, especially when it refers to State of Israel as a geographical and political entity. This fact is interpreted by Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace as a form of incitement, since the state of Israel is not labeled in any textbook map and Palestine is covering the territory of Israel as well in many cases. It can be explained that historical and topographical maps are used to avoid drawing political boundaries, Israel is not represented as aren’t Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, and what is important some maps clearly delineate the West Bank and Gaza but do not explain what these indications signify. This action is intended not to move beyond a clear national consensus or its explicit policy. Such an attitude show that there is no guidance on how to teach Israel, or the borders of Paletine.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:51 pm

      Generally textbooks refer to Palestine with the West Bank and Gaza Strip distinguished from Israel, which isn’t named, but so aren’t the neighbor states. Border, topographic or demographic maps are mostly labeled as Historical Palestine. It is meant to preserve the memory of places in historical Palestine, especially cities with Israeli Arab populations, which are perceived as a legacy of all Palestinian people. As far as the modern history is concerned the schoolbooks don’t cover the unresolved political issues, which are part of each side’s strategic plans. That is why the territory of the state of Israel is shown without any label, and there is no reference to Palestine made either, which is explained that Israel itself has not yet marked its borders and no final agreement has been reached with the PLO.

      The most attention however is given not to the issue of how the Palestinian identity is presented in their textbooks but to their view of other, especially Jews, and what’s more the evaluation of the way of presenting their national identity is based on that specific view. The Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace research show that Jews, Judaism, and Israel are hardly mentioned in PA textbooks and Zionism is presented as a colonial movement and as a danger to Palestinians. Nathan J. Brown points out that most PA textbooks aim to avoid saying anything about Israel and the few exceptions are not pejorative. Generally Palestinian textbook references to Israel and Israelis usually are drawn from official historical documents and from encyclopedias. State of Israel is mentioned inadequately in Palestinian textbooks, and its commonly associated with historical events (such as the Oslo Accord) or ethnicity (as a Jewish state). Professor Brown concluded that anti-Jewish incitement does not occur. Some note that Israel is implicitly referred to in non-specific terms such as the Land outside the Green Line, the land of 1948, or the interior. Towns with large Arab populations that lie within pre-1967 Israeli territory are sometimes termed Historical Palestine in many PA textbooks. Jews are placed among Peoples of the Book. Some experts reports show that Zionists and Zionism are portrayed in a negative light. Generally, Israel, Israelis, Zionism and Zionists are depicted as occupiers, invaders, aggressors, infiltrators, and oppressors. Israel, as a sovereign state, is presented only with reference to the Oslo Accords and other agreements. Holy sites in Palestine do not include those of Jews except for ones that are holy to both Muslims and Jews (Al-Buraq Wall, Al-Haram al-Ibrahimi as-Shareef, Jacob’s Well and Joseph’s Tomb).
      As it can be seen Palestinian schoolbooks present generally positive content, showing however gaps and understatements that occur because of the political problems that aren’t yet resolved, but there are any direct hostile approaches found. Schoolbooks focus on the emphasizing the Palestinian character of their legacy of the past for the sake of future generations. But the CMIP reports keep charging the Palestinian textbooks of incitement and promoting hatred toward Jews and Israel. As professor Nathan J. Brown and other institutions in the field point out that any mention of a Palestinian character, for instance, of Jerusalem was seen by the Center as questioning the Israeli/Jewish nature of the city. Questioning Israeli annexation, which by international law is viewed as illegal, is natural since Jerusalem is designated as a mater for future final negotiations. Moreover the CIMP fail to report that all mentions of locations in Jerusalem refer to Old City and few Palestinian neighborhoods.
      The Center often base on Palestinian schoolbook maps as an absolut proof for the violent character of the curriculum. For instance topographical maps of Palestine which avoid determining borders are seen as anti-Israeli. It was so because the main task was to find the place of certain coordinates, and didn’t demand any border lines. So the books omit not only the borders of Palestine and Israel but also other countries as well. There are however maps that delineate the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but don’t explain what they signify. Maps of cities show the existence with a significant Palestinian population before and after 1948 border lines. A unit on tolerance is criticized for omitting Jews, regardless the fact that entire unit is dedicated to tolerance within Palestinian society. ‘Izz al-Din al-Qassam who is mentioned in texts as a Palestinian national hero is seen by the Center’s report as a terrorist who fought the British and Jews. Palestinian texts mention him only as a martyr in the struggle against British imperialism, not in endorsement of suicide attacks. As professor Brown point out, the Center’s logic could be used to cite any Israeli textbook mentioning Yitzhak Shamir as encouraging massacres of Palestinians and political assassinations of British and UN officials.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 10, 2015, 12:07 am

        “Some experts reports show that Zionists and Zionism are portrayed in a negative light. Generally, Israel, Israelis, Zionism and Zionists are depicted as occupiers, invaders, aggressors, infiltrators, and oppressors.”

        I can’t imagine why.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:51 pm

      How are then the Palestinians to understand their history which both helped to create their institutions (like the Oslo Accords) and also compromised their national aspirations. Almost any approach of their history would touch intense domestic and international controversy. The distant past is used to serve national needs, religious and national identities are implemented and reinforced, since their first curriculum puts the emphasis on nationalism. Given the opportunity to write a comprehensive curriculum for the first time, the authors inserted national symbols in every conceivable location and illustration.

      In autumn of 2013. Hamas introduced its own textbooks for grades eight, nine and ten. Unfortunately, except for few articles in the press, there is no appropriate analysis of these textbooks. From some articles we can distinguish several main points.
      Textbooks express Palestinian national identity, focusing on Arab and Islamic influences. Journalist present at one of the lessons in Gaza describes that the students were asked about 1929. They responded that Al-Buraq is owned by a Muslim waqf, which the report of the British commission of inquiry from 1930 confirms.
      The reference to these events allowed the teacher to ask another question, about whether students boycott Israeli goods, just as it happened in 1929 with Jewish products (Jews also- even before that date boycotted Arab goods).
      The boycott of Israeli goods is a traditional, peaceful form of resistance against the occupying forces, which for the last few years is part of the international movement aimed at forcing Israel to end the occupation.
      New textbooks provide other methods of fighting against the occupier. One chapter describes armed resistance. While Israel has given its recent military operations names referring to biblical tradition, Hamas presented its own terminology.
      According to some accounts Zionism is described as a racist movement, which aims to expel Arabs from their own land. The first three chapters focus on the pre-1948 Palestine, and describe among other things Palestinian greatest centers of that period.
      Hamas considers as non-negotiable the Palestinian right to return to their lands and the establishment of Jerusalem as the future capital of the state. Hamas has also added new curricula, such as military training (Israel has the same).
      According to one article a student expressed concern that textbooks can enlarge divisions among Palestinians (since there is more focus on Hamas’ political leaders, etc). They omit for example the Oslo agreement (negotiated by the PLO) or evaluate them negatively (which is how generaly historians evaluate it anyway). On the other hand, many of the students were satisfied with the new textbooks.They explained that after the bombing of the Islamic University by Israel (Israel’s accusations that it was used for military purposes was not confirmed the UN mission), and after the destruction of objects close to them,they treat those books as a form of resistance and a symbol of their steadfastness.
      Another student appreciated that these books are not limited only to the narrative of the Palestinian West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but also they link their history to their heritage in historic Palestine. One of the teachers said that they are highly politicized textbooks. He adds that they focus on nationalism and national identity. Schools managed by the UN do not introduce new textbooks.
      READ:
      1.N.J. Brown, Palestinian Politics After the Oslo or his: Democracy, History, and the Contest Over the Palestinian Curriculum
      2.Analysis and Evaluation of the New Palestinian Curriculum. Reviewing Palestinian Textbooks and Tolerance Education Program Grades 4 & 9, Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information IPCRI and other parts…
      3.S. Nicolai, Fragmented foundations: education and chronic crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, International Institite for Educational Planning
      4.J. Bernard, J. Maitre, Studies on Palestinian Curriculum and Textbooks, UNESCO
      5.A.D. Pina, Palestinian Education and the Debate Over Textbooks, CRS Report for Congress

      Israeli textbooks…Actually israeli textbooks leave much to be desired when it comes to presenting others, etc. So don’t go just talking about Palestinian textbooks!
      1.“Victims of Our Own Narratives?”. Portrayal of the “Other” in Israeli and Palestinian School Books”, Council of Religious Institutions of the Holy Land 2013
      2.Stereotypes and Prejudice in Conflict: Representations of Arabs in Israeli Jewish Society, by Daniel Bar-Tal and Yona Teichman.
      3.4.Bar-Tal D., & Schnell I. (Eds.) (2012). The Impacts of Lasting Occupation: Lessons from Israeli Society
      4. Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education, by Nurit Peled-Elhanan

      • straightline
        straightline
        January 11, 2015, 4:58 am

        Just sent off an order to Amazon – thanks Zofia!

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:54 pm

      Something about Hamas:
      Hamas has a loosely defined political theory which implemented in practice does not obviously mirror its ideal representation and fulfilment. I will not focus my attention on the Hamas’Charter since many researchers, for example Jeroen Gunning or Azzam Tamimi, argue it was written by the “old guard”. Very few Hamas’ leaders and ordinary members have even referred to the Charter as a source of any argument and for the time being the Charter does not represent the views of the present leadership (THERE ARE LINKS BELOW THAT REFER TO THAT ISSUE THOUGH). Hamas from its beginning has been a grass-root movement and therefore its TEXTS tend to be more of MOMENTARY snapshots and abstracts that DO NOT represent Hamas’ complexity. Hamas’ political structure is divided between state and non-state actors, local leaders, all of whom function under the reality of the Israeli occupation. During most of the 90’s Hamas was dominated by internal debates concerning their future, which limited their decisive actions. Moreover, the organisation shifted closer to the left, which indicated their practical approach to practising politics (Mishal and Sela, The Palestinian Hamas). When Fatah and PLO struggled with bribery, Hamas was seen as an honest and fair organisation, independent from Western help.
      Their 2005 electoral platform addresses eighteen various subjects, which with the exception of two represent what we can call secular discourse. “Our Essential Principles” and “Religious Guidance and Preaching” cover more technical details, such as mosque upkeep, what we could consider as ideological Islamist rhetoric. It contains specific political proposals and deals with the following subjects:
      1. A Palestinian State with the Right of Return;
      2. Governmental Reform;
      3. National Unity;
      4. Democratic Rights; and
      5. Domestic Development.
      The draft program for a coalition government shows Hamas’ effort to create a coalition government that will consist of various Palestinian factions.
      Manifesto:
      1. To join the PLO;
      2. To deal responsibly with previous agreements; and
      3. At least temporarily to endorse the two-state solution.
      Cabinet Platform program was delivered during the Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh speech, which represented a draft of Hamas’ governing agenda. It also contains very few religious references and it lacks any militant discourse. The Cabinet Platform presents three new objectives:
      1. To respect the Presidency, the Constitutional Order and the PLO;
      2. To cooperate with Israel in “all mundane affairs”, and
      3. To pursue “all avenues” of achieving peace with the Quartet.

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:55 pm

      The increasing politics of “islamization” since 2009 and 2010 has been the effect of the Hamas’ government efforts to hold and reinforce their legitimacy and control over the public sphere in the face of criticism from the Salafi groups(Ibrahim Qannan. “New Gaza Salafist faction numbers 11,000.” Ma’an News Agency and Radical Islam in Gaza.” Crisis Group Middle East Report N°104). Since 2007 Hamas has competed and even collided with what was labeled as “takfiri groups”. To maintain its ideological influence Hamas tries to hold control over mosques. A fine example is the clash between Jund Ansar Allah, which in August 14 2009 in Rafah declared an Islamic “emirate”. Salafists do not constitute a homogeneous group, but they are quite united in opposition to Hamas. Some of them even liaise with Fatah members, since they represent intelligentsia, the elite and see themselves as better affiliated with Fatah, and therefore consider Mahmoud Abbas to be the legitimate president of the Palestinian Autonomy (The Real Thing: An Extreme Movement That Makes Hamas Look Mild in Comparison.” The Economist).Also Jaljalat constitute unstructured networks, whose presence in Gaza is apparent since the mid-2000.As we can see Hamas is seriously involved in keeping Jaljalat and other groups at bay, thus their primarily task is to maintain order and law obedience. This shift (but not opposition) in policy from reform to maintaining “Islamic” social order has been more evident since the Operation Cast Lead and since Salafists recognized their chance to challenge Hamas. As prof. Yezid Sayigh states Hamas is acting within a secular law system since it has taken control over Gaza Strip and has not tried to change the nature of the legislative system to a more Islamic one (Yezid Sayigh. “We Serve the People” Hamas Policing in Gaza.”)
      Hamas though has difficulties to overcome the existing tensions that emerged by joining together two types of authority: the popular public one and the one built on Palestinian Islamic tradition. With the internal and external pressures Hamas has to underline their ideological stance in practice, so it can be seen as a strong party, capable of bringing order. Use of force is seen as imperative to bring and preserve that order, which is met of course with definite public opposition, especially by various youth groups like the Nida Al-Watan or Sharek Youth Forum. The strong public pressure is probably the primary force that pushed Hamas and Fatah into reconciliation talks. Hamas is not deaf to public opinions and moods, it does not see its authority derived from any divine power. Its policy which is a mixture of Islamic tradition and popular legitimacy can be engaged in talks with other powers, the only thing that is needed is for those powers to have a will to include Hamas as a legitimate force (that won the democratic elections) in those talks.

      About that “summer war” I replied: link to mondoweiss.net

      About Khaled Meshal speech:http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/caroline-palestinian-refugees#comment-732791
      A must read about talks with Hamas, etc. http://www.jeromeslater.com/2012/12/what-to-make-of-khaled-meshal.html and http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/22373/just_war_moral_philosophy_and_the_200809_israeli_campaign_in_gaza.html

      More in rest of the comments.

      That is why Israel not only should but must talk to Hamas, and stop clinging to the old anti-Hamas propaganda. Hamas is a dynamic movement and party that can be reasoned with. Israel from the VERY BEGINNING has denied the Palestinian people their right to have a state and even recently Netanyahu said it time and again and not only that- Israel continues to take more land and build more settlements to make this true! And yet you say that’s because old and unused Hamas’ Charter (not their actual political practice) Israel shouldn’t talk to! On that basis Palestinians should never talk to Israel! So your argument considering Hamas actually makes no sense, and is just the same old, same old excuse not to talk with a party that must be talked to if Israel is serious about peace with Palestinians in the first place! Palestinians talk to Likud (despite their policy) and other parties despite their political narration about the peace process and actual doings in the occupied territory!

      About Hamas (books, and other info): http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/caroline-palestinian-refugees#comment-732671

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 6:05 pm

      Oh and 1 other thing:
      Regarding your: 1st point:don’t just simply write that there is”incitement to genocide of the Jews”…don’t confuse calls to resist against the occupier or poor anti-Israel propaganda with that! (since Israel also do that, it uses cheap anti-Palestinian propaganda too). Your links show anti-Israel and anti-jewish propaganda. Memri and palwatch are sites known for their errors, bad translations, they interpret events, words, etc. at their convenience….
      Oh I see there Itamar Marcus!!- I wrote about him earlier to you….yeah… he is “reliable”!! your links show anti-Israel and anti-jewish propaganda. Not incitement to genocide of the Jews.
      You want to see incitement to genocide? Here:
      Israeli lawmaker’s call for genocide of Palestinians gets thousands of Facebook likes
      http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israeli-lawmakers-call-genocide-palestinians-gets-thousands-facebook-likes

      Incitement to Genocide “Incredibly Common in Israeli Political Discourse”
      Deputy Speaker of Israeli Knesset Called for Expulsion and Jewish Reoccupation of Gaza
      http://www.globalresearch.ca/incitement-to-genocide-incredibly-common-in-israeli-political-discourse/5396420

      Other incitement:
      “They Have To Die”: Israeli Politician’s Comments Calling For Killing of Mothers of Palestinians Trigger International Backlash
      http://jonathanturley.org/2014/07/17/they-have-to-die-israeli-politicians-comments-calling-for-killing-of-mothers-of-palestinians-trigger-international-backlash/
      WAFA Monitors Incitement and Racism in Israeli Media
      http://palestinianmissionuk.com/human-rights/wafa-monitors-incitement-and-racism-in-israeli-media/
      Not to mention those many Facebook pages, promotion of killing Palestinians by the IDF (for example those shirts…)
      Israeli Incitement: Fueling Intolerance & Hate Crimes
      http://imeu.org/article/israeli-incitement-fueling-intolerance-hate-crimes
      http://www.wewiv.com/cat/israeli-media-incitement
      AND GUESS WHAT?! ISRAEL ACTUALLY DO KILL PALESTINIANS IN THOUSANDS!!
      It is not only some poor propaganda….

      ABOUT YOUR: “dealing with even attempts at terror and with acts of extreme incitement”…well you gave 2 links… The USUAL PRACTICE IT THIS:
      1.Israel police brutality remains unchecked 14 years after massacre of Palestinian citizens
      http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-police-brutality-remains-unchecked-14-years-after-massacre-palestinian-citizens/13923
      2.Israel turns blind eye to racist state-employed rabbis
      http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-turns-blind-eye-racist-state-employed-rabbis/9134
      3.“IDF must learn from the Syrians how to slaughter the enemy,” says prominent Israeli rabbi
      http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/idf-must-learn-syrians-how-slaughter-enemy-says-prominent-israeli-rabbi
      4.Ban Arabs from driving cars, prominent Israeli rabbi urges
      http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/ban-arabs-driving-cars-prominent-israeli-rabbi-urges
      5.At officially sponsored meeting, Israel’s racist rabbis say ethnic cleansing working, call for more
      http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/officially-sponsored-meeting-israels-racist-rabbis-say-ethnic-cleansing-working
      6.Rabbi who called for slaughter of a million Palestinians is to supervise Israel’s ‘Red Cross’
      http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/rabbi-who-called-slaughter-million-palestinians-supervise-israels-red-cross
      7.Why are Orthodox rabbis edging into Israel’s apartheid politics?
      http://electronicintifada.net/content/why-are-orthodox-rabbis-edging-israels-apartheid-politics/14078
      8.Settler jailed for kidnapping Palestinian teen
      http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=373188
      9.A Jewish settler was sentenced Sunday to 18 months in prison for the kidnap, assault and battery of a 15-year-old Palestinian boy over three years ago- ONLY 18 MONTHS!!! Guess how much a Palestinian would get?! for throwing stones they get 10 yrs!
      10.Man says Israeli settlers attempted to kidnap his 4-year-old son
      http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=748466
      So far in 2014, there have been at least 313 incidents of settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
      11.Witnesses: Settlers try to kidnap 11-year-old Jerusalem boy
      http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=729713

      Read about IDF that stands and just watch what settlers are doing to Palestinians!
      EVEN:
      1.’Undercover Israeli combatants threw stones at IDF soldiers in West Bank’
      http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/undercover-israeli-combatants-threw-stones-at-idf-soldiers-in-west-bank-1.428584
      2.Commander admits: Undercover Israeli officers threw stones at soldiers in Bil’in
      http://972mag.com/commander-admits-undercover-israeli-officers-threw-stones-at-soldiers-in-bilin/44802/
      3.”Price Tag” Escalation Timeline: Jan 1, 2011 – present
      http://peacenow.org/entry.php?id=1077#.VLBK0Mz_M5Y

      Other issue:
      1.Israeli Arabs more likely to be convicted for crimes than their Jewish counterparts, study shows
      Study commissioned by Israel’s Courts administration and Israel Bar Association finds that 48.3 percent of Arabs receive custodial sentences for certain crimes, compared to 33.6 percent of Jews
      http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israeli-arabs-more-likely-to-be-convicted-for-crimes-than-their-jewish-counterparts-study-shows-1.376521
      2.Since Israeli civil law does not apply to the West Bank, Israeli settlers in the area are theoretically subject to martial law. In practice, they are generally judged in civil courts in Israel within the Green Line and Palestinians are subject to a separate legal system. The arrangement has been described as “de facto segregation” by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination- Concluding observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in 2012 (parahgraph 24).

      Separate Legal Systems for Jewish-Israeli Settlers and Palestinians in the Occupied Territories
      http://www.badil.org/en/youth-education-a-activation-project/item/1695-art7

      3.Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, A/HRC/12/48, 25 September 2009, para 85
      85. Little if any action is taken by Israeli authorities to investigate, prosecute and punish violence against Palestinians by settlers and members of security forces, including killings, resulting in a situation of impunity. The Mission concludes that Israel has failed to fulfil its obligations to protect the Palestinians from violence by private individuals under both international human rights law and international humanitarian law.
      http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/25184E52D3E5CDBA8525763200532E73
      4.Unprotected: Israeli settler violence against Palestinian civilians and their property
      http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/665317F0F18D199B852575230075076D
      5.Yesh Din: “Law Enforcement upon Israeli Civilians in the West Bank, Semblance of Law”. Yesh Din. 2006
      or:
      “Yesh Din report: Only 8% of Palestinian complaints against settlers result in indictment”. Haaretz. 2008-11-03.
      Report: 90% probes into attacks against Palestinians close with no indictment
      http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3565876,00.html

      And these are old reports- see the new ones!!

      Don’t use separate examples, which do not represent the usual practice of the occupying force as a base for your argument! Read all those reports by OCHAoPT or Badil, Adalah and other organisations on how Israel deals with those issues….

      Little digression here:
      Israel won’t recognize 1915 as Armenian Genocide: Israeli ambassador to Baku
      http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/israel-wont-recognize-1915-as-armenian-genocide-israeli-ambassador-to-baku.aspx?pageID=238&nID=76711&NewsCatID=359

    • oldgeezer
      oldgeezer
      January 11, 2015, 1:59 am

      The everything that Israel has to lose is everything it has stolen. I’m really not going to work up a worry over Israel losing illegal gains. Looks good on them. And hopefully they pay a huge price for over half a century of theft and human rights abuses.

      In terms of Israel itself… No it will not lose a thing. It’s military might will protect it from that and, again, that’s how it should be.

      • annie
        annie
        January 11, 2015, 2:03 am

        The everything that Israel has to lose is everything it has stolen.

        hot comment oldgezzer

      • oldgeezer
        oldgeezer
        January 11, 2015, 2:17 am

        I would tell you just how hot my comments are except for the fact they’ve never been described as such haha :)

      • Mooser
        Mooser
        January 20, 2015, 12:13 pm

        Well, I’m just glad none of “Robert in Israel”s arguments are made out of self-interest. They are all the arguments of a person who will sacrifice much if he is right, which makes them even more moving.

  18. Bornajoo
    Bornajoo
    January 7, 2015, 5:29 pm

    @Robert
    “The answer is that while the Palestinians are said to have nothing to lose…. ”

    You are kidding right? Do you ever give a moments thought as to why they “have nothing to lose”? They’ve already had everything stolen from them and the blatant theft continues. They are murdered, maimed, kidnapped, treated like sub humans, herded like animals into checkpoints, bombed to smithereens using the latest lethal military equipment. They have been subjected to the longest and most brutal occupation in history and for the sake of my sanity and trying to keep this comment short I won’t mention the other numerous crimes committed against them

    And you believe they need to make MORE concessions?!

    Okay, I give up….

    • Robert in Israel
      Robert in Israel
      January 7, 2015, 6:55 pm

      Did you ever give a moment’s thought to the fact that the Palestinians have always had *plenty* to lose? Because of their (and your) inability to make concessions that address Israeli concerns, the Palestinians continue to lose valuable assets such as security, prosperity, and territory, You can’t tell me they have the same amount of these as they did 50 years ago. And they certainly have been losing valuable time as well.

      Right now, the Palestinians continue to demand that there be two states: one on the east which is 100% Arab, and one on the west, which is over 50% Arab. Do you really think any country would agree to such an arrangement if put in Israel’s situation?

      And while I prefer to keep these posts short, I can’t just ignore your comment about the Palestinians suffering the longest most brutal occupation in history. Seriously? To say that to a member of a nation whose homeland was occupied for over 2,000 years, and whose people, both in and out of the homeland were butchered by the millions, takes a special kind of chutzpah. Hmm, I guess that “bornajoo” moniker is literally correct!

      But in case you think I’m only focused on Jewish suffering, have you never studied the case of Tibet? Occupied and annexed by China since 1950 (after earlier sustained invasions), over 1.2 million Tibetans have been murdered — all non-combatants. All but a handful of monasteries and shrines remain of the more than 6,000 that existed in 1950. China has continued to flood Tibet with Chinese settlers, such that today ethnic Chinese are about 60% of the Tibetan population. And political and religious rights remain highly restricted for ethnic Tibetans. It should be noted that the Tibetans of course never used terrorism and never fired missiles at Chinese towns and villages. But the world and the UN are mostly silent, because no one with power really cares, and everyone wants Chinese business.

      And that’s just one case of modern occupation. There are plenty of others also far worse than anything the Palestinians have even claimed.

      The real reason that the Palestinian issue is paramount in the UN and in international debate is because this dispute involves the Jews and the Holy Land. If the Chinese had invaded, you’d be as ignorant of this conflict as you are of Tibet-China.

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        January 7, 2015, 9:00 pm

        Screw Israeli “concerns”! You have posted a stinking pile of bs utter nonsense. Do you profess belief in the Grimms fairy tale version of history in your comment? If so you belong in a secure hospital. If not, you need to go and learn real history. There never was any major expulsion. The Muslim and Christian Palestinians are the descendants of Jews who converted down the centuries, with some intermarriage as people migrated around the wider region. There were significant Jewish populations all over the ancient world from well before the supposed expulsion – not least in places like Rome itself as well as Baghdad. You incomers are likely descendants of Khazars with some intermarriage with those populations!
        This site isn’t about China or Tibet, so if you are so bothered about that issue I suggest you find one that is.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo
        January 8, 2015, 5:51 am

        @Robert

        “Did you ever give a moment’s thought to the fact that the Palestinians have always had *plenty* to lose? Because of their (and your) inability to make concessions that address Israeli concerns, the Palestinians continue to lose valuable assets such as security, prosperity, and territory, You can’t tell me they have the same amount of these as they did 50 years ago. And they certainly have been losing valuable time as well.”

        Please allow me to paraphrase a bit.

        “Right now, the Palestinians continue to demand that there be two states: one on the east which is 100% Arab, and one on the west, which is over 50% Arab. Do you really think any country would agree to such an arrangement if put in Israel’s situation?”

        Only countries that are not racist, supremacist, war mongers or are not fully intent on stealing all the land of the indigenous people. Israel isn’t one of those unfortunately

        “And while I prefer to keep these posts short, I can’t just ignore your comment about the Palestinians suffering the longest most brutal occupation in history. Seriously? To say that to a member of a nation whose homeland was occupied for over 2,000 years, and whose people, both in and out of the homeland were butchered by the millions, takes a special kind of chutzpah. Hmm, I guess that “bornajoo” moniker is literally correct! ”

        At this point you have exposed yourself completely for the obvious religious, messianic, colonialist zealot that you are. I grew up with the same kind of brainwashing as you Robert but I managed to open my eyes and escape and I wake up every morning really grateful that I did. It seems that your programming runs very deeeeep Robert. In fact I could hazard a guess that you may even live in a settlement. I won’t bother to reply to your claim that your “homeland was occupied for over 2000 years” because really Robert, at this point you should calm down and wait for the ambulance to arrive. 2 men with white coats will give you a little injection, give you a comfy jacket to wear (might be a bit tight) and take you somewhere where you are safe and will not be able to harm anyone anymore.

        “But in case you think I’m only focused on Jewish suffering, have you never studied the case of Tibet? Occupied and annexed by China since 1950 (after earlier sustained invasions), over 1.2 million Tibetans have been murdered — all non-combatants. All but a handful of monasteries and shrines remain of the more than 6,000 that existed in 1950. China has continued to flood Tibet with Chinese settlers, such that today ethnic Chinese are about 60% of the Tibetan population. And political and religious rights remain highly restricted for ethnic Tibetans. It should be noted that the Tibetans of course never used terrorism and never fired missiles at Chinese towns and villages. But the world and the UN are mostly silent, because no one with power really cares, and everyone wants Chinese business.”

        Hey Everyone! it’s okay now, it’s all okay. Robert has just told us that China is even worse than Israel. Phew! What a relief. We can all stop now, Mondoweiss can pack up and everyone can just forget about the Palestinians forever because the only reason anyone ever speaks about Israel-Palestine and the “Holy Land” is because they are anti semites. How stupid of all of us wasting all of this time needlessly. Let’s all go and have a fight with China instead. Gee, wow, thanks Robert! Another paraphrase

        Oh and by the way, the Chinese occupation began 2 years later. Israel first occupied Palestine in 1948 when you expelled over 750,000 Palestinians. These events are referred to as The Nakba. Oh and just in case you haven’t noticed (I forgive you as you are new here) that this particular website is called “Mondoweiss The War of Ideas in the Middle East”. If you really are concerned about the issues in Tibet you might be on the wrong website. Just thought I’d point that out in case you didn’t notice.

        Oh and finally Robert, all of your continual colonial activities and continued land theft and all of your several hundred thousand nutty settlers have made the 2 state solution totally impossible anyway so at some point it’s going to be one state for everyone. And you know Robert, the gracious, dignified, humble and incredible people known as the Palestinians will accept it and they will live with you in peace, side by side, even after all of the unspeakable things you and yours have done to them over the decades. But your brain simply cannot believe that because you are programmed and brainwashed to be a racist, paranoid supremacist who does not consider the Palestinians to have the same value as Jews. It’s as simple as that.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 6:08 am

        Oh well, I didn’t think you intended on having a serious and respectful discussion, but I tried. You are the one who has chosen to be brainwashed, so of course everyone who disagrees with you sounds brainwashed to their position. Be well, and just so you can enjoy your chosen allegiance.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo
        January 8, 2015, 6:12 am

        @Robert
        (please ignore similar comment as did not publish correctly – this is the correct one)

        “Did you ever give a moment’s thought to the fact that the Palestinians have always had *plenty* to lose? Because of their (and your) inability to make concessions that address Israeli concerns, the Palestinians continue to lose valuable assets such as security, prosperity, and territory, You can’t tell me they have the same amount of these as they did 50 years ago. And they certainly have been losing valuable time as well.”

        Please allow me to paraphrase a bit. ‘Did you ever give a moments thought that the longer I keep the victim tied up in my basement, being continually raped and brutalised, that while she’s down there I’m free to ransack and steal more and more of her possessions. If the victim agreed to be freed, under my strict terms, my conditions, over my continual domination, being forever beholden to me as her superior master, well then I would have let her out ages ago! I mean right now she still has 3 fingers, on each hand and 4 toes on each foot. I’m only asking her to give up a further full leg and one arm and I’ll let her out!’

        “Right now, the Palestinians continue to demand that there be two states: one on the east which is 100% Arab, and one on the west, which is over 50% Arab. Do you really think any country would agree to such an arrangement if put in Israel’s situation?”

        Only countries that are not racist, supremacist, war mongers or are not fully intent on stealing all the land of the indigenous people. Israel isn’t one of those unfortunately

        “And while I prefer to keep these posts short, I can’t just ignore your comment about the Palestinians suffering the longest most brutal occupation in history. Seriously? To say that to a member of a nation whose homeland was occupied for over 2,000 years, and whose people, both in and out of the homeland were butchered by the millions, takes a special kind of chutzpah. Hmm, I guess that “bornajoo” moniker is literally correct! ”

        At this point you have exposed yourself completely for the obvious religious, messianic, colonialist zealot that you are. I grew up with the same kind of brainwashing as you Robert but I managed to open my eyes and escape and I wake up every morning really grateful that I did. It seems that your programming runs very deeeeep Robert. In fact I could hazard a guess that you may even live in a settlement. I won’t bother to reply to your claim that your “homeland was occupied for over 2000 years” because really Robert, at this point you should calm down and wait for the ambulance to arrive. 2 men with white coats will give you a little injection, give you a comfy jacket to wear (might be a bit tight) and take you somewhere where you are safe and will not be able to harm anyone anymore.

        “But in case you think I’m only focused on Jewish suffering, have you never studied the case of Tibet? Occupied and annexed by China since 1950 (after earlier sustained invasions), over 1.2 million Tibetans have been murdered — all non-combatants. All but a handful of monasteries and shrines remain of the more than 6,000 that existed in 1950. China has continued to flood Tibet with Chinese settlers, such that today ethnic Chinese are about 60% of the Tibetan population. And political and religious rights remain highly restricted for ethnic Tibetans. It should be noted that the Tibetans of course never used terrorism and never fired missiles at Chinese towns and villages. But the world and the UN are mostly silent, because no one with power really cares, and everyone wants Chinese business.”

        Hey Everyone! it’s okay now, it’s all okay. Robert has just told us that China is even worse than Israel. Phew! What a relief. We can all stop now, Mondoweiss can pack up and everyone can just forget about the Palestinians forever. How stupid of all of us wasting all of this time needlessly. Let’s all go and have a fight with China instead. Gee, wow, thanks Robert! Another paraphrase ‘How dare you criticise me for keeping all of these victims locked up in my cellar, how dare you even try and discuss this issue in any way when you know full when that the Chinese guy across the road has even more victims locked up in the basement than I have! And they’ve been down there even longer than mine! You’re only criticising me because I’m a Jewish rapist’

        Oh and by the way, the Chinese occupation began 2 years later. Israel first occupied Palestine in 1948 when you expelled over 750,000 Palestinians. These events are referred to as The Nakba. Oh and just in case you haven’t noticed (I forgive you as you are new here) that this particular website is called “Mondoweiss The War of Ideas in the Middle East”. If you really are concerned about the issues in Tibet you might be on the wrong website. Just thought I’d point that out in case you didn’t notice.

        Oh and finally Robert, all of your continual colonial activities and continued land theft and all of your several hundred thousand nutty settlers have made the 2 state solution totally impossible anyway so at some point it’s going to be one state for everyone. And you know Robert, the gracious, dignified, humble and incredible people known as the Palestinians will accept it and they will live with you in peace, side by side, even after all of the unspeakable things you and yours have done to them over the decades. But your brain simply cannot believe that because you are programmed and brainwashed to be a racist, paranoid supremacist who does not consider the Palestinians to have the same value as Jews. It’s as simple as that.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 6:57 am

        My reply remains the same. You want the dispossession of the Jews to remain permanent, but provide no justification for wanting to continue our repression. And you can’t see anything wrong with Palestinians calling for genocide of the Jews. So there’s not much to discuss, is there? Again, watch that video I posted and if you feel that the speaker and the listeners who shout “amen” are unjustified even by what you believe are Israel’s crimes, then maybe there’s something to discuss.

      • just
        just
        January 8, 2015, 9:53 am

        Bornajoo~ thank you for your comments, compassion and obvious humanity. ;-)

        Nice one, Bumblebye! ;-)

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo
        January 8, 2015, 1:03 pm

        Thank you too Just, not only for your wonderful humanity but for your ceaseless energy and determination. Very inspiring

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 8, 2015, 10:16 am

        >> Robert in Israel: You want the dispossession of the Jews to remain permanent …

        Jewish citizens of countries around the world are not dispossessed: They are citizens of their respective homelands.

        Palestinians driven from their homes and lands and awaiting, as refugees, the realization of their right to return to their respective homes and lands – they are dispossessed. And Zio-supremacists like you want that dispossession to remain permanent.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 5:46 pm

        Don’t you get it?? The Palestinians who have American citizenship don’t plan on giving up their dream of returning to Palestine. Even the ones who want to stay in America say that wherever Palestinians are, they should be allowed to return. Ask a Palestinian when their national right to Palestine ends, and he’ll say “Never!”. But for some mysterious reason, Jews are not allowed to say “Never!” We’re expected to say, “Oh yeah, at some point our eternal right just evaporated.”

        Sorry, I’ll never agree to that absurd double standard. Every generation of Jews, whether in the Holy Land or in the Diaspora, always dreamed of the restoration of Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land. The fact that we were oppressed and powerless only explains why it took so long; it does not justify the ripping away of our homeland.

      • mariapalestina
        mariapalestina
        January 9, 2015, 2:02 am

        @ Robert in Israel (I’d love to know just where in Israel you actually live, Robert)

        “We’re expected to say, ‘Oh yeah, at some point our eternal right just evaporated.'”

        Just wondering exactly how you think you obtained that “eternal right.”

        “Every generation of Jews, whether in the Holy Land or in the Diaspora, always dreamed of the restoration of Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land. The fact that we were oppressed and powerless only explains why it took so long; ”

        “… it does not justify the ripping away of our homeland.”

        I guess the oppressed and powerless Palestinians could use the same line.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 6:11 pm

        Exactly! And they do use that line, just hypocritically, since they are trying to do to us we they (falsely) claim we did to them. That’s why in the PLO charter there is a paragraph specifically stating that the Jews are not a nation, because they know all too well that if we are a nation, then the Arab invasion of 629 CE could not have won Palestine for the Arabs, nor that of any later Arab or non-Arab Muslim group.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 8, 2015, 11:14 am

        @ Robert in Israel

        “, the Palestinians continue to lose valuable assets such as security, prosperity, and territory, You can’t tell me they have the same amount of these as they did 50 years ago.”

        Uh huh. That’s right. Israel has illegally acquired by war more than half of what remained of Palestine post 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) http://wp.me/pDB7k-Xk

        “Right now, the Palestinians continue to demand that there be two states: one on the east which is 100% Arab, and one on the west, which is over 50% Arab”

        The Palestinians claim only one state per UNSC res 1806 http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=29495

        “And while I prefer to keep these posts short, I can’t just ignore your comment about the Palestinians suffering the longest most brutal occupation in history. Seriously? To say that to a member of a nation whose homeland was occupied for over 2,000 years”

        Uh huh. Say, who did King David invade and occupy?

        “and whose people, both in and out of the homeland were butchered by the millions”

        Not by any Palestinians of today buster. Israel is colonizing non-Israeli territory TODAY!

        ” have you never studied the case of Tibet? Occupied and annexed by China since 1950 (after earlier sustained invasions), over 1.2 million Tibetans have been murdered — all non-combatants. All but a handful of monasteries and shrines remain of the more than 6,000 that existed in 1950. China has continued to flood Tibet with Chinese settlers, such that today ethnic Chinese are about 60% of the Tibetan population. And political and religious rights remain highly restricted for ethnic Tibetans. It should be noted that the Tibetans of course never used terrorism and never fired missiles at Chinese towns and villages. But the world and the UN are mostly silent, because no one with power really cares, and everyone wants Chinese business.”

        Uh huh … You really know how to step in it … https://www.google.com.au/search?q=China%20Israel%20largest%20trading

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 8, 2015, 11:29 am

        @ Robert in Israel “You want the dispossession of the Jews to remain permanent” … “And you can’t see anything wrong with Palestinians calling for genocide of the Jews”

        Around here people give evidence for their accusations. You see, false accusations are against the most basic of Judaisms tenets and people who make false accusations especially on behalf of the Jewish state, are not welcome

        So some quotes please … thx … we’ll wait … we’ve waited for some people to give quotes and simple answers for years

        “The real reason that the Palestinian issue is paramount in the UN and in international debate is because this dispute involves the Jews and the Holy Land”

        No buster, its because Israel is a UN Member state and required to adhere to International Law and the UN Charter. But rather than take the opportunities it has been afforded hundreds of times in hundreds of UNSC resolutions reminding Israel of its legal obligations, the Jewish state run and aided by idiots has flaunted the law and UN Charter, ignoring its legal obligations, building more and more illegal facts on the ground that it cannot possibly afford to get out of.

        ” If the Chinese had invaded, you’d be as ignorant of this conflict as you are of Tibet-China “

        China has a UNSC veto vote … Go yell at the Israeli Govt https://www.google.com.au/search?q=China%20Israel%20largest%20trading

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 5:36 pm

        Talknic, do you mean you want proof that influential and respected Palestinians openly call for the genocide of the Jews?

      • American
        American
        January 8, 2015, 12:15 pm

        Robert in Israel…..
        “We want to live in security, whether you like it or not. ”
        >>>>>>>>>>>>

        You will never live in security because your criminal behavior is repugnant and unacceptable to most of the world .
        And you create more enemies for yourself every day.
        God speed to your cult as it keeps riding to its Appointment in Samara.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 6:52 pm

        Yeah, here are a couple of good lists of Israel’s repugnant activities:

        http://www.israel21c.org/headlines/top-22-ways-israel-aided-africa-in-last-three-years/

        http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4099881,00.html (ESPECIALLY THE 5TH PARAGRAPH)

      • American
        American
        January 8, 2015, 5:52 pm

        ” “Now I’ve got an exercise for you, Amigo. Could you please post a pre-20th-century reference to the Palestinians? I’d appreciate that” ….clueless Robert in Israel
        >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

        Been telling you people to lay off the zio history comic books and read ‘real’ history. Lets see if your math skills come from comic books also—count how many times ‘Palestine’ and Palestina is called Palestine in ancient history and on ancient maps.

        Palestine 1020 B.C.
        “Palestine in the time of Saul.” From Atlas of the Historical Geography of the Holy Land. Smith, George Adam. London, 1915.

        [Palestine, Ancient] Palaestina (507K)
        From “A Classical Atlas, to Illustrate Ancient Geography; Comprised in Twenty-Five maps, Showing the Various Divisions of the World as Known to the Ancients; Composed from the Most Authentic Sources.” by Alexander G. Findlay, F.R.G.S. 1849.

        The first clear use of the term Palestine to refer to the entire area between Phoenicia and Egypt was in 5th century BC Ancient Greece,[6][7] when Herodotus wrote of a “district of Syria, called Palaistinê” in The Histories, which included the Judean mountains and the Jordan Rift Valley.[6][8][9][10][11][12] In the treatise Meteorology c.340 BCE, Aristotle wrote, “there is a lake in Palestine”. [13][14] [15][16] This is understood by scholars to be a reference to the Dead Sea.[17] Later Greek writers such as Polemon and Pausanias also used the word, which was followed by Roman writers such as Ovid, Tibullus, Pomponius Mela, Pliny the Elder, Dio Chrysostom, Statius, Plutarch as well as Roman Judean writers Philo of Alexandria and Josephus.[18] Other writers, such as Strabo, referred to the region as Coele-Syria[a] (“all Syria”) around 10-20 CE.[19][20] Circa 135 CE, Palestine was used in naming the new Roman province known as, Syria Palæstina,[b] when the Roman authorities created the imperial province

        During the Byzantine period c.390, the imperial province of Syria Palaestina was reorganized into: Palaestina Prima, Palaestina Secunda,[27] and Palaestina Salutaris.[27] Following the Muslim conquest, place names that were in use by the Byzantine administration generally continued to be used in Arabic.[3][28] The use of the name “Palestine” became common in Early Modern English,[29] was used in English and Arabic during the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem. In the 20th century the name was used by the geopolitical entities commonly known as “Mandatory Palestine” and the “State of Palestine”. Both incorporated geographic regions from the land commonly known as Palestine, into a new state whose territory was named Palestine.

        c.340 BCE: Aristotle, Meteorology, “Again if, as is fabled, there is a lake in Palestine, such that if you bind a man or beast and throw it in it floats and does not sink, this would bear out what we have said. They say that this lake is so bitter and salt that no fish live in it and that if you soak clothes in it and shake them it cleans them.” This is understood by scholars to be a reference to the Dead Sea[14][17][15][16]

        c.10-19 BCE: Tibullus, Tibullus and Sulpicia: The Poems: “Why tell how the white dove sacred to the Syrians flies unharmed through the crowded cities of Palestine?”[60][61]
        c.2 CE: Ovid, Ars Amatoria: “the seventh-day feast that the Syrian of Palestine observes”[62][63]
        c.8: Ovid, Metamorphoses: (1) “…Dercetis of Babylon, who, as the Palestinians believe, changed to a fish, all covered with scales, and swims in a pool”[64] and (2) “There fell also Mendesian Celadon; Astreus, too, whose mother was a Palestinian, and his father unknown”[65][63]
        c.17: Ovid, Fasti (poem): “When Jupiter took up arms to defend the heavens, came to Euphrates with the little Cupid, and sat by the brink of the waters of Palestine.”[66][63]
        c.40: Philo of Alexandria, (1) Every Good Man is Free: “Moreover Palestine and Syria too are not barren of exemplary wisdom and virtue, which countries no slight portion of that most populous nation of the Jews inhabits. There is a portion of those people called Essenes.”;[67] (2) On the Life of Moses: “[God] conducted his people as a colony into Phoenicia, and into the Coele-Syria, and Palestine, which was at that time called the land of the Canaanites, the borders of which country were three days’ journey distant from Egypt.”;[68] (3) On Abraham: “The country of the Sodomites was a district of the land of Canaan, which the Syrians afterwards called Palestine”[69][17]
        c.43: Pomponius Mela, De situ orbis: “Syria late litora tenet, terrasque etiam latius introrsus, aliis aliisque nuncupata nominibus: nam et Coele dicitur et Mesopotamia et Damascene et Adiabene et Babylonia et Iudaea et Commagene et Sophene. Hic Palaestine est qua tangit Arabas, tum Phoenice; et ubi se Ciliciae committit Antiochia, olim ac diu potens, sed cum eam regno Semiramis tenuit longe potentissima. Operibus certe eius insignia multa sunt; duo maxime excellunt; constituta urbs mirae magnitudinis Babylon, ac siccis olim regionibus Euphrates et Tigris immissi.”[70][17]
        c.78: Pliny the Elder, Natural History, Volume 1, Book V: Chapter 13: “Next to these countries Syria occupies the coast, once the greatest of lands, and distinguished by many names; for the part which joins up to Arabia was formerly called Palaestina, Judaea, Coele,[a] and Phoenice. The country in the interior was called Damascena, and that further on and more to the south, Babylonia.”; Chapter 14: “After this, at the point where the Serbonian Bog becomes visible, Idumea and Palaestina begin. This lake, which some writers have made to be 150 miles in circumference, Herodotus has placed at the foot of Mount Casius; it is now an inconsiderable fen. The towns are Rhinocorura and, in the interior, Rafah, Gaza, and, still more inland, Anthedon: there is also Mount Argaris”;[71] Book XII, Chapter 40: “For these branches of commerce, they have opened the city of Carræ, which serves as an entrepot, and from which place they were formerly in the habit of proceeding to Gabba, at a distance of twenty days’ journey, and thence to Palæstina, in Syria”[72][17]
        c.80: Marcus Valerius Probus, Commentary on Georgics: “Edomite palms from Idumea, that is Judea, which is in the region of Syria Palestine”.[73]
        c. 85: Silius Italicus, Punica: “While yet a youth, he [Titus] shall put an end to war with the fierce people of Palestine.”[74][75]
        c. 90: Dio Chrysostom, quoted by Synesius, refers to the Dead Sea as being in the interior of Palestine, in the very vicinity of “Sodoma”[76]
        c.97: Josephus, Against Apion: “Nor, indeed, was Herodotus of Halicarnassus unaquainted with our nation, but mentions it after a way of his own… This, therefore, is what Herodotus says, that “the Syrians that are in Palestine are circumcised”. But there are no inhabitants of Palestine that are circumcised excepting the Jews; and, therefore, it must be his knowledge of them that enabled him to speak so much concerning them.”[77][17]
        c.94: Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews: “…these Antiquities contain what hath been delivered down to us from the original creation of man, until the twelfth year of the reign of Nero, as to what hath befallen us Jews, as well is Egypt as in Syria, and in Palestine”[78][17]
        c.100: Statius, Silvae, refers to “liquores Palestini”[19][63]
        c.100: Plutarch, Parallel Lives:”Armenia, where Tigranes reigns, king of kings, and holds in his hands a power that has enabled him to keep the Parthians in narrow bounds, to remove Greek cities bodily into Media, to conquer Syria and Palestine, to put to death the kings of the royal line of Seleucus, and carry away their wives and daughters by violence.”[79]

        Roman Aelia Capitolina period
        Palestine in c.100CE according to Ptolemy (map by Claude Reignier Conder of the Palestine Exploration Fund)
        Undated Classical inscription from Constantinople, published by George Dousa in 1599, mentioning “Syriae Palaisteinae”[80]

        c.135: Syria Palæstina[b] was a Roman province between 135 and about 390.[81] It was established by the merge of Roman Syria and Roman Judaea, following the defeat of the Bar Kokhba Revolt.
        c.150: Appian, Roman History: “Intending to write the history of the Romans, I have deemed it necessary to begin with the boundaries of the nations under their sway…. Here turning our course and passing round, we take in Palestine-Syria, and beyond it a part of Arabia. The Phoenicians hold the country next to Palestine on the sea, and beyond the Phoenician territory are Coele-Syria, and the parts stretching from the sea as far inland as the river Euphrates, namely Palmyra and the sandy country round about, extending even to the Euphrates itself”[82]
        c.150: Lucian of Samosata, Passing of Peregrinus: 11. “It was then that he learned the wondrous lore of the Christians, by associating with their priests and scribes in Palestine. And—how else could it be?—in a trice he made them all look like children, for he was prophet, cult-leader, head of the synagogue, and everything, all by himself. He interpreted and explained some of their books and even composed many, and they revered him as a god, made use of him as a lawgiver, and set him down as a protector, next after that other, to be sure, whom they still worship, the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world.[83][84]
        c.150: Arrian, Anabasis Alexandri:[c] “Tyre then was captured, in the archonship at Athens of Anicetus in the month I lecatombacun…Alexander now determined to make his expedition to Egypt. The rest of Syrian Palestine (as it is called) had already come over to him, but a certain eunuch, Batis, who was master of Gaza, did not join Alexander”[85]
        c.150: Ptolemy, Geography (Ptolemy), including map[86]
        155: First Apology of Justin Martyr, refers to “Flavia Neapolis in Palestine” in the introductory paragraph
        c.225: Cassius Dio, Historia Romana, The Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70CE: “Such was the course of these events; and following them Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate also, and Titus and Domitian were given the title of Caesars. The consular office was assumed by Vespasian and Titus while the former was in Egypt and the latter in Palestine”[87]
        c.300: Antonine Itinerary[88][89]
        311: Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, History of the Martyrs in Palestine. As the “Father of Church History”, Eusebius’ use of the name Palestine influenced later generations of Christian writers[90][91]

        Late Antiquity period
        Late Roman Empire (Byzantine) period
        Notitia Dignitatum of c.410 CE showing Dux Palestinae[92]
        Madaba map extract showing “οροι Αιγυπτου και Παλαιστινης” (the “border of Egypt and Palestine)

        c.380: Ammianus Marcellinus, Book XIV, 8, 11: “The last province of the Syrias is Palestine, a district of great extent, abounding in well-cultivated and beautiful land, and having several magnificent cities, all of equal importance, and rivalling one another as it were, in parallel lines. For instance, Caesarea, which Herod built in honour of the Prince Octavianus, and Eleutheropolis, and Neapolis, and also Ascalon, and Gaza, cities built in bygone ages.”[93][80]
        c.384: Saint Jerome, Epistle 33: “He (Origen) stands condemned by his bishop, Demetrius, only the bishops of Palestine, Arabia, Phenicia, and Achaia dissenting”[19][94][63]
        c.390: Palaestina was organised into three administrative units: Palaestina Prima, Secunda, and Tertia (First, Second, and Third Palestine), part of the Diocese of the East.[95][96] Palaestina Prima consisted of Judea, Samaria, the Paralia, and Peraea with the governor residing in Caesarea. Palaestina Secunda consisted of the Galilee, the lower Jezreel Valley, the regions east of Galilee, and the western part of the former Decapolis with the seat of government at Scythopolis. Palaestina Tertia included the Negev, southern Jordan—once part of Arabia—and most of Sinai with Petra as the usual residence of the governor. Palestina Tertia was also known as Palaestina Salutaris.[97] Recorded in the:
        Synecdemus of Hierocles (c.530 CE) [98]
        Descriptio Orbis Romani of George of Cyprus (c.600 CE)[99]
        c. 400: Genesis Rabba, Jewish midrash, explains that the word “land” in Genesis 41:54 refers to three lands in the region – Phoenicia, Arabia and Palestine.(ויהי רעב בכל הארצות: בשלש ארצות בפנקיא ובערביא ובפלסטיני)[100][63]
        c. 400: Lamentations Rabbah, Jewish midrash, mentions the dukes of Arabia, Phoenicia, Palestine and Alexandria as joining forces with Roman Emperor Vespasian. (שלש שנים ומחצה הקיף אספסיאנוס את ירושלם והיו עמו ארבעה דוכסין, דוכס דערביא, דוכס דאפריקא, דוכוס דאלכסנדריא, דוכוס דפלסטיני)[63]
        c.450: Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History: “The see of Caesarea, the capital of Palestine, was now held by Acacius, who had succeeded Eusebius.”[101]
        c.450: Proclus of Constantinople: “Iosuae Palaestinae exploratori cohibendi solis lunaeque cursum potestatem adtribuit”[102]
        c.500: Tabula Peutingeriana (map)
        c.500: Zosimus, New History: “Finding the Palmyrene army drawn up before Emisa, amounting to seventy thousand men, consisting of Palmyrenes and their allies, [Emperor Aurelian] opposed to them the Dalmatian cavalry, the Moesians and Pannonians, and the Celtic legions of Noricum and Rhaetia, and besides these the choicest of the imperial regiment selected man by man, the Mauritanian horse, the Tyaneans, the Mesopotamians, the Syrians, the Phoenicians, and the Palestinians, all men of acknowledged valour; the Palestinians besides other arms wielding clubs and staves.”[103]
        c.550: Madaba map, “οροι Αιγυπτου και Παλαιστινης” (the “border of Egypt and Palestine)
        c.550: Christian Topography
        555: Cyril of Scythopolis, The Life of St. Saba[104]
        c.560: Procopius, The Wars of Justinian: “The boundaries of Palestine extend toward the east to the sea which is called the Red Sea.”[105] Procopius also wrote that “Chosroes, king of Persia, had a great desire to make himself master of Palestine, on account of its extraordinary fertility, its opulence, and the great number of its inhabitants”[106][107]

        Middle Ages
        Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates period
        Reconstruction of the c.700 CE Ravenna Cosmography showing “Palaestina”

        629: Heraclius, In 629 Heraclius restored the True Cross to Jerusalem in a majestic ceremony:[108][109] I.e. the so-called Fast of Heraclius, which immediately preceding Lent, forms the first week of the Great Fast. The origin of this fast is said to be as follows: that the emperor Heraclius, on his way to Jerusalem, promised his protection to the Jews of Palestine, but that on his arrival in the holy city, the schismatical patriarch and the Christians generally prayed him to put all the Jews to the sword, because they had joined the Persians shortly before in their sack of the city and cruelties towards the Christians. (Abu Salih the Armenian, Abu al-Makarim, ed. Evetts 1895, p. 39, Part 7 of Anecdota Oxoniensia: Semitic series Anecdota oxoniensia. Semitic series—pt. VII], at Google Books)
        c.670: Adomnán, De Locis Sanctis, or the Travels of Arculf: “Que utique Hebron, ut fertur, ante omnes, non solum Palestíne, civitates condita fuerat, sed etiam universas Egyptiacas urbes in sua precessit conditione, que nunc misere monstratur destructa.”[110] translated: “This Hebron, it is said, was founded before all the cities, not only of Palestine, but also preceded in its foundation all the cities of Egypt, although it has now been so miserably destroyed.”[111][112]
        c.700: Ravenna Cosmography
        c.770: Thawr ibn Yazid, hadith, as quoted in Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Wasiti’s Fada’il Bayt al-Muqaddas (c.1019): “The most holy spot [al-quds] on earth is Syria; the most holy spot in Syria is Palestine; the most holy spot in Palestine is Jerusalem [Bayt al-maqdis]; the most holy spot in Jerusalem is the Mountain; the most holy spot in Jerusalem is the place of worship [al-masjid], and the most holy spot in the place of worship is the Dome.”[113][114]
        c.770: Hygeburg, The Life of Willibald: “Then, having visited the church of St. George at Diospolis [he passed] through Joppe, a coast town of Palestine, where Peter raised to life the widow Dorcas, and went along the shore of the Adriatic Sea, and adored the footsteps of our Lord at Tyre and Sidon. And then, crossing Mount Libanus, and passing through the coast town of Tripoli, he visited Damascus again, and came to Emmaus, a village of Palestine, which the Romans after the destruction of Jerusalem called, after the event of the victory, Nicopolis.”[115][116]
        810-815: Theophanes the Confessor, Chronicles:[117][118] Since Muhammad was a helpless orphan, he thought it good to go to a rich woman named Khadija …to manage her camels and conduct her business in Egypt and Palestine… When he [Muhammad] went to Palestine he lived with both Jews and Christians, and hunted for certain writings among them. (Theophanes 1982, p. 35, The Chronicle of Theophanes)
        c.870: Ibn Khordadbeh, Book of Roads and Kingdoms: “Filastin Province 500,000 dinars of taxes” (c.864 AD)[119][120]
        c.870: al-Baladhuri, Conquests of the Lands Wrote that the main towns of the district, following its conquest by the Rashidun Caliphate, were Gaza, Sebastia (Sebastiya), Nablus, Caesarea, Ludd, Yibna, Imwas, Jaffa, Rafah, and Bayt Jibrin.[119]
        c.880: Qudamah ibn Ja’far, Kitab Al Kharaj (The Book of the Land Tax): Filastin Province, 195,000 dinars (c.820 AD)
        891: Ya’qubi, Book of Lands: “Of the Jund Filastin, the ancient capital was Lydda. The Caliph Sulayman subsequently founded the city of Ramla, which he made the capital…. The population of Palestine consists of Arabs of the tribes of Lakhm, Judham, Amilah, Kindah, Kais and Kinanah”[119][120]
        c.900: Limits of the Five Patriarchates: “The first See and the first patriarchate is of Jerusalem, James, the brother of God and apostle and eyewitness, and minister of the word and secrets of secrets and hidden mysteries, contains the whole Palestine a country until Arabia.” (Πρῶτος θρόνος καὶ πρώτη πατριαρχία Ἱεροσολύμων, Ἱακώβου τοῦ ἀδελφοθέου καὶ ἀποστόλου, αὐτόπτου καί ὑπηρέτου τοῦ λόγου γενομένου καὶ μύστου τῶν ἀπορρήτων καὶ ἀθεάτων αὐτοῦ μυστηρίων θεαμάτων, περιέχων πᾶσαν τὴν Παλαιστίνων χώραν ἄχρι Ἀραβίας)
        903: Ibn al-Faqih, Concise Book of Lands[119][121]
        c.913: Ibn Abd Rabbih[119][121]
        c.930: Patriarch Eutychius of Alexandria, Eutychii Annales:[122][123][124] CHAPTER II: ADVERSITIES OF THE CHURCH.: 1 Persecutions of the Christians.: …The Christians suffered less in this than in the preceding centuries. …In the East especially in Syria and Palestine the Jews sometimes rose upon the Christians with great violence (Eutyrhius, Annales tom ii., p. 236, &c. Jo. Henr. Hottinger, Historia Orientalis, lib. i., c. id., p. 129, &c.) yet so unsuccessfully as to suffer severely for their temerity. (Mosheim 1847, p. 426, at Google Books)
        943: Al-Masudi, The Meadows of Gold[119][125]

        Fatimid Caliphate period
        World map c.1050 CE by Beatus of Liébana

        951-978: Estakhri, Traditions of Countries and Ibn Hawqal, The Face of the Earth: “The provinces of Syria are Jund Filstin, and Jund al Urdunn, Jund Dimaskh, Jund Hims, and Jund Kinnasrin…. Filastin is the westernmost of the provinces of Syria… its greatest length from Rafah to the boundary of Lajjun… its breadth from Jaffa to Jericho…. Filastin is the most fertile of the Syrian provinces…. Its trees and its ploughed lands do not need artificial irrigation… In the province of Filastin, despite its small extent, there are about 20 mosques…. Its capital and largest town in Ramla, but the Holy City (of Jerusalem) comes very near this last in size”[119][121]
        985: Al-Muqaddasi, Description of Syria, Including Palestine: “And further, know that within the province of Palestine may be found gathered together 36 products that are not found thus united in any other land…. From Palestine comes olives, dried figs, raisins, the carob-fruit, stuffs of mixed silk and cotton, soap and kercheifs”[126]
        c.1000: Suda encyclopedic lexicon: “Παλαιστίνη: ὄνομα χώρας. καὶ Παλαιστι̂νος, ὁ ἀπὸ Παλαιστίνης.” / “Palestine: Name of a territory. Also [sc. attested is] Palestinian, a man from Palestine.[127]
        1029: Rabbi Solomon ben Judah of Jerusalem, a letter in the Cairo Geniza, refers to the province of Filastin[128]
        1047: Nasir Khusraw, Safarnama[119] / Diary of a Journey through Syria and Palestine: “This city of Ramlah, throughout Syria and the West, is known under the name of Filastin.”[129][130]
        c.1050: Beatus of Liébana, Beatus map, Illustrates the primitive Diaspora of the Apostles and is one of the most significant cartographic works of the European High Middle Ages.
        1051: Ibn Butlan[119]

        Crusaders period
        Tabula Rogeriana, showing “Filistin” in Arabic in the middle of the right hand page

        1100-27: Fulcher of Chartres, Historia Hierosolymitana (1095-1127): “For we who were Occidentals have now become Orientals. He who was a Roman or a Frank has in this land been made into a Galilean or a Palestinian.”[131]
        c.1130, Fetellus, “The city of Jerusalem is situated in the hill-country of Judea, in the province of Palestine” [132]
        1154: Muhammad al-Idrisi, Tabula Rogeriana or The Book of Pleasant Journeys into Faraway Lands[119][133]
        1173: Ali of Herat, Book of Indications to Make Known the Places of Visitations[119]
        1177: A Brief Description, by Joannes Phocas, of the Castles and Cities, from the City of Antioch even unto Jerusalem; also of Syria and Phoenicia, and of the Holy Places in Palestine[134][135]
        c.1180: William of Tyre, Historia Hierosolymitana[136]
        1185: Ibn Jubayr, The Travels of Ibn Jubayr[119]

        Ayyubid and Mamluk periods
        Palestina on the Fra Mauro map, 1459
        Map of Palestine published in Florence 1482 and included in the Francesco Berlinghieri expanded edition of Ptolemy’s Geographia (Geography)

        1220: Jacques de Vitry, History of Jerusalem: “And there are three Palestines, which are parts of Greater Syria. The first is that whose capital is Jerusalem, and this part is specially named Judaea. The second is that whose capital is Caesarea Philippi, which includes all the country of the Philistines. The third is that whose capital is Scythopolis, which at this day is called Bethshan. Moreover, both the Arabias are parts of Syria: the first is that whose capital is Bostrum; the second is that whose capital is Petra in the Wilderness.”[137]
        1225: Yaqut al-Hamawi, Dictionary of Geographies “Filastin is the last of the provinces of Syria towards Egypt. Its capital is Jerusalem. Of the principal towns are Ashkelon, Ramle, Gaza, Arsuf, Caesarea, Nablus, Jericho, Amman, Jaffa and Beit Jibrin”[119]
        c. 1266 Abu al-Makarim, “The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt”, Part 7 of Anecdota Oxoniensia: Semitic series Anecdota oxoniensia:[138] At the beginning of the caliphate [of Umar] George was appointed patriarch of Alexandria. He remained four years in possession of the see. Then when he heard that the Muslims had conquered the Romans, and had vanquished Palestine, and were advancing upon Egypt, he took ship and fled from Alexandria to Constantinople; and after his time the see of Alexandria remained without a Melkite patriarch for-ninety seven years. (Abu al-Makarim c. 1895, p. 73, at Google Books)
        1321: Abu’l-Fida, A Sketch of the Countries: “The Nahr Abi Futrus is the river that runs near Ramla in Filastin”[119]
        1322: Ishtori Haparchi, Sefer Kaftor Vaferach, mentions twice that Ramla is also known as Filastin
        1327: Al-Dimashqi[119][139]
        1338 Robert Mannyng The Chronicle
        c.1350: Guidebook to Palestine (a manuscript primarily based on the 1285-1291 account of Christian pilgrim Philippus Brusserius Savonensis): “It [Jerusalem] is built on a high mountain, with hills on every side, in that part of Syria which is called Judaea and Palestine, flowing with milk and honey, abounding in corn, wine, and oil, and all temporal goods”[140]
        1351: Jamal ad Din Ahmad, Muthir al Ghiram (The Exciter of Desire) for Visitation of the Holy City and Syria: “Syria is divided into five districts, namely: i. Filastin, whose capital is Aelia (Jerusalem), eighteen miles from Ramla, which is the Holy City, the metropolis of David and Solomon. Of its towns are Ashkelon, Hebron, Sebastia, and Nablus.”[119]
        1355: Ibn Battuta, Rihla[119] Ibn Battuta wrote that Ramla was also known as Filastin[141]
        1355: Jacopo da Verona: Liber Peregrinationis: “Primo igitur sciendum est. quod in tota Asyria et Palestina et Egipto et Terra Sancta sunt multi cristiani sub potentia soldani subjugati solventes annuale tributum soldano multa et multa milia.”[142][143]
        1377: Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah: “Filastin Province taxes – 310,000 dinars plus 300,000 ratls of olive oil”[119]
        c.1421: John Poloner “The land which we call the Holy Land came to be divided by lot among the twelve tribes of Israel, and with regard to one part was called the kingdom of Judaea … with regard to the other part it was called the kingdom of Samaria… Both these kingdoms, together with the land of Philistim, were called Palestine, which was but a part thereof, even as Saxony and Lorraine are parts of Germany, and Lombardy and Tuscany are parts of Italy. And note that there are three Palestines. In the first, the capital city is Jerusalem, with all its hill country even to the Dead Sea
        1540 Guillaume Postel: Syriae Descriptio[147]
        c. 1560 Ebussuud Efendi: Ebu Suud is asked in a fatwa, “What is the meaning of the term the Holy Land, arazi-i mukaddese?” His answer is that various definitions of the term exist, among them the whole of Syria, to Aleppo and Ariha in the north. Others equate it with the area of Jerusalem (al-Quds); still others equate it with the term “Palestine.”[148]
        c.1561: Anthony Jenkinson, published by Richard Hakluyt, The Principall Navigations, Voiages, and Discoveries of the English Nation: “I William Harborne, her Majesties Ambassadour, Ligier with the Grand Signior, for the affaires of the Levant Company in her Majesties name confirme and appoint Richard Forster Gentleman, my Deputie and Consull in the parts of Alepo, Damasco , Aman, Tripolis, Jerusalem, and all other ports whatsoever in the provinces of Syria, Palestina, and Jurie, to execute the office of Consull over all our Nation her Majesties subjects”[149]
        1563: Josse van Lom, physician of Philip II of Spain: A treatise of continual fevers: “Therefore the Scots, English, Livonians, Danes, Poles, Dutch and Germans, ought to take less blood away in winter than in summer; on the contrary, the Portuguese, Moors, Egyptians, Palestinians, Arabians, and Persians, more in the winter than in summer”[150]
        1563: John Foxe, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs: “Romanus, a native of Palestine, was deacon of the church of Casearea at the time of the commencement of Diocletian’s persecution”.[151]
        c.1565: Tilemann Stella, map: The Holy Land, the land of promise, which is a part of Syria, the parts that are called Palestina[152] at The Library of Congress
        1570: Abraham Ortelius, Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (Theatre of the World),[153] map: Palestinæ
        1570: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum, folio 51[154]
        1577: Holinshed’s Chronicles: “The principal and chief cause I suppose and think to be, because that whereas the patriarch of Jerusalem named Heraclius came in an ambassage unto him, in the name and behalf of all the whole land of Palestine called the Holy Land, requesting that he would take upon him to be their help, and defending the same against the Saladin then king of Egypt and of Damascus”[155]
        1591: Johannes Löwenklau: Historiae Musulmanae Turcorum Latin: “Cuzzimu barec ea ciuitas est Palæstinæ, quam veteres Hierosolyma dixerunt, Hebræi Ierusalem. Nomen hodiernum significa locum benedictum vel inclytum”, translates as “Quds Barış is the city of the Palestinians, also known as Hierosolyma, in Hebrew, Jerusalem. The name means the holy one or the glorious one”[156]
        1591: Giovanni Botero[157]
        1594: Uri ben Shimon and Jakob Christmann (ed.): Calendarium Palaestinorum Et Universorum Iudaeorum… “Auctore Rabbi Ori filio Simeonis, Iudeo Palaestino” [Author Rabbi Uri son of Simeon, Palestinian Jew]”[158]
        1596: Giovanni Antonio Magini, Geographia, Cosmographia, or Universal Geography: An atlas of Claudius Ptolemy’s world of the 2nd century, with maps by Giovanni Antonio Magini of Padua,[159] map: Palaestina, vel Terra Sancta,[160] at Google Books
        c.1600: Shakespeare: The Life and Death of King John: Scene II.1 “Richard, that robb’d the lion of his heart, and fought the holy wars in Palestine”[161] / Othello Scene IV.3: “I know a lady in Venice would have walked barefoot to Palestine for a touch of his [Lodovico’s] nether lip.”[162]
        1616: Pietro Della Valle: Viaggi di Pietro della Valle il Pellegrino[163]
        1624: Francis Bacon, New Atlantis, “The Phoenicians, and especially the Tyrians, had great fleets; so had the Carthaginians their colony, which is yet farther west. Toward the east the shipping of Egypt, and of Palestine, was likewise great.”[164]
        1637: Philipp Cluverius, Introductionis in universam Geographiam (Introduction to World Geography),[165][166] map: Palaestina et Phienice cum parte Coele Syria[167]
        1639: Thomas Fuller[168]
        1647: Sadiq Isfahani, The Geographical Works of Sadik Isfahani: “Filistin, a region of Syria, Damascus, and Egypt, comprising Ramla, Ashkelon, Beit al Mukuddes (Jerusalem), Kanaan, Bilka, Masisah, and other cities; and from this province is denominated the “Biaban-i Filistin” (or Desert of Palestine), which is also called the “Tiah Beni-Israil””[169]
        c.1649: Evliya Çelebi, Travels in Palestine: “All chronicles call this country the Land of Palestine”[170]
        c.1670: Khayr al-Din al-Ramli, al-Fatawa al-Khayriyah: According to Haim Gerber “on several occasions Khayr al-Din al-Ramli calls the country he was living in Palestine, and unquestionably assumes that his readers do likewise. What is even more remarkable is his use of the term “the country” and even “our country” (biladuna), possibly meaning that he had in mind some sort of a loose community focused around that term.”[171] Gerber describes this as “embryonic territorial awareness, though the reference is to social awareness rather than to a political one.”[148]
        c.1670: Salih b. Ahmad al-Timurtashi, The Complete Knowledge of the Limits of the Holy Land and Palestine and Syria (Sham).[172]
        1688: John Milner, A Collection of the Church-history of Palestine:[173] Hitherto of Places, now follows an account of the Persons concerned in the Church-History of Palestine. (Milner 1688, p. 19, at Google Books)
        1688: Edmund Bohun, A Geographical Dictionary, Representing the Present and Ancient Names of All the Countries:[174] Jerusalem, Hierosolyma, the Capital City of Palestine, and for a long time of the whole Earth; taken notice of by Pliny, Strabo, and many of the Ancients. (Bohun 1688, p. 353, at Google Books)
        1693: Patrick Gordon (Ma FRS), Geography Anatomiz’d:[175][176] Palestine, or Judea, Name.] This Country …is term’d by the Italians and Spaniards, Palestina; by the French, Palestine; by the Germans Palestinen, or das Gelobte Land; by the English, Palestine, or the Holy Land. (Gordon 1704, p. 290, at Google Books)
        1709: Matthäus Seutter, map: Deserta Aegypti, Thebaidis, Arabiae, Syriae etc. ubi accurata notata sunt loca inhabitata per Sanctos Patres Anachoretas at The Library of Congress
        1714: Adriaan Reland, Palaestina ex monumentis veteribus illustrata: “All regions which the Jews inhabited had the name Palestine. Hebrew writers, Philo, Jospehus and others have all used this name.”:[177] map: Palaestina prima, on Google Books
        1717: Laurent d’Arvieux, Voyage dans la Palestine
        1718: Isaac de Beausobre, David Lenfant, Le Nouveau Testament de notre seigneur Jesus-Christ: On a déja eu occasion de parler des divers noms, que portoit autrefois la Terre d Israël, Ici nous désignerons sous le nom de Palestine qui est le plus commun. (We previously spoke of the various names for the Land of Israel, …Now we will refer to the Land of Israel by the name of Palestine which is the most common)[178][179]
        1730: Joshua Ottens, map: Persia (Iran, Iraq, Turkey)[180]
        1736: Herman Moll, map: Turkey in Asia[181]
        1743: Richard Pococke: Description of the East
        1746: Modern History Or the Present State of All Nations: “Jerusalem is still reckoned the capital city of Palestine”[182]
        1747: The modern Gazetteer: “Palestine, a part of Asiatic Turkey, is situated between 36 and 38 degrees of E longitude and between 31 and 34 degress of N latitude, bounded by the Mount Libanus, which divides it from Syria, on the North, by Mount Hermon, which separates it from Arabia Deserta, on the East, by the mountains of Seir, and the deserts of Arabia Petraea, on the South, and by the Mediterranean Sea on the West, so that it seems to have been extremely well secured against foreign invasions.”[183]
        1751: The London Magazine[184]
        1792: Giovanni Mariti: Travels Through Cyprus, Syria, and Palestine; with a General History of the Levant[185]
        1794: Jean Baptiste Bourguignon d’Anville, map: A New Map of Turkey in Asia[186]
        1799: Pierre Jacotin, Napoleon’s director of surveyancing, begins work on the “Jacotin Map”: The region is labelled “Palestine” in French and فلسطين أو أرض قدس (“Palestine or Holy Land”) in Arabic[187]
        Modern period

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 8:41 pm

        Did I ever claim that Palestine is a modern term? Read more carefully. I said that when the term “Palestinians” was used prior to the 20th century (and really prior to 1950), it was almost always used in reference to the Jews, or occasionally to the foreign residents of Palestine. I believe a few times it appears as referring to all residents. But when not referring to the Jews, it was never used to refer to any national group, much less the local Arabic-speakers.

        So when you see the term “Palestine” in an old reference, remember that back then it meant the Jewish national homeland. Here’s a good example from a classic commentary on the Quran 5:21:

        (O my people! Go into the holy land) the purified Damascus, Palestine and parts of Jordan (which Allah hath ordained for you) which Allah has gifted to you and made it a bequest of your father Abraham. (Turn not in flight) retreating, (for surely ye turn back as losers) who are punished: Allah will take away from you the quails and honey:

        http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=21&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 8, 2015, 9:03 pm

        “The real reason that the Palestinian issue is paramount in the UN and in international debate is because this dispute involves the Jews and the Holy Land.”

        It doesn’t matter why the issue is paramount. That doesn’t affect the reality, which is that Israel is in the wrong.

        “the case of Tibet? Occupied and annexed by China ”

        China being in the wrong doesn’t stop Israel from being in the wrong as well.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 4:36 am

        You are of course correct, but I didn’t make those points in the context of justifying Israel.

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 4:44 am

        but I didn’t make those points in the context of justifying Israel.

        rrrriiight.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 8, 2015, 9:04 pm

        still with the tired lie of a jewish nation. jews are a religion not a nation. and its not their homeland as only ethnic groups have those. the alleged jewish homeland wasn’t occupied jews abaddoned it. and arab and proto arab people have always been in palestine. your just another entitled zionist jew who thinks you deserve others people things simply because you want them.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 3:04 am

        Your arguments are purely ad hoc, and have no basis in fact or history. But I can add that one thing that is confusing for modern people is that in the ancient world and until a century or two ago, most national identities included a common religion, and not just language, culture, and geography. The Jews are a very ancient nation, and so of course the religion is part and parcel of the national identity. But we’re not the only extant ancient nation. The Armenians are quite an ancient nation, and they too have a specific religion, and even a specific brand of Christianity as an integral part of their national identity. In fact, when a portion of the Armenians converted to Islam, they stopped being considered part of the Armenian nation, and are instead called Hamshenis.

        In short, your intolerance of Jewish nationalism (and presumably all religio-nations) is merely a function of your cultural bias.

      • annie
        annie
        January 9, 2015, 4:22 am

        one thing that is confusing for modern people is that in the ancient world and until a century or two ago, most national identities included a common religion, and not just language, culture, and geography.

        the concept of nations and therefore “national identities” is somewhat modern, not even a century old.
        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=nation&searchmode=none

        nation (n.) c.1300, from Old French nacion “birth, rank; descendants, relatives; country, homeland” (12c.) and directly from Latin nationem (nominative natio) “birth, origin; breed, stock, kind, species; race of people, tribe,” literally “that which has been born,” from natus, past participle of nasci “be born” (Old Latin gnasci; see genus). Political sense has gradually predominated, but earliest English examples inclined toward the racial meaning “large group of people with common ancestry.” Older sense preserved in application to North American Indian peoples (1640s). Nation-building first attested 1907 (implied in nation-builder).

        (1). As a noun, “citizen of a (particular) nation,” from 1887. National anthem first recorded 1819, in Shelley. Related: Nationally….

        .. earliest English examples inclined toward the racial meaning “large group of people with common ancestry.” Older sense preserved in application to North American Indian peoples (1640s). Nation-building first attested 1907 (implied in nation-builder).

        and religion is barely even mentioned on the page. do you have a source for your allegation “until a century or two ago, most national identities included a common religion” ?

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 6:19 pm

        No, modern conceptions of nationhood are modern, not ancient ones. That was precisely my point. It’s hard for people stuck with their modern assumptions to realize that nationhood can look a bit different than what they’re used to. The inclusion of religion as integral to nationhood is perfectly legitimate.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 8, 2015, 9:09 pm

        >> Robert in Israel: Don’t you get it?? The Palestinians who have American citizenship don’t plan on giving up their dream of returning to Palestine.

        They can dream all they want. The fact is, if they are from the geographic region comprising Partition-borders Israel and are up to n generations removed from it, they are entitled to the same right of preferential immigration to Israel as any other Israeli up to n generations removed from the geographic region comprising Partition-borders Israel.

        (Same applies to the geographic region comprising Partition-borders “Palestine” (or whatever it is to be called.)

        >> Sorry, I’ll never agree to that absurd double standard.

        There is no double-standard.

        >> Every generation of Jews, whether in the Holy Land or in the Diaspora, always dreamed of the restoration of Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land.

        Fervent dreams of Jewish supremacism – of any form of supremacism – should not be realized.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 9, 2015, 12:05 am

        @ robert there is no double standard. jews were premitited to come and live in palestine for close to 200 years they lost the right to claim it because the chose to abbadon it. the palestine right continues because unlike they jews conquerors they want to go back and are forcibly prevent from returning to their homeland and excercizing their legal sovreignty over the territory.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 12:01 pm

        You need to read real history books. 200 years? Seriously?? Try 2,000 years, and actually there were always Jews living in the Land of Israel, and always Jews trying to live here despite the extreme suppression of basic rights, especially by the Arab Muslim occupiers. So Jewish numbers dwindled until the beginning of the 19th century, i.e. 100 years before Zionism influenced more Jews to come.

        But l can’t spend all my time explaining all this. Read. Really read. Not just material you’re comfortable with.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 9, 2015, 4:03 am

        @ Robert in Israel

        You’re hilarious. Un-corroborated propaganda from Memri and PMW is not evidence

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 6:13 pm

        If videos of Arabic language interviews with the original audio present for comparison to the English translations is not evidence, there is no such thing as evidence.

      • annie
        annie
        January 10, 2015, 6:24 pm

        robert in israel, memri and pmw are hate sites and have been busted for fabrication and mistranslation. and known liars don’t make good witnesses in a court of law, even if something they may be saying at the time is in fact true. i would advise one to avoid using our comment sections as a place to traffic those sources. find other sources or another site besides MW to peddle their version of propaganda.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 8:42 pm

        Please direct me to at least one well-documented case of fabrication or serious mis-translation at MEMRI and/or PMW.

        And let’s focus on the clips I posted links to. For the sake of argument, assume for a moment that the clips are accurate. Would they change your opinion, even just a little?

      • annie
        annie
        January 10, 2015, 10:23 pm

        let’s focus on the clips I posted

        hmm, not really. you’ll have to get find a more credible source first.

        Please direct me to at least one well-documented case of fabrication or serious mis-translation at MEMRI and/or PMW.

        here’s a tad of my “supporting evidence” (re your now trashed spamming comment). do your own homework.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2012/09/friedmans-mirror
        http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/08/12/294357/state-department-memri-neocon/
        http://www.ipsnews.net/2009/10/politics-us-pro-israel-group39s-money-trail-veers-hard-right/

        In 2007, CNN correspondent Atika Shubert and Arabic translators accused MEMRI of mistranslating portions of a Palestinian children’s television programme.

        “Media watchdog MEMRI translates one caller as saying – quote – ‘We will annihilate the Jews,”‘ said Shubert. “But, according to several Arabic speakers used by CNN, the caller actually says ‘The Jews are killing us.”‘

        http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/may/15/arabicunderfire
        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/aug/12/worlddispatch.brianwhitaker

        and no, i do not watch the memri videos, not even curious. cheer up, i don’t watch isis videos either.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 9, 2015, 10:42 am

        @robert I didn’t base of of history I based it off of the definition of the word nation. which I fail to see how jews meet when all the connection are solely based in religion. and other ancient nations that are countries now actually meet the definition. there was once an ancient hebrew people but modern jews have nothing in common with them outside of religion. that i reject the fairy tale of jewish nationalism and am “intolerant” to it is not due to a culutaral bias but more due to the fact I’m literate.

        and the armenians have a national idienty outside of religion. jews don’t. and i catagoricaly reject states for religions.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 10, 2015, 4:33 pm

        pj dude states (somewhere in this overstuffed thread): jews are a religion not a nation. and its not their homeland as only ethnic groups have those.

        pj has inscribed on his two tablets the law from on high. the jews are a religion and not a nation. they are not even an ethnic group.

        so, i react:

        Although one does not wish to grant Hitler or his living heirs any ideological victories, but during last century’s outstanding Jewish defeat and catastrophe (1939-1945), the definition of “Jew” was definitely ethnic and totally divorced (at least regarding a practical case by case basis) from the religion.

        (The reason why I specify case by case: In its totality the Nazis’ extermination antiSemitism was influenced by at least one element of Judaism- the myth of the chosen people. The exaltation of the Aryan race utilized the Jewish myth of chosenness as their idea’s polar opposite.)

        If we deal with the period from Napoleon to Hitler there were indeed moves in Western Europe and America in particular to accept the Jew as an individual of a different faith, but this ideation of the Jew as citizen with a faith that we choose to regard as an eccentricity rather than an essence, this idea was nowhere near universal (global) and it was not nearly predominant particularly in regions with the highest concentration of large Jewish populations further to the east. There Jews were considered ethnically different.

        In progressive America and other progressive societies in 2015, there is a move/wish to create a post ethnic society. (not quite the same as the movement towards a multicultural society which is also a zeitgeist in the west.) Aside from this spirit of the west there is the spirit of the Jews: When the Jews came to America (in particular, but maybe other Anglo Saxon countries as well) they felt the urge to become “fully human” and to shed the old world and to be born anew as Americans. This was a strong impulse and still is an impulse for Jews in the West.

        Thus given the anti ethnic ideal of “progressive” America added to the shed-the-old-bring-out-the-new of a large portion of American Jewry, this “Jew is a religion and not a nation nor even an ethnic group” becomes a useful tool to describe the goal that progressive America and assimilating Jews wish to achieve. But historically it reflects a wish or a historical novelty rather than an essence. It may be a good wish and the progressive American idea may deserve the propaganda boost so as to bolster it into the future, but it is not a historical fact and stated alone like that it embodies arrogance and dogmatism rather than humble thoughtful historical perspective or nuance.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 11:41 pm

        @yonah actually i said only nations have homelands i can of the top of my head think of several national homelands that aren’t based on ethnicity. the USA being the obvious one. the former piecemeal state of italy and germany being others.

        but case in point jews don’t have everything that other nations have. they don’t have any sort of cultural connection to each other outside of the jewish faith which is kind of important in trying to claim their more than a religion. hell even the language can’t really be used as its a modern version of what was a dead language.
        so there is no culture no language nothing i can see for connections that aren’t purely there because of the religion. its not so much a decree as recognizing despite attempt of zionists to lie jews don’t meet the definition of a nation. i’m sorry just because their terror campaign to get a state worked doesn’t mean their actually a nation.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 11:53 pm

        @ robert that 200 was a typo. and what muslims arab occupiers. how can the native population occupy their own land. when islam conquered palestine it conquered the native arab inhabitants. the arabs aren’t occupiers. and jews never tried to come back. they never tried to live their they left and never attempted to come back until the 1900’s. and the muslim world protected its jewish citizens for the most part until the zionist invasion and conquest in 1948.

        and no jews weren’t alway recognized as a nation because nations only came into being as and idea around 200 years ago. jews have always been viewed as preciesely what they are a religion.

        so please don’t tell me your explaining and to read.r funny the guy who is quoting only zionist sources telling someone to read sources. i have read zionist sources they just fail to be convincing. probably due to the fact they are lies. so your not explaining anything your just repeating lies about why you and your should be allowed to get away with war crimes. i suggest your read not that it would do you any good. if its not in line with you bs you’ll refuse to even consider it. your arrogant ignorant and little more than a thug in mentality.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 11, 2015, 6:10 pm

        The Muslims didn’t conquer the Arabs! There was no Arabic spoken in Palestine before the Arab invasion. Most of the inhabitants were still Jews, but there were also a lot of Christian and pagan Romans. So yes, the Arabs are absolutely occupiers.

        I can relate to your accusation against me about repeating lies to try to justify war crimes, because that’s exactly how I feel about you and most of the posters here. It’d be nice though if you and the others stuck to discussing specific ideas and claims, and stopped the incessant insults and bombastic, rambling accusations. It accomplishes nothing.

      • oldgeezer
        oldgeezer
        January 11, 2015, 2:13 am

        “Right now, the Palestinians continue to demand that there be two states: one on the east which is 100% Arab, and one on the west, which is over 50% Arab. ”

        Yeah except that they don’t. They have said that they want it Israeli free. A perfectly reasonable demand give over a half century of abuse and theft by Israelis.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 11, 2015, 9:43 am

        @ Robert in Israel “The Palestinians who have American citizenship don’t plan on giving up their dream of returning to Palestine. “

        So what? Why should they? Palestine isn’t Israel.

        “Even the ones who want to stay in America say that wherever Palestinians are, they should be allowed to return”

        Correct to Palestine. It’s a LEGAL right.

        “Ask a Palestinian when their national right to Palestine ends, and he’ll say “Never!””

        Correct as long as a refugee does not take permanent citizenship in a country other than that of return, they have a right to return to their country. Where’s the problem pal?

        “But for some mysterious reason, Jews are not allowed to say “Never!” We’re expected to say, “Oh yeah, at some point our eternal right just evaporated.””

        You have Israel you silly silly person. Go live there get out of Palestine, it isn’t Israeli

        ” I’ll never agree to that absurd double standard. “

        What double standard, YOURS. You’re the one denying non Jewish Israelis the right to return to Israel AND denying the right of Palestinians to return to Palestine.

        “Every generation of Jews, whether in the Holy Land or in the Diaspora, always dreamed of the restoration of Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land”

        Go yell at the Zionist Federation and the Jewish agency you stupid person they’re the people who demanded a separate state. Proclaimed it, had it recognized, committed Israel to adhere to the law and UN Charter. It’s called Israel, go live there and stop moaning!

        “The fact that we were oppressed and powerless only explains why it took so long; it does not justify the ripping away of our homeland”

        Drivel. A) In the 2,000 years since the Roman era til 1948 Jews could and thousands did return to the Jewish People’s Historical homeland and gain citizenship and buy land and settle. B) Again, you’re whining at the wrong people. Go kvetch at the Zionist Federation and the Jewish agency they’re the people who demanded a separate state. It’s called Israel, get out of Palestine, go live in Israel and stop your incessant moaning!

    • Zofia
      Zofia
      January 9, 2015, 3:45 pm

      And what’s with that Palestinian Mandate was for Jews meme?? In the Mandatory text and in the reports made by the British Mandatory power, Palestine was regarded as a territorial unit, set apart from others. Besides the Ottoman citizens who are considered Palestinians or who can apply for Palestinian citizenship in line with international law on the succession of states, Palestinian citizenship can be acquired by birth, naturalisation, marriage, or permission. SO ARABS IN PALESTINE WHO WERE OTTOMAN CITIZENS WERE PALESTINIANS IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT! LOCAL JEWS TOO. THE PROBLEM WAS: WHAT TO DO WITH JEWISH IMMIGRANTS THAT WEREN’T OTTOMAN CITIZENS?? AND HERE THE FUN BEGINS:

      Palestinian citizenship under the British Mandate:

      During the transition period national certificates and passports for Ottoman residents of Palestine were established. Three conditions were to be met in order to obtain Palestinian citizenship: had to be born in Palestine, or to show that the father is Palestinian (women received citizenship of her husband or father). One could apply for citizenship when expressed the intention to remain permanently in Palestine. What was needed was also a document allowing to live in Palestine. Residents were free to leave Palestine with a passport. The process of issuing passports began in August 1920. And they were valid for the duration of a particular journey. In practice,the concept of a Palestinian nationality was used despite the lack of appropriate legal regulations. British administration often defined the events and situations involving the territory administered by them (even unofficially) as Palestinian. “White Paper”, June 23, 1922 confirmed the status of all citizens as citizens of the Palestinian Mandate and no group had other legal status (although de jure they were still Ottoman citizens).

      Besides Article 7 of the Mandate, a definition of Palestinian nationality can be found in two key Orders—Palestine Order in Council (Constitution) and Legislative Election Order—and other lower-level legislation.

      The Palestine Order in Council was, both substantively and administratively, regarded as a constitution.The Constitution provided a functional definition of the term ‘foreigner’. Article 59, paragraph 1, defined a ‘foreigner’ as “any person who is a national or subject of a European or American State or of Japan, but shall not include: (i) Native inhabitants of a territory protected by or administered under a mandate granted to a European State, (ii) Ottoman subjects, (iii) Persons who have lost Ottoman nationality and have not acquired any other nationality”. This definition confirmed that the inhabitants of Palestine were still Ottoman citizens but protected by a European state (i.e. Britain).

      The Election Order defined the term ‘Palestinian citizens’. Article 2 stipulated that “the following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens… Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order”. Although it was provided for the purpose of the legislative election, this definition had in fact established the future status of those individuals who would henceforth beregarded as Palestinian nationals (“Turkish subjects habitually resident in Palestine”). Thus, as some rightly observed, this definition constituted a practical amendment to the Ottoman Nationality Law of 1869.

      Although the Palestine Mandate authorized Britain to pass a law on Palestinian nationality, the enactment of such a law was delayed for three years. This late enactment was questioned at the international level. In 1922, the Permanent Mandate Commission of the League of Nations asked Britain, inter alia, whether it had enacted a nationality law. The Commission also enquired as to whether that law had been framed in such a way as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews, whose permanent residence in Palestine was in accordance with Article 7 of the Mandate. It seems that Britain preferred to wait until it had first acquired a full legal basis for its presence in the country by concluding a peace agreement with Turkey, the legitimate sovereign over Palestine.

      The British-run Government of Palestine naturalized certain groups of foreign residents in the country to enable them to participate in the legislative election in accordance with the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council of 1922.These residents were mostly immigrants Jews.

      Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 (BELOW) of the Treaty of Lausanne: ‘Palestine’ was not mentioned in the Treaty of Lausanne, let alone Palestinian nationality. However, there was no need to mention these terms because the Treaty provided generic provisions applicable to all territories detached from Turkey, including Palestine. This 1923 Treaty differed from the draft Treaty of Sèvres (1920), which introduced a separate regime for each ex-Turkish territory, with special reference to Palestinian nationality in Article 129. Instead, a similar clause to the latter article was embodied, as already detailed, in Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate. Therefore, with regard to Palestinian nationality, the Mandate and the Treaty of Lausanne complemented each other.

      To qualify for Palestinian nationality in virtue of 30 Article, the individual had to meet two conditions. He or she should first be a Turkish citizen, or subject.Secondly, such a person had to be habitually resident (‘établis’, or established, in the authentic French version) in Palestine as of 6 August 1924, the day on whichthe Treaty of Lausanne came into being. In other words, residents in Palestine who had no Ottoman nationality (i.e. foreign citizens or stateless persons) had no right to become Palestinian citizens. Similarly, Ottoman citizens residing outside Palestine on the above date were not deemed to be Palestinians. An exception to the latter provision applied to those individuals who were born in Palestine and fell under Article 34 of the Treaty.

      Palestinian nationality was regulated by the Treaty of Lausanne in a similar way to how the nationalities of other mandated-territories in the Middle East were regulated. The Treaty confirmed the previous practice whereby the inhabitants of Palestine were effectively regarded as Palestinians. To be sure, most of the nationality rules of the Treaty were later embodied in the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order and became part of the country’s legal system. The Treaty of Lausanne, including its nationality rules, remained legally binding and effectively applicable throughout the mandate period (until 14 May 1948)

      The “Palestinian Citizenship Order 1925”, as it is officially called, was
      enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925 and came into force on 1 August 1925. The 1925 Citizenship Order constituted the ‘nationality law’ of Palestine,
      which was referred to in Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate.

      With regard to the terminology, it was argued that the Order favoured the term ‘citizenship’ over ‘nationality’, as it constituted a “fundamental difference which exists in many Oriental countries between allegiance to the state, which is citizenship, and membership of a nationality within the state, which is a matter of race or religion”. But, while it is true that the Citizenship Order used the term ‘citizenship’ in most of its articles, the term ‘nationality’ was also utilized for the same purpose. Employing both terms was consistent with Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate, which used the two terms synonymously. Moreover, as it has been evident in several cases, Palestinian courts did not make a clear distinction between both terms.

      The British government admitted that representatives of the Zionist movement were consulted in “the Draft Palestine Citizenship Order in Council”; thus naturalization of Jews was facilitated through the provisions of the Order. At the same time, Britain found itself bound to regulate the inhabitants’ nationality, pursuant to the international law of state succession, as laid down in Articles 30-36 of the Treaty of Lausanne.

      This is what Article 1, Clause (1), of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order
      declared with regard to those persons who formed, according to domestic law, the first ‘Palestinians’. YOU READ: Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens. To qualify for Palestinian nationality in accordance with the above-quoted clause, the person was required to be: (1) a Turkish subject, or citizen; and (2) habitually resident in Palestine. The legal meaning of ‘Turkish’ and ‘habitually resident’ cannot be defined in the abstract, especially as court rulings had already interpreted both terms, as reflected in the Treaty of Lausanne, in other areas outside Palestine. Accordingly, the person was required to be first, and foremost, a Turkish citizen. A foreigner, regardless of his or her length of residence in Palestine before 1925, had no right to acquire Palestinian nationality under Article 1, Clause (1), of the Order.

      ALL THIS IN:THE INTERNATIONAL LAW FOUNDATIONS OF PALESTINIAN NATIONALITY. A Legal Examination of Palestinian Nationality under the British Rule.

      British even “helped” Ottoman-Palestinians obtain other citizenships (and thus to relinquish their Ottoman, then Palestinian, citizenship). In other words, British Mandate citizenship laws tried to crystallize new Palestinian citizenship-based community, but contributed to the dispersion of Palestinian national identity!!!! HERE YOU HAVE YOUR ARTIFITIAL POLITICAL AND LEGAL MANUVERS CONCERNING THE PROBLEM OF ZIONISTS PLAN TO SETTLE IN PALESTINE… SO PALESTINIAN ARABS (AND LOCAL JEWS) WERE SEEN AS PALESTINIANS…NOT ONLY JEWS!!! WERE DID YOU GET THAT IDEA?!
      Amended by Palestinian Nationality Order (Amendment) of 1931 providing that those Ottoman citizens who did not normally reside in Palestine on the 1 August 1925 (Citizenship Order came into force), but who were usually resident in Palestine on the 6 August 1924 (Lausanne Convention came into force, where Palestine was officially detached from Ottoman Empire) are deemed Palestinians unless, by the date the 1931 Amendment Order came into force, they have obtained another citizenship. However, in successive amendment (Palestinian Nationality Order (Amendment) 1939), a second paragraph was added to the original Article 2 of the Citizenship Law, providing that those who satisfy previous provisions, but who had obtained another citizenship and kept personal constant connections with Palestine may apply for Palestinian citizenship which the Palestinian government has the power to accept or reject. A consolidated version of all Palestinian Nationality Orders of 1925–1941 was endorsed in 1944.

      By birth (Arts. 3–6): those meeting any of the following conditions are considered Palestinians:
      • born in Palestine from a legitimate marriage where the father was, by then, Palestinian
      • born outside Palestine from a legitimate marriage where the father was Palestinian or naturalized Palestine and was present in Palestine on the date of birth of the child
      • born in Palestine to a legitimate/illegitimate marriage and did not obtain another nationality.

      By naturalisation (Arts. 7–11): any person who is a naturalised Palestinian enjoys the same rights and duties as Palestinian citizens. The High Commissioner may issue a naturalisation certificate if there is proof that the applicant:
      • has lived in Palestine for at least two to three years prior to applying to be naturalised;
      • is of good moral standing and has a sufficient knowledge of one of the three official Mandate languages, English, Arabic or Hebrew.
      • intends to reside in Palestine if their application is accepted.
      There is, however, the High Commissioner is not under obligation to grant a naturalisation certificate on presentation of proof of having met the conditions imposed by law. He does not need to justify his refusal and his decision is final.

      By marriage (Arts. 12–13): The general rule is that the wife of a Palestinian is considered Palestinian, and the wife of foreigner is considered a foreigner, in line with Article 6 that stipulates that the wife takes the citizenship of the husband. This general rule should, however, be read in the light of the following:
      The foreign woman who marries a Palestinian before 25 July 1939 (entry in force of the Palestinian Nationality Order (Amendment) of 1939), becomes Palestinian. After that date, the High Commissioner may provide a naturalisation certificate upon request.

      By permission (Arts. 12(6), 14).

      To sum up: citizens of Palestine were Arabs and local Jews. Special legal procedures had to be implemented to make the Jewish immigrants citizens (since they weren’t Ottoman citizens,etc). The British even prevented real Palestinians (born in Palestine, etc) from formally obtaining the citizenship- like in the case of a Palestinian who had gone beyond the boundaries of Turkey (for business or trip) at that time (M. Qafisheh, The International Law Foundations of Palestinian Nationality)

      So again, you were wrong.

      M. Qafisheh, The International Law Foundations of Palestinian Nationality
      Asem Khalil, Palestinian Nationality and Citizenship.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo
        January 9, 2015, 5:00 pm

        Dear Zofia
        I can only imagine just how much time, energy and effort you must have put into these replies. Your knowledge in this area is simply vast. I’ve read through it all once and will read it all again. Thank you for all of the references too

        Unfortunately it might be wasted on the individual who it was actually intended for as I have a feeling he is way too programmed to accept any real facts or actual reality. But I live in hope and would love to be wrong!

        But regardless of the original intention, this huge store of reading material is now up for all to read and learn from which can only be positive

        I would also like to thank Talknic for his excellent factual comments which I have also learned much from

        (and many more great commentators I didn’t mention!)

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 9, 2015, 7:18 pm

        Thank you Bornajoo! :) I also would like to thank Talknic for his comments!:) They are awesome!:)

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 10, 2015, 4:52 am

        Zofia , what an exhaustive (and exhausting) series of posts! Surely not the work of a single lunch hour.
        It would be a good idea for MW to collect them into a set of essays for a FAQ section (something MW desperately needs) so that when harbareers start peddling their tripe we can refer them to your refutations.

      • annie
        annie
        January 10, 2015, 3:15 pm

        It would be a good idea for MW to collect them into a set of essays for a FAQ section

        here, just for you.. bookmark it: http://mondoweiss.net/profile/zofia

        ;)

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 7:58 pm

        Zofia, I don’t have time for megaposts, so I’ll just respond to your first key point, that the Mandate was not meant for the Jews.

        Well, that wasn’t my language. What I said was that the goal of the Mandate was to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine.

        Here’s the key part of Art. 2 of the Mandate text: ART. 2.

        “The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.”

        Is that different from what I said? Looks pretty unambiguous to me.

        The creation of the Jewish national home was not to prejudice “civil and religious rights” of non-Jews, but national rights were only relevant vis a vis the Jews. That was the very point of the Mandate. Like it or not.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 11, 2015, 10:00 am

        @ Robert in Israel
        ” What I said was that the goal of the Mandate was to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine”

        You’re full of Red Heifer shite pal.

        It was one of many goals for the State of Palestine, a state that had provisional recognition, FIRST line (referring to art 22 LoN Covenant) of the Mandate FOR Palestine. See also Article 7 under which Jewish folk could get Palestinian citizenship under the Palestinian Nationality law.

        “The creation of the Jewish national home was not to prejudice “civil and religious rights” of non-Jews, but national rights were only relevant vis a vis the Jews”

        Problem …. the Palestinians already had national rights in Palestine as Palestinian citizens rights that were further codified under the Palestinian Nationality Law.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 5:19 pm

        Talknic, you seriously project on to others your own failings. And as for the “Palestinian citizenship” you keep quoting, that was vis a vis the British Mandate, not some mythical Palestinian state that once existed. I know you know that, but you keep hoping that others who don’t like to read will believe you, so I’m setting the record straight. It was a temporary citizenship until the Mandate would be ended. Stop changing historical facts to suit your politics.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 14, 2015, 4:13 am

        @ Robert in Israel “Talknic, you seriously project on to others your own failings”

        Care to elucidate as to what these failings are Robert … thx

        “.And as for the “Palestinian citizenship” you keep quoting, that was vis a vis the British Mandate, not some mythical Palestinian state that once existed”

        Mmmm… I wonder what was meant by Palestinian citizenship per Article 7 of the LoN Mandate for Palestine. And what was meant in the same document by Palestinian Nationality Law and; why was the reference to Palestine’s provisional recognition included in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, first line?

        .” I know you know that, but you keep hoping that others who don’t like to read will believe you”

        That’s why I link to every point made. Right … I’ll have to remember not to give any sources

        ” so I’m setting the record straight. It was a temporary citizenship until the Mandate would be ended”

        Strange I can’t find that anywhere in the LoN Mandate for Palestine. HELP! You’re so clever you can read things that don’t exist

        ” Stop changing historical facts to suit your politics”

        Save it pal, I’ve not changed anything

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 16, 2015, 7:14 am

        Talknic, you asked the following question:
        “Mmmm… I wonder what was meant by Palestinian citizenship per Article 7 of the LoN Mandate for Palestine. And what was meant in the same document by Palestinian Nationality Law and; why was the reference to Palestine’s provisional recognition included in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, first line?”

        I already know that you won’t accept my analysis or that of anyone suspected of the Z word. So I’ll quote a very scholarly article by a distinguished Palestinian Arab professor, Mutaz M. Qafisheh. At the bottom of this post is his very impressive (professionally and nationalistically) CV. Here’s the link to the full article plus key paragraphs that answer your question (the whole article has numbered paragraphs – I nice idea, I must say):

        1 – This paper addresses the status of the inhabitants of the territory that has become known as ‘Palestine’ and that had been part of the Ottoman Empire since 1516, during the period starting from the beginning of the British occupation on 9 December 1917 until the enforcement of the Palestinian Citizenship Order on 1 August 1925,1 from the perspective of international law.

        2 – Under the Turkish rule, according to the Ottoman Nationality Law of 19 January 1869,2 Palestine’s inhabitants were Ottoman citizens. At that time, legally speaking, there was nothing called Palestine, Palestinian nationality, or Palestinians, neither was there anything called Israel, Israeli nationality, or Israelis.

        5 – In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”

        44 – Obviously, the main objective of regulating nationality, according to this article [7], was to turn immigrant Jews into Palestinian citizens. This came as a logical consequence to the overall goal of the Palestine Mandate: to create a Jewish national home in the territory.

        93 – The overall purpose of the regulation of Palestinian nationality from 1917 through 1925 and the years that followed has been to bring to Palestine as many Jews as possible and to reduce the number of Palestine’s Arabs as much as possible – a policy that is still in place today.

        Link to the full article: http://bcrfj.revues.org/6405

        There are a lot of other relevant passages, but clearly Dr. Qafisheh does not agree with you that Article 7 somehow undermines Zionist claims or bespeaks some longstanding Palestinian nationality, and in fact, exactly the opposite: he feels it was unfair to the Arabs of the Palestine Mandate.

        Dr. Qafisheh’s credentials:

        Dr. Mutaz M. Qafisheh holds Ph.D. in International Law (honors), Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva. He is currently a Professor of International Law at the Hebron University and the Al-Quds University, Palestine, and a practicing international lawyer. He is a former Human Rights Officer, United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva and Beirut; Regional Director, Penal Reform International, Middle East and North Africa, Amman; Director, Security Sector Reform, Birzeit University; Director, Legal Education Program, Palestinian Law Schools, Jerusalem; Legal Advisor and Program Manager, Legislative Process, Palestinian Legislative Council, Ramallah. His areas of specialization include human rights, humanitarian law, international criminal law, nationality and citizenship, statelessness, refugees, migration, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, law of the Middle East, Islamic law, UN system, and legislative drafting.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 16, 2015, 5:02 pm

        @Robert:
        It is nice that you skipped the points that aren’t that convenient for you. Why not read the whole book yourself?
        But first:
        Palestinians had their own vision of their identity, geography, society, etc. BEFORE the British got there. Even the Ottoman Empire recognized that in practice a Palestinian territorial unit was functioning (economically, socially, etc)…read about vilayet Filastin or Sanjak of Jerusalem.
        Khalidi, Palestinian Identity Read also: B. Abu-Manneh, The Rise of the Sanjak of Jerusalem in the Late Nineteenth Century, [in:] The Israel/Palestine Question,ed. I. Pappe, Routledge, London 1999 J. Bussow, Hamidian Palestine: Politics and Society in the District of Jerusalem 1972-1908, Brill, Leiden 2011 There you will read about: “vilayet Filastin” (in Rashid Khalidi, Palestinain Identity, page 151) which was used next to: “Kuds-i Serif Eyaleti”. Also in Doumani, Rediscovering Palestine also in works of Salim Tamari.
        http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/million-palestinians-feiglin#comment-732760
        http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/million-palestinians-feiglin#comment-732844
        http://mondoweiss.net/2014/12/million-palestinians-feiglin#comment-732794

        Qafisheh wrote [about the LEGAL approach to nationality]:
        … Yet he failed to mention the fact that although there was no Palestinian state before 1948, Palestinian nationality was internationally recognized and Palestinian citizens had never been regarded or treated as stateless at the time. Nonetheless, the existence of a distinct Palestinian nationality during the period of British rule has never been denied by those writers who have addressed the issue of Palestinian refugees. A few studies, particularly those advocating the right of return, have indeed given the question of nationality some legal account; however, they did so without sufficient discussion… However, no writer (including those Israeli authors who questioned the right of Palestinian refugees to return), has denied the existence of Palestinian nationality under the mandate. Thus, it was interestingly observed, “… the unanimous recognition of a proper nationality for their [i.e. Mandated-territories of Class ‘A’] inhabitants might throw light upon the status and the rights of the Palestinian Arab refugees acquired under the Mandate”.
        Most of these studies, including one conducted by the present writer, have merely provided an overview of Palestinian nationality and failed to reach the heart of the problem.

        Chapter II is devoted to nationality under the Ottoman Empire, as the status of ‘Ottoman subject’ was required for the automatic acquisition of Palestinian nationality when the latter nationality was first initiated.

        Chapter V, which will clarify the status of ‘natural Palestinians’, or those individuals whose Ottoman nationality was automatically replaced by Palestinian nationality upon the enforcement of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order. The status of Ottoman subjects who were habitually residing in Palestine (and who constituted the bulk of the Palestinian population) upon the enforcement of the said Order will be first reviewed. The problematic status of those persons who were born in Palestine but were residing abroad upon the enforcement of the same Order will then be addressed in the light of the applicable law and in accordance with the practice of the British Empire and the British-run Government of Palestine.

        What you don’t uderstand is that:
        In the Mandatory text and in the reports made by the British Mandatory power, Palestine was regarded as a territorial unit, set apart from others. Besides the Ottoman citizens who are considered Palestinians or who can apply for Palestinian citizenship in line with international law on the succession of states, Palestinian citizenship can be acquired by birth, naturalisation, marriage, or permission.

        On page 72: Palestinian nationality existed despite a lack of comprehensive legislative regulation.
        On page 73: This British practice was in line with the overall British policy towards Palestine at the time. Such policy was included in a statement presented to the British Parliament by the Secretary of State for the Colonies on 23 June 1922 (commonly known as ‘the White Paper’). Among other things, the White Paper declared:
        [I]t is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status.

        On page 76:Using ‘nationality’ and ‘citizenship’ in this article implied that both terms were synonymous. It also demonstrated that the definition of nationality was considered to presume the existence of a legal relationship between the individuals and Palestine as a mandated territory, or as a state. In other words, Palestinian nationality, at least in the way in which it was ‘framed’, was not based upon racial, religious or other political considerations. Indeed, “la citoyenneté palestinienne n’est pas une nationalité juive”; nor, equally, was such ‘citoyenneté’ deemed to be “une nationalité arabe”. Therefore, “under Article 7 of the Mandate, the intention to take up permanent residence in Palestine is a sine qua non in the case of those Jews whose acquisition of Palestinian citizenship is to be facilitated”.

        MORE: The British policy later shifted- White Paper of 1939. On page 207: limiting the total Jewish immigrants to 75,000 in five years). It may be recalled that the Palestine Royal Commission, which had visited the country in 1936, recommended to the British government, inter alia, the restriction of the future Jewish immigration into Palestine. In general, the Government of Palestine’s control of immigrates after 1939 was in line with the White Paper’s policy.The definition of the term ‘foreigner’ had been the logical result of the recognition of a distinct Palestinian nationality. In virtue of various immigration legislation, a ‘foreigner’, or ‘alien’, was regarded as any person who was not a Palestinian citizen under the Citizenship Order of 1925.
        On page 223:
        This position was to change after the outbreak of World War II. In December 1939,
        the British government decided that “no facilities were to be granted to any person of whatever nationality who came from or who had visited German territory since the beginning of the war”. Thus, immigration into Palestine became restricted for two reasons. The first, as already noted, was the British policy adopted with the White Paper of 1939, which reflected Palestinian Arab fears of Jewish immigration.978 The second reason related to the status of enemy nationals of those persons who possessed German nationality, which related, in turn, to security concerns surrounding persons coming from Germany.
        Nonetheless, certain exceptions to these rules were accorded on humanitarian
        grounds to Jewish refugees escaping from Europe.

        Zionist project and Palestinian national movement resulted in:
        At the end of the British rule, the law and facts concerning nationality in Palestine faced a new controversy. In legal terms, original and naturalized Palestinian citizens (Christians, Jews, Muslims and others) were equal nationals, regardless of their religion. In reality, however, these citizens were divided into two ‘Palestinian peoples’: Arab and Jewish. In such a situation, Palestinian nationality, as well as the entire future of the country, was arriving at a historical juncture. Page 253.
        Plus:
        UN partition plan envisioned that there would be a Palestinian Arab majority in the “Jewish” part (Arabs=509.780, Jews= 499.020 in Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question. Report of Sub-Committee 2: unispal.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf on page 41)- Zionists knew that very well… Palestinian support for the partition wouldn’t change much regarding Zionist political strategy… Plus, right after the vote Jews attacked Palestinian villages and people. Gurion even ordered to attack the villages that signed a non-aggression pact- he wanted to provoke Palestinians to fight (in Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel)

        On page 257:
        The Partition Plan’s principle on nationality in the future entities of Palestine was straight-forward. Palestinian citizens, irrespective of their religion, residing in the Arab State, would become citizens of that Arab State (but not Arab citizens). Likewise, Palestinian citizens, also regardless of their religion, residing in the Jewish State would become citizens of that Jewish State (but not Jewish citizens).
        ALSO:… foreigners residing in the Arab State or the Jewish State (regardless of whether they were Arabs, Jews or neither) could not automatically become citizens in either State (p.258).
        Page 259:(1) the nationality of the Arab State (but not an ‘Arab
        nationality’—in the sense that the Arab State nationality should not only be given to persons belonging to the Arab race); or (2) the nationality of the Jewish State (but not a ‘Jewish nationality’—which means that the Jewish State nationality could be conferred on non-Jews). Thus, the Plan had merely applied an established rule of international law with regard to this point.
        The basis of the automatic change from Palestinian nationality into the nationalities of post-Palestine entities, therefore, is derived from the law of state succession, whatever the legal validity of the Plan itself.

        Partition Plan had merely declared the legal rules relating to the future nationalities in the Arab State and the Jewish State; it did not create these nationalities.

        Jerusalem: Thus, Palestinian citizens as well as foreigners of all nationalities
        who were residing at the time in Jerusalem were eligible to be Jerusalem’s nationals. By the end of 1944, the settled population in Jerusalem numbered 240,880. Of this number, 140,530 persons were Arabs (96,760 Muslims and 43,770 Christians), 100,200 were Jews (both Palestinian and foreign), and there were 150 others.The exact number of non-Jews and non-Arab foreigners was unknown.

        By recognizing the de facto presence of foreign Jews in Palestine, the nationality provisions of the Plan recognized the pre-existing facts in Palestine. However, while the provisions admitted certain rules of international law relating to state succession, they generally ignored the domestic nationality law applicable in Palestine (i.e. the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 and its amendments).Obviously, the Plan attached greater importance to the Arab race and to the Jewish religion (both political criteria) than to the bond of nationality (a legal criterion) as bases for the future nationalities in the projected post-Palestine entities. Happily, the existence of a distinct Palestinian nationality was not denied in principle.

        Do you see now? British Mandate legally facilitated Jewish immigration, but not the creation of an actual “Jewish national home”. There was no Jewish, nor Arab nation but Palestinian!!! Zionists had sth else in mind… That status didn’t give the Zionists a state of their own, they were supposed to be and live along other Palestinians, who expressed their own identity (that is not Zionist), own national rights, vision of their state that based on their own traditions, who saw the Zionists immigrants as alien (and rightly so).
        That was why Zionists had to create a “state within a state” to implement in practice that “Jewish home” of theirs…
        So the British did facilitate Jewish immigration (not for long though) but that wasn’t enough for the Zionists…They didn’t want to become Palestinian citizens alongside people who they didn’t considered as “Jewish” (their own vision of it) and who were in majority, who would take control of the state after the departure of the British and implement their own laws, etc. So Zionists acted on their own…
        The various British policy towards that is a different issue. Only what happened on the ground- the rivalry of two national movements CHANGED the policy, which resulted in the partition plan.
        So the British Mandate wasn’t to become a “Jewish national home”… as the Zionists envisioned it… The British were obligated to help to create a Palestinian state with Palestinian nationals [Arab and Jewish- if you want to keep that division.. local Jews had a diff opinion on that though- MORE in:
        1.Ammiel Alcalay, “After Jews And Arabs: Remaking Levantine Culture”
        2.”Lives in Common: Arabs and Jews in Jerusalem, Jaffa and Hebron”
        3.Shabi R., We Look Like the Enemy: The Hidden Story of Israel’s Jews from Arab Lands, Walker & Company, 2008
        4.Yuval Ben-Bassat “Late Ottoman Palestine”
        5.S. Tamari, Mountain against the Sea: Essays on Palestinian Society and Culture
        or
        1.Kimmerling B., The Invention and Decline of Israeliness: State, Society, and the Military, University of California Press, 2001
        2.Ohana D., The shaping of Israeli identity: myth, memory, and trauma, Routledge
        3.Orr A., Israel: Politics, Myths and Identity Crises, Pluto Press, 1994
        4.Oz A., The Sabra: the creation of the new Jew, University of California Press, 2000
        5.Piterberg G., The Returns of Zionism: Myths, Politics and Scholarship in Israel, Verso, 2008
        6.Sternhell Z.,The Founding Myths of Israel: Nationalism, Socialism, and the Making of the Jewish State, Princeton University Press, Nowy Jork 1999
        7.Yehuda N., Masada Myth: Collective Memory and Mythmaking in Israel, University of Wisconsin Press, 1995
        8.Yehuda N., Sacrificing Truth: Archaeology and the Myth of Masada, Humanity Books, 2002
        9.Zerubavel Y., Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition, University Of Chicago Press, 1995

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 16, 2015, 11:49 pm

        “page 76:Using ‘nationality’ and ‘citizenship’ in this article implied that both terms were synonymous”

        As they have been throughout the twentieth century.

        Zofia, you are doing a wonderful job here, but do take a rest now and again. I don’t want you to burn out.

  19. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 7, 2015, 9:56 pm

    I think it’s cute that Zionists always demand that the people with NO power must agree that the people with ALL the power can keep it.

    • Robert in Israel
      Robert in Israel
      January 8, 2015, 4:47 am

      Ideally, I would want the world to recognize the definitive and minimalist Biblical borders, which on the West is the Mediterranean Sea as south as Wadi El-Arish (“the River of Egypt”, which is NOT the Nile), and as far north as the Litani River in southern Lebanon (despite attempts to identify more northerly points with Biblical names, in practice archaeologists have shown that the Israelites did not settle north of the Litani, so I presume my ancestors of yore knew the places that modern commentators and geographers can only speculate on). On the east, the Jordan River of course, along with the Golan on up to the southern line of the Litani.

      This Wikipedia map is close, but I would raise the southern border closer to Beer Sheba, and lower the northern portion down to the gray line of the Litani: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel#mediaviewer/File:Map_Land_of_Israel.jpg

      Re the practical side of these borders, I would leave the southern Lebanese/the Gov’t of Lebanon (but not Hizbullah, obviously) in de facto control unless they voted to fully join Israel. Ditto for Taba (the small southeastern chunk of the Sinai Peninsula added in this border scheme), even if just 700 Egyptian resort employees live there.

      These would be the most just borders. However, if the Palestinians made the concessions I’ve written about elsewhere, I would support a permanent Palestinian state on the Jewish homeland. And ditto for southern Lebanon and Taba. Justice can take a back seat to peace if there is sufficient justice in the compromise between the two.

      That said, no borders, even with Israel getting just Tel Aviv, will bring peace without a commitment to peace education. It starts there, and since education in the Middle East is intricately wound up with Islam, there can only be peace when Islam undergoes the same revolution that Christianity underwent in the 19th and 20th centuries. But that’s for another discussion.

      I hope I’ve answered your question clearly.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 8, 2015, 11:46 am

        @ Robert in Israel “Ideally, I would want the world to recognize the definitive and minimalist Biblical borders… etc etc .. “

        Tough for you. Israel was proclaimed and recognized as it asked to be recognized “as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947 , and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time” http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

        “This Wikipedia map is close, “

        It’s actually ” the result of speculations “ http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Land_of_Israel.jpg

        ” I would leave … etc … etc …”

        Uh huh. But you aren’t gonna do anything

        “if the Palestinians made the concessions I’ve written about elsewhere”

        The Palestinians are under no legal obligation what so ever to forgo ANY of their legal rights under the laws Israel agreed to uphold.

        “That said, no borders, even with Israel getting just Tel Aviv, will bring peace without a commitment to peace education.”

        Maybe you could start with yourself. Start with Israel’s actual proclaimed and only recognized borders (in case you missed it the first time http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf )

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 9, 2015, 10:46 am

        whats just in giving to a state borders that were never theirs. your arrogance shows. their can’t be a palestinian state on the jewish homeland because there isn’t a jewish homeland. there is a palestinian one in palestine. your litlerally demanding us to cave into borders that were made up

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 7:15 pm

        What else can I say? The borders were not made up, and yes, the Holy Land is the homeland of the Jewish nation, and has been for at least 3,300 years.

        But in attempt to break the gridlock on this point, consider this: the term Palestine began in the late Roman era as a Latin term based on the Hebrew “Paleshet”. Now the letter ‘P’ does not exist in Arabic, hence the need to change the pronunciation to Falastin(e), with an ‘F’. How could Palestine be the homeland of a nation that didn’t invent the name of its land, and can’t even pronounce it correctly? This is not a trivial point. It would be like if the Jews claimed China or Chile as their homeland, and yet there’s no ‘CH’ sound in Hebrew.

        Another irony: the semitic root P-L-SH means to invade. It’s like Falasha in Ethiopian, meaning “migrant”. Of course, the modern Palestinians simply took their name from the name of the British Mandate, which in term had used the term that was accepted in Europe, so the term is not actually descriptive of the Palestinians, however the irony is palpable.

      • annie
        annie
        January 10, 2015, 7:59 pm

        Now the letter ‘P’ does not exist in Arabic, hence the need to change the pronunciation to Falastin(e)

        when i put “Paleshet” (פְּלֶשֶׁת) into google translate is came back “Flst.” and doesn’t it mean “(p’léshet, “Philistia, land of the Philistines” and Philistines have the “F” sound?

        the term Palestine began in the late Roman era as a Latin term based on the Hebrew “Paleshet”.

        i don’t really know whether this is true or not. in ancient greek they also called it Palaistínē. none the less…doesn’t it sort of undermine your argument ancient hebrews were calling the land “Philistia, land of the Philistines” if, as you claim, it is not the homeland of palestinians?

        besides, how do you know the hebrew term came prior to the ancient greek term, or inspired it?

        (5th BC Attic): IPA: /pala͜ɪsti͜ínɛ͜ɛ/

        besides, isn’t this conversation a little foolish? there were hardly any jews there for the last 1000 years. if they wanted to get back there so much they could have started walking a long time ago. i could really care less who was living there 3000 years ago. why should we care about that or give it any credence today wrt a state that was formed 67 yrs ago?

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 10, 2015, 9:23 pm

        In Hebrew, the letter ‘pey’ resolves to a ‘fey’ (i.e. an ‘F’ sound) when it is preceded by a vowel sound. So, for example, Pharoah is Par’o, but if the word before ends in a vowel sound, then it’s Far’o. To reflect this dual nature of the letter ‘pey’, early transliterators chose to use “ph” to represent the pey. That’s why “Pelishti” was transliterated “Philistine” (with a Latin-based suffix to boot).

        BTW, Paleshet/Philistia was not the whole of the Holy Land, but just the area of the modern Gaza Strip and a bit beyond. The Philistines invaded the coast from one or more nearby Mediterranean islands, but disappeared by the Assyrian invasion of 722 BCE. There is actually almost no evidence for the existence of the Philistines outside of the Bible, so it’s very hard to draw too many conclusions, but obviously their appearance in the Bible wouldn’t undermine the Bible.

        In any case, because the Romans initially called the land they had conquered from the Judaeans “Judaea”, just as the Jews/Judaeans called it, many scholars have presumed that the name change after the Bar Kochba revolt in 132-135 was an attempt by Hadrian to punish the Jews by renaming the land after their old-time traditional coastal enemies. However, I’ve never seen any proof of this speculation, as reasonable as it might be.

        What is for certain is that when the Arabs finally came on the scene in 629 CE, the name “Palestine” (actually “Palestina”) was firmly entrenched in the Roman-Byzantine system of governance, and it was from there that the Arabs learned the name, just as every other group did.

        Your last point was about why the Jews didn’t start going back in large numbers until the early 19th century. There is no one answer, but life for Jews in Arab lands in general, and the Holy Land in particular, was extremely hard, and the general trend was for Jews to move away towards Europe, which is why most Jews ended up there rather than further south. Strict Muslim law did not allow Jews to purchase land, to build new synagogues, or even repair them without special permission. There was an oppressive poll tax (the “jizya”), and other decrees that made Europe attractive. Perhaps just as influential, there was abject poverty in the Middle East, and corrupt government that harmed everyone, and especially in the Holy Land.

        When the European powers started to get interested in the Holy Land, and especially Jerusalem, they started to build consulates, improve services, provide jobs, and also made deals with the Sultanate to ease up on the restrictions against non-Muslims. This is why Jews started to move back in much larger numbers in the 19th century even before the Zionist movement worked on organizing “Aliyah” (“Going Up”) to the Land of Israel.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 10, 2015, 10:25 pm

        Thank you Annie :) I will add @Robert:
        :) here we go again :)
        This happens when you don’t read about the thing you comment- I gave you archaeological books about Israel/Palestine- there many scholars [Israeli, and other arch] show that there NEVER was only “Jewish” presence + there wasn’t any 1 original “Jewish” culture, etc.-READ THOSE BOOKS! YOUR OLD AND FALSE GENERALISATIONS WON’T HELP AGAINST THOSE SCHOLARLY BOOKS.
        The term nation doesn’t apply to ancient times, etc. Don’t use modern terms to ancient history! When you wrote about that “Jew”-“Judean” thing it became you not only don’t have any knowledge about the past but also you didn’t even stop to think that “Jew” is an English word that can hardly apply to ancient meaning of a term!
        You clearly have know idea about the ancient history of the land, not to mention about Jewish history so you use typical general and old/refuted narration. Since when invention of a name=nation? hmm? where did you get that from? That is just pure nationalistic narration, and if you knew any better it can be used against Jews… [+they until recently avoided the name like fire]
        And of course you need to learn more about Arabic and even Hebrew… Christopher A. Rollston and many others nicely show how [in his case] Hebrew took from other languages, how it evolved and how modern Hebrew was created ;]
        You didn’t even read about the term “ioudaios”? hmmm??

        When it comes to language remember that sounds are important not their representation in writing. Having this in mind: scholars don’t know where Cana‛an the alphabet originated—though southern Palestine, near the borders of Egypt, seems the more probable geography, in view of the discovery of a proto-alphabet at Serabit el Khadim. It used pictures of common objects to represent their initial sounds in the form of 28 letters in writing. For example first sign stood for the three long vowels a-u-e (alif).The next basic letter, B, comes from beit, which meant “house” in Cana‛anite (and still means “house” in Arabic).

        Many scholars now take a different approach in their study of languages, because they noticed that the religious or national narrations distort their view (Read for example C. Calhoun about nationalism about this and its impact on science, or Michael Billig “Banal Nationalism” and works of Michel Foucault). Without much scientific evidence some scholar at first started backdating Hebrew as a language or a script in order to place it in a position of ascendancy against other ancient languages, but Ugarit findings make it now impossible to uphold. Different Encyclopaedias have various approaches to the subject. For example Collier’s Encyclopedia entry on “Alphabet” backdate an early “Hebrew” alphabet to eleventh century bce, and neglect the fact that the Israelites were preliterate. BUT Encyclopaedia Judaica from 1971 clarifies that the “Hebrews” adopted the Cana‛anite alphabet and “followed the current Phoenician script until the ninth century,” then adopted a variety of Aramaic. As Ra’ad writes (Hidden Histories, p.103): “Even if one doubts the equation of “Hebrew” with “Israelite” and with the much later religion Judaism, this hypothetical explanation of the descent of Hebrew as a script at least avoids moving branches and burying other branches in the alphabet tree”. He adds:”The tree in Daniels and Bright’s The World’s Writing Systems is generally accepted: from proto-Cana‛anite, the 28-letter linear script developed around 2000 bce and wedge-shaped Ugaritic around 1500 bce. From linear Cana‛anite developed Old Arabian scripts and “Phoenician” around 1200 bce. The reduced “Phoenician” 22-letter alphabet dominated northern and western regions of Greater Syria until about 850 bce, with various “script varieties” deriving from it, such as Aramaic. From Aramaic (an international language from about 700 bce) developed later “Semitic” scripts, including square Hebrew. Arabic more likely developed from a pre-1300 bce South Semitic group, since it retained a 28-letter alphabet. (Ra’ad 103-104, and Saggs, Civilization Before Greece and Rome, p.83–84.).

        After Ugarit many scholars attempted to link it somehow to Hebrew to backdate the origins of this language, despite the fact that the connection to Arabic of the original Cana‛anite, Southern Arabic and Ugaritic is more demonstrable if sounds are examined rather than merely the shapes of letters, which are different from each other.The original Cana‛anite had 28 signs and sounds. Similarly, Ugaritic had basically 28 sounds, although it used cuneiform technology to etch 30 signs on clay tablets and wanted to distinguish the three alephs, a-u-e. Arabic today has 28 sounds. Thus, the sound systems of Arabic, proto-Cana‛anite, South Arabian, and Ugaritic are basically identical. Modern Arabic letters evolved differently and eventually the writing used the cursive joining of letters to form words.

        And here we come to the problem of Transcriptions. Many scholars, both Western and Israeli, tend to transcribe inscriptions in South Arabian (which, like modern Arabic, has 28 signs), Cana‛anite/Phoenician, and Aramaic, using the 22-letter “square Hebrew” (or square Aramaic). Even a standard and generally reliable reference, The World’s Writing Systems, arbitrarily decides to render the 30 alphabetic signs from Ugarit, almost completely identical to Arabic, in a chart that has “Ugaritic Scripts with Hebrew Equivalents.” At the same time, the text tells us: “The wedge script records an inventory of sounds that is closer to that found in Classical Arabic (ca. 28 sounds) than to that found in Biblical Hebrew (ca. 22 sounds).” – in: Peter T. Daniels and William Bright, The World’s Writing Systems, p. 92.

        Some scholars having problems with all this started to introduce the notion of a “Hebreo-Philistine” script, some even coin the term: “Hebreo-Philistine”. Ra’ad pointed out that this is a strategy that pervades the treatment of ancient languages in relation to Hebrew, for the languages are not identified as Cana‛anite, Ugaritic, Aramaic or Hebrew, but by the hyphenated “Hebrew-Aramaic” or “Hebrew-Canaanite” or now “Hebreo-Philistine”. EXAMPLE:“Gezer calendar,”which dates to the tenth or eleventh century bce-by some is classified as “ancient Hebrew”. Other scholars observe that the calendar is written in signs that are “Phoenician,” similar to other inscriptions in the whole region in that period; in this case, the letters show some demonstrable affinities to Moabite. More and more scholars see Arabic as a storehouse and inventory of ancient languages. Read the research by Christopher A. Rollston, a professor at Emmanuel School of Religion. That is why there are problems with transcription to Hebrew and then again from Hebrew to other languages: there are vowel shifts in Hebrew (such as a—o, ‘a—a, a—e) and consonant sounds (such as q/k, b/v and p/f). Arabic form retains an initial guttural sound ̔a, a q in the second syllable and “long a” in the last syllable, whereas the Hebrew and Western usage misses the initial guttural, has k in the middle, and o in the last syllable. And this is how we arrive to your problem with Akka/Akko that is which one in “original” or ancient. Ra’ad sums it up:giving the impression that the sound “o” is original or legitimate in the names Zionist source cites “Acco, Canaanite ‛Aka” without noting of course how exact the Arabic-Cana‛anite correspondence is. Varieties in Hebrew are largely the result of a transmission process through scholarly and religious traditions at a time when the language was practically dead or fossilized, or used only in scholarly and rabbinical practices—that in fact the Arabic variety, despite some natural changes, is a genuine one for the reason that Arabic preserved the original “Semitic” sound inventory.

        In “Hidden Histories” you can read: debates about square Hebrew as merely a script variety of Aramaic…
        OR: The Ugaritic alphabet contains signs representing sounds that are exactly the same as the 28-letter Cana‛anite alphabet and the 28-letter Arabic alphabet—the only difference being that there are three signs for the aleph.

        A respectable reference, The World’s Writing Systems, tells us that the wedge-shaped script records an inventory of sounds that is closer to that found in Classical Arabic (ca. 28 sounds) than to that found in biblical Hebrew (ca. 22 sounds)….Ugaritic-Arabic equivalence of many words, like brq (meaning “lightning”), krm (“vineyard”), kf (transcribed as kp, “palm of the hand”), mlk (“king”), mzn (“scale”).

        What complicates the problem here more than elsewhere are not just the linguistic intricacies but more immediately the contention, or pretense, by Zionist scholars and naming committees that they were restoring the “original” names. Ashkelon and Acco, both without the initial guttural ̔a… In fact, names like “Ashkelon” and “Acco” have come about through a transcription tradition (which distorted many sounds) and were thus accepted in Jewish and Western usage. In other words, they are Israeli reinstatements of variants that are in effect fossils rather than originals…

        Zionist claims assume that the Arabic forms are more recent and arose after the Arab/Muslim “conquest” in 638 ce, which changed or “distorted” place names, as if Arabic were a totally foreign language alien to its region.

        Ironically, however, the same city names assumed to be more recent (that is, the ones used in Arabic, ‛Asqalan and ‛Akka) are much closer to the original names found in hieroglyphic that date back around 4000 years, as recorded in Egyptian sources, and a few hundred years later in cuneiform in the Tal el ‛Amarneh correspondence… Akka has not changed its name for more than 4000 years, while the Arabic ‛Asqalan is very close to the ancient name. They both represent a better preservation of the original than the biblical writings or Western renderings. To explain the discrepancy in these and other names involves a number of linguistic matters concerning Arabic and Hebrew, including vowel shifts in Hebrew guessing (such as a—o, ‘a—a, a—e) and consonant sounds (such as q/k, b/v and p/f), as well as issues relating to the transcription of the original sources and of the biblical and later renderings.
        In the case of ‛Asqalan/Ashkelon, the Arabic form retains an initial guttural sound ̔a, a q in the second syllable and a in the last syllable, whereas the Hebrew and Western usage misses the initial guttural, has k in the middle, and o in the last syllable.

        About the “p” should be “f.”-In his subchapter: Misleading Transcriptions:
        This arbitrary and biased practice is also what Gitin et al. practice as they try to decipher the Philistine/“Phoenician” inscription from ‛Aqrun, introducing the notion of a “Hebreo-Philistine” script. In another instance of fixation on Hebrew and the use of a Western linguistic tradition in application to regional place and personal names, a king mentioned in the inscription is called “Padi” (the consonants p and f have the same sign in Hebrew except for a dot mark introduced later in history). An obvious “Semitic” name would be Fadi (which means “one who sacrifices”). In this case, the name should be transcribed at least to posit both possibilities, as F/Padi, although f is more natural in this case (see later section on f/p).-SOMETHING FOR YOU HERE ;D SEE THAT SECTION!

        … It is theorized that some of these Hebrew sounds northwest Semitic varieties, a somewhat incomplete theory. These are specific adaptations in guessing that influenced pronunciation, as in the vowel o/o(alif) common in modern Hebrew (as in the way Israelis changed ‛Akka to “Acco”), as well as the vowel e/e(alif) (as in the way the Naqab Desert has been made into “Negev” by the Israelis), in this case adding another transmission difference from the Western use of “Negeb” by having v for b. (Hebrew signsfor v /b and f/p are the same, except that dots were added later in the history of square Hebrew writing, after the introduction of diacritical marks in Syriac and Arabic).
        READ IN HIS BOOK ABOUT: F/Pisgah

        SO ACTUALLY ARABIC NAME WITH “F” IS THE CORRECT ONE… THE “P” WAS GIVEN THROUGH BAD TRANSLATION…. ;D WHY THE ISSUE? PROBLEM WITH SOUNDS… AGAIN:
        …It is one of the irritating and inaccurate conventions of scholarship, both Western and Israeli, to transcribe inscriptions in South Arabian (which, like modern Arabic, has 28 signs), Cana‛anite/Phoenician, and Aramaic, using the 22-letter “square Hebrew” (square Aramaic really, as I explain later and in Chapters 1, 5, and 7).

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 4:05 pm

        Annie, you might want to be a little suspect about the reliability of Zofia’s sources. For example, she has been arguing that Arabic essentially predates Hebrew, even though the earliest examples of Arabic date back to only the early 6th century CE, while the earliest extant examples of Hebrew writings date back to the 10th century BCE. That’s a 1,500-year difference — older than Islam itself — a difference that makes any attempt to claim Arabic as older at the very least eyebrow-raising, if not patently absurd.

        What is certainly absurd is Zofia’s claim that the similarity in sounds and number of alphabet letters makes Arabic a better match despite the fact that Hebrew’s root meanings are far more similar to the near-Eastern languages she’s been using for comparison. It’d be like claiming that since English uses nearly the same alphabet as Hebrew, the two are closely related. It’s just intellectually dishonest to make such an argument as if it were a scientific fact.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 11, 2015, 1:51 am

        If I were only dialoguing with you, I’d go point by point, but there are a dozen others, and there’s no way I can respond to all the cut-n-paste pre-prepared material you’re posting. Try going for 1 or 2 key points. That said, yes, I noticed the stuff about the term “ioudaios”, but it’s a trivial point in the larger debate, for even if the term is purely geographical, it merely means that modern Israel is maintaining the tradition of having a Jewish state that allows for a large non-Jewish population on which it bestows the same civil (but not national) rights it does to its Jewish citizens. Contrast that with the almost unanimous position of the Palestinian negotiators who demand that their state be emptied of all Jews.

        As for your “scholars”, and the Israeli “scholars” in particular, I’m quite familiar their writings, and it is well known that they draw bull’s eyes and then draw circles around them. Completely ad hoc arguments that have no value. They keep their jobs because of tenure, not academic brilliance.

      • annie
        annie
        January 11, 2015, 2:20 am

        If I were only dialoguing with you, I’d go point by point, but there are a dozen others

        LOLOLOLOLOOLO

        shorter robert: ‘you’ve overwhelmed me.’!!!

        Contrast that with the almost unanimous position of the Palestinian negotiators who demand that their state be emptied of all Jews.

        nah, they never said that. they said no military, no settlers. they never said jew free and you damn well know it. they got spread all over the news for less than a day and was refuted. loser.

        As for your “scholars”, and the Israeli “scholars” in particular, I’m quite familiar their writings,

        oh pleeeaaaase. nothing in your posts resemble ‘scholarly’ in the least. it’s the most shoot from the hip repetitive bs advanced level hasbara talking pts we’ve had here for awhile. but you’re offering zilch in terms of counter arguments. Completely ad hoc arguments that have no value. They keep their jobs because of tenure, not academic brilliance.

        #massivefail

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 10, 2015, 10:26 pm

        @Robert:
        About how Arabic preserved ancient names… I wrote:
        process of changing the names to ” biblical”, ie “original” started back in the 20’s. The problem is that even Zionists themselves (the researchers) argue that multiple translations of the Bible distorted the names, so they often had to rename the Arabic names instinctively and guess how they should sound like in Hebrew … All this action is political, to show that “original” inhabitants “returned”. The names of various places are intended to be the evidence of their “originality” – but as it turns out they are not. If you like it or not it is a proces of renaming the places- to justify the expulsion of Arab inhabitants and replacing them with new Jewish ones- to divert the attention from the colonization process and to give the impression that arch-absent residents are in fact “returning” and not colonizing. As Ra’ad writes: “Yohanan Aharoni (one of the early authorities on Israeli geography) and others are forced to admit the errors in Hebrew transcription, even as they want to insist that biblical or other Hebrew sources of names are the genuine or original ones: “the biblical sources have undergone a long process of oral and written transcription … some errors with regard to place names have crept in”. At the same time, to give more credence to the Hebrew forms, Aharoni has to argue that transcription problems “exist mainly in the non-biblical sources, especially the Egyptian and Akkadian,” although these are the only available and fairly reliable sources (Aharoni, The Land of the Bible, p. 100-104). Yael Elitzur, a recent Israeli writer on toponymy (place naming), concedes the role of the “autochthonous inhabitants” in continuing the preservation of names (Elitzur, Ancient Place Names in the Holy Land, p. 2.), though who these undefined indigenous people are remains too sensitive for Elitzur to name them directly—viz. the Palestinians” (Ra’ad, p. 178) “Yohanan Aharoni’s The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography is a typical early example of how Zionists deal with toponyms. For Aharoni, the place names are the ancient ones confirmed in the Bible, transmitted later in Aramaic, and then with the Muslim conquest in 638 ce they took on the “Arabic mouth.” This fallacious premise leads to several linguistic jumps that contradict even his own list of toponyms that show ancient Egyptian or other regional variants are different from and more natural than the Hebrew. […] Other Israeli writers attempt to maintain this illusion of continuity and naturalness in relation to the modern imposition of the Hebrew names. They want to consider the Arabic influence as a “distortion” and that the Hebrew names have now been “regained,” contradicting the linguistic evidence and failing to give any credit to the Palestinian population that preserved the names: “many of the place-names were transmitted from ancient times, from one generation to another”. (Ra’ad, p.184-185) “…a 1986 monograph by Thomas L. Thompson and F. C. Goncalvez entitled Toponomie Palestinienne: Plaine de St Jean D’Acre et Corridor de Jerusalem. This study shows how the Zionist toponymy project, originally established as early as 1920 to “restore” Hebrew names or to create names of symbolic meaning, went much further than its original mandate. There was simply not enough tradition to go by, so it could only continue by picking out biblical or Jewish associations at random. It had to Hebraize Arabic names, or in other cases translate Arabic to Hebrew to give the location an ideologically consistent identity. For example, some locations were rendered from Arabic into the Hebrew phonetic system: Minet el-Muserifa became Horvat Mishrafot Yam and Khirbet el Musherifa was changed to Horvat Masref. Sometimes, in this artificial process, the committees forgot about certain genuine Jewish traditions, as in the case of the total canceling of the Arabic name Khirbet Hanuta, not recognizing that it probably rendered the Talmudic Khanotah. This forced exercise of re-naming often even went against biblical tradition, most notably in erasing the Arabic names Yalu and ‛Imwas. Yalu became Ayallon, while ‛Imwas, Western Emmaus, associated with the Christ story, was one of three villages, along with Beit Nuba, razed in 1967. According to the Israeli writer Meron Benvenisti in Sacred Landscape, in order for a total map of the “Land of Israel” to be created, and since only a small number of place names could conceivably be linked to anything mentioned in the Bible, the renaming often became a forced exercise in making arbitrary connections, sometimes picking words at random from the Bible or translating to Hebrew the indigenous Arabic names and pretending they were Hebrew”. (Ra’ad, p.188-189) Read the footnotes he provides in his book: he quotes multiple scholars on the matter and gives detailed descriptions of language problems concerning the above issues.

        So you are again wrong… People in historical Palestine have had their own ideas about themselves, land and it changed it time (da…) I wrote about how modern Palestinians used the term throughout history, gave you books about the ancient history of the land, that show that “Jews” were living there among other ppl who didn’t suddenly disappear… they shared some ideas, traditions, languages…etc. Don’t mix Israelites with Hebrew and Jews… A Jew doesn’t = Judean, etc. Not to mention you must learn more about languages of the region… and even how Hebrew was developing and what problem modern Hebrew brings when it comes to translations of ancient names, languages, etc…
        Besides… different people live differently, there is no “right” script for doing that…you are just picking some narratives that you think will help you but instead it is doing the opposite. Jews in ancient time weren’t the Jews constructed by historical vision of Zionism, and even many modern Israeli scholars agree to that.They used different terms, language, ideas, as other people that lived there ALSO did that!

        I know you won’t read those books…but somebody else will…

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 10, 2015, 10:30 pm
      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 10, 2015, 11:30 pm

        How can you say the borders are not made up when their is zero evidence that the country your subscribing those borders to ever existed?

        again palestine cannot be the homeland of the jewish nation because their is no jewish relation or do catholics buddahisms and shintoists have homelands and are nations as well? and how could palestine be the homeland of a made up jewish nation for 3300 years when there is only evidence of a jewish state only goes back 3000?

        and the name palestine is not derived from hebrew in fact the hebrew term probably comes from the same source as palestine the original egyptian Peleset which again predates archeological evidence of a jewish state.

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 11, 2015, 8:13 am

        Ty Annie:)
        The whole problem is that some people try to translate other languages that had more sounds with “square Hebrew” (or square Aramaic) that has only 22 sounds. Cana‛anite had 28 signs and sounds, Ugaritic had basically 28 sounds, although it used cuneiform- 30 signs on clay tablets and wanted to distinguish the three alephs, a-u-e. Arabic has also 28 sounds and is better for this. Peter T. Daniels and William Bright admit that The wedge script records an inventory of sounds that is closer to that found in Classical Arabic (ca. 28 sounds) than to that found in Biblical Hebrew (ca. 22 sounds) but still try to translate ancient languages using square Hebrew. From the ’50s there a book “The Lexical Relation Between Ugaritic and Arabic”. In ” Ugaritic Textbook: Grammar, Texts in Transliteration, Cuneiform Selections” on page 30 you can see how Arabic and Ugaritic are similar https://books.google.pl/books?id=ShcFfQZrEzAC&pg=PA30&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false
        The cuneiform alphabet in South Arabic sequence found at Beth Shemesh (Dietrish-
        Loretz 1988a, 277-96) would comprise the geographic link between the South Arabic alphabet of the south and the South Arabic alphabet of Ugarit.
        Ra’ad:
        Another strategy to minimize Ugaritic connections uses euphemisms such as “contacts” and “cognate” to explain linguistic or other links, misleading because they elide the huge time distance between Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible. To maintain a notion of Israelite special distinction or an exclusionary “uniqueness,” Ugaritic texts are said to show an epic or mythic tradition “assimilated” to express the imagery of God. An allied strategy appropriates recent discoveries into the confines of the faith, arguing for “transformations”: “the Bible intentionally employed words and images from these mythological stories. … The strangeness of the Bible will remain.”
        !!Fortunately, corrections are beginning to be made to such evasions and misguided attempts that try to keep the Bible as superior rather than see it as an intermediary reference. An introduction by Adrian Curtis to the recent Handbook of Ugaritic Studies acknowledges that “the issue of the relevance of the discoveries at Ugarit for the study of the Hebrew Bible … has been unduly dominant, at the expense of an appreciation of Ugarit and its texts in their own right.” Curtis mentions the common illusion that “the newly discovered language was seen as akin to Hebrew.” However, this impression is corrected in a chapter by two of the best experts in the field, Manfried Dietrich and Oswald Loretz, who note that: “The language they [the 30 signs] represented could be described as an idiom which in terms of content seemed to be comparable to Canaanite texts, but from a phonological perspective, however, was more like Arabic.” Moreover, the discovery at Ugarit of an abecedary arranged in the same order as the “South Semitic” alphabet has led to the suggestion that people from the south, whether the Arabian Peninsula or southeastern Palestine, migrated to Ugarit or otherwise influenced it in the middle of the second millennium bce.
        Ra’ad in “Hidden Hisotires” has more about it all- with nice bibliography :)

      • Zofia
        Zofia
        January 11, 2015, 8:35 am

        …The effect of this discursive device is very clear: it creates a sense of familiarity… But the lay reader cannot develop such disciplinary senses. So for the lay Israeli reader, a feeling of sameness or closeness is fabricated through the ability to read the Ugaritic text in a legible and culturally esteemed form. This Biblicized pseudo-Ugaritic text, and the aesthetic gratification that the reader derives from “understanding Ugaritic”, licenses the creation of a subject position believing in the unity of Ugaritic and Hebrew, which harmonizes with Canaanite political discourse.
        On the other hand, a reconstructed representation of the original Ugaritic text would estrange the text from the lay Israeli ear.Without the corrected forms, Ugaritic would seem to non-initiates more like Arabic than like Hebrew. For example, the stock of consonants in Ugaritic is similar to that of Arabic; Ugaritic and Arabic have a three vowel system while Hebrew in th Israeli form has five (and even more in the Biblical form); both Ugaritic and Arabic have case endings on nouns, a feature that had been lost in Biblical Hebrew.
        More in:Hebrew and Zionism: A Discourse Analytic Cultural Study, by Ron Kuzar. This fragment is on p. 251.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 4:43 pm

        Zofia, I’ll just repeat what I just posted for Annie. Claiming that Arabic is more similar to Ugaritic than Hebrew simply because its alphabet is more similar is just like saying that if comparing English and Ugaritic to Hebrew, English is the more closely related of the two because its alphabet is more similar. That of course is absurd, and so is claiming Arabic more similar to Ugaritic than Hebrew. Even a beginner linguist knows that establishing similarities between languages is based on the meanings of their word roots, and not their alphabets. Phonology is closely related to alphabetic values, so it too is a very distant second or third place behind root meanings.

        Please note that in terms of the debate over national claims, it really doesn’t matter if Hebrew is older than Arabic, or more authentically Canaanite, because that’s not what the debate is really about. It really comes down to whether or not the Jews are a nation entitled to the same rights as other indigenous peoples or not. I understand that you intuitively feel that we are not a nation, but do try to be more objective when dealing with purely academic questions. That includes eschewing highly politicized academicians, who themselves should not be in academia given their lack of objectivity.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 11, 2015, 10:15 am

        @ Robert in Israel ” and yes, the Holy Land is the homeland of the Jewish nation, and has been for at least 3,300 years”

        An interesting historical snippet. However Israel’s boundaries were proclaimed and recognized as the Israel Government asked to be recognized. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/decad169.asp Israel has not legally acquired any further territories.

        What lay “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine” is simply not Israeli.

        So, take your whining to the Zionist Federation and the Jewish Agency they screwed it for Jewish Israelis who are prohibited from living anywhere in the Jewish People’s Historic homeland except within Israel’s actual proclaimed and recognized boundaries.

        “But in attempt to break the gridlock on this point, consider this: the term Palestine began in the late Roman era as a Latin…”

        Another interesting little snippet. True or not, it’s completely irrelevant to Israel’s actual proclaimed and recognized boundaries and Israel’s illegal activities in territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”.

        Best you take your pathetic whining to the Zionist Federation and the Jewish Agency

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 11, 2015, 4:01 pm

        I see no sign of any consensus in the ancient world that the territory commonly called Palestine was one where ‘the Jews’ (meaning those whose religion centred on a Temple in Jerusalem?) had prior claim. How could there be? Throughout almost all that time Palestine was sparsely inhabited, at least by comparison with Egypt and Iraq, and ruled by kings who were to some degree clients of greater powers based in the more populated regions.
        These must have regarded themselves and been in many ways accepted as the legitimate ‘kings of kings’ and protectors of all the religious groups within their purview. Perhaps because many different groups had some sort of political protection, religious consensus within Palestine were rare. The Bible is sometimes questioned as history but it makes at least these points abundantly clear. The writers regret, but do not disguise, the fact that there was no religious uniformity most of the time.
        There were always people around who were clearly not classified as Jewish. Zionists might like to follow the fashion of the Greek-speaking Jews who transformed the Palestinians into ‘a mixed bunch of foreigners’ and in a sense that term, though somewhat contemptuous, must be realistic. Palestine has always and for ever, from the first time we glimpse it until now, been a place of more than one culture and all the residents all the time must have regarded themselves as legitimately present.
        We do not have a moral sense completely different from that of our ancestors in the dawning years of civilisation. They knew as well as we do that there is a certain right to good government and that it is wrong in all normal circumstances to turn people out of or keep people from their accustomed homes – not because of alleged rights from the distant past but because they are the living people of the present. That is why the Israelite conquest is presented in the Bible as receiving – and of course as needing – special divine dispensation. But we cannot be asked to believe either that this divine dispensation is still in force or that a new one has been granted.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 6:02 pm

        Hi MHughes976,

        Believe it or not, I basically agree with everything you wrote. It’s also nice to read someone who knows how to disagree respectfully.

        I completely agree that someone who does not believe in the divinity of any of the famous holy books should accept claims to divine land assignments. That is why I reserve my arguments regarding the very Zionist passages in the Quran and Hadith for Muslims, and not secularists.

        If indeed you are a secularist, then I would argue that you should still support Zionism since a purely secularist approach to history has no real archaeological evidence for a mass Israeli invasion of Canaan. Secular historians posit that the Israelites evolved out of the surviving Canaanite tribes. As such, the Jewish claim is almost identical to the one that the Palestinians argue for. But there is too much documentation to ignore the fact that most Arabs who define themselves as Palestinians are either descended from post-18th century migrants, or else descended from Arabs who never lived in Palestine.

        This latter claim might sound dubious if you’ve never read it before, but permit me to explain. According to British census records (which I hold are overstated, but that another time), there were some 1.2 million Arabs in 1948. If you look at population growth in other prolific communities like India and China, you see that since then, their populations have not yet quadrupled. For example, according to this chart – http://www.populstat.info/Asia/indiac.htm – India has gone from 350k to 1.2m during that 66-year stretch.

        Yet the Palestinians claim that today there are some 12 million Palestinians worldwide (e.g. http://www.imemc.org/article/66665), meaning a 10-fold increase!

        I’d say the early UNRWA reports of massive joining of food rations lists by Arabs in Jordan and Syria especially probably continued for some time, and that phenomenon is largely responsible for the current numbers. I think there also continues to be politicized over-reporting, but however you slice it, a very significant percentage of Palestinians have no roots whatsoever in Palestine behond their UNRWA ration cards.

        In any case, my point here is that even on a purely secular level, the Jews have a much stronger claim to the Land of Israel / Palestine than the Arabs who now identify themselves as Palestinians.

        But I would agree that the religious claim is much clearer and much more definitive — all things being equal.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 14, 2015, 4:28 am

        @ Robert in Israel “modern Israel is maintaining the tradition of having a Jewish state that allows for a large non-Jewish population on which it bestows the same civil (but not national) rights it does to its Jewish citizens”

        Traditional apartheid … interesting observation Robert

        ” Contrast that with the almost unanimous position of the Palestinian negotiators who demand that their state be emptied of all Jews”

        Care to provide a quote Robert …. thx. Otherwise folk might be forgiven for thinking you’re spewing Ziopoop.

        What was said is quite normal for states. All citizens of Israel are Israeli, right? All citizens of Britain are British, right? So why should Palestine have Israeli citizens?

        “As for your “scholars”, and the Israeli “scholars” in particular, I’m quite familiar their writings .. “

        Sure pal. You’re not even aware Israel proclaimed its boundaries in order to be recognized http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

  20. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 7, 2015, 10:52 pm

    It just occurred to me that I am missing an opportunity here to ask a question of a Zionist that is never asked enough.

    If I gave you a pencil and paper and told you to draw the borders of Israel that you want the world to recognize where would they be? Please be specific.

    • Robert in Israel
      Robert in Israel
      January 8, 2015, 4:50 am

      For some reason, my post got printed above your question, not below.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 8, 2015, 11:06 am

        “For some reason, my post got printed above your question, not below.”robert in israel

        For some reason , the link you provide leads to a 3x 4 blank rectangle.If you insist , I have no problems recognising those borders.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 4:58 pm

        Wow, ABC, you are the first person I’ve encountered on this message board who is respectful and seeks genuine dialogue despite differences of opinion. You’re definitely not blah.

        By “ideally” if everyone would recognize Biblical Israel as the legitimate borders of modern Israel.

        The reason I excluded Hizbullah is mostly because they are an evil pseudo-Muslim (“Islamist”) organization, but also because they are Iranian Persians and enjoy little support from the native Lebanese Arabs, be they Christian or Muslim. And my point about who would rule there was simply to acknowledge that I don’t feel any Arab should have to leave his home simply because it happens to be in historic Eretz Yisrael, nor should local gov’t change for that reason.

        IOW, I just wanted to answer your question directly, without getting into the myriad political ramifications of those borders.

        Re who we negotiate with, my line is that one can negotiate with rivals, but not with sworn enemies. So if an organization’s charter calls for Israel’s destruction, I see negotiating as pointless and dangerous to the point of being immoral. But if a Palestinian organization simply states that it believes the Palestinian Arabs have a right to self-determination, but seeks a permanent peace with Israel, then I have no problem negotiating with them. Likewise, I believe in the Jewish right to self-determination, but am prepared to make a permanent peace with a Palestinian state in what we see as our homeland. And likewise, I would not expect a Palestinian to negotiate with the extremist Kach organization.

        So, who do you think Israel has been getting close to in Syria?

        “Justice can take a back seat to peace if there is sufficient justice in the compromise between the two.” By this I mean that if I saw a chance for real peace, I would give up on what I see as justice for the Jews (the entirety of the Holy Land). OTOH, we could get “peace” by just leaving the Middle East en masse, but that degree of injustice is to great to be satisfied with the peace it would bring. I know the Palestinians feel the same way on this latter point, but I’m not sure how many are willing to make a permanent peace involving less than their own maximalist dreams.

        Re your final point, Israel definitely prosecutes Jews who commit hate crimes against Arabs, and anti-racism is the norm. I’m not sure where you’re getting your impressions from. I wish you could come to Israel and see it for yourself. Anyway, here are a couple of links to examples of how the PA should be dealing with even attempts at terror and with acts of extreme incitement:
        http://www.haaretz.com/news/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-of-the-bat-ayin-underground-1.206876
        http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=22181

        As you can see, my insistence on peace education is not trivial; it lies at the core of the conflict as it stands today.

      • annie
        annie
        January 8, 2015, 5:23 pm

        Hizbullah is mostly … an evil pseudo-Muslim (“Islamist”) organization, but also .. they are Iranian Persians and enjoy little support from the native Lebanese Arabs

        lol, wow, where did you come up w/this. hezbollah is not arab and enjoy little support from the native Lebanese?

        are you aware there is a hezbollah christian factor too. have you ever been to lebanon? you sound like a nut. and i didn’t even read the rest of your comment.

      • Bornajoo
        Bornajoo
        January 8, 2015, 6:41 pm

        @Annie
        “lol, wow, where did you come up w/this. hezbollah is not arab?”

        From the Zionist Book of Facts, printed by Hasbara Publications, available at Delusional Books located in mythical Greater Israel

      • annie
        annie
        January 8, 2015, 6:45 pm

        maybe it’s from the same “Zionist Book of Facts” as ‘palestinian christians are not arabs’.

        or maybe he’s just got some bolts loose and thinks all shia muslims are persian.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 8:13 pm

        Yeah, I just retracted that bizarre error, which was first pointed out by Annie. Anyway, it was not at all related to the main point I was making there, which is that Hizbullah is an Islamist organization, and I wouldn’t wish their rule on anyone anywhere. For example, check out this fairly recent Pew research poll about the views of different national groups regarding Hizbullah:

        http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/07/as-it-fights-in-syria-hezbollah-seen-unfavorably-in-region/ (SECOND CHART)

        Detailed report: http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/07/hezbollah-topline-and-survey-methods/

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 8, 2015, 8:00 pm

        Annie, for your information I got that amazing factoid from my way-overtired brain. Granted, Hizbullah is supported by Iran, and was at least initially trained by Iran, but I don’t know what made me suddenly think the majority of fighters are Iranian. I never thought that before, and I assuredly won’t think that henceforth. BTW, I can believe there are a few Christians, but I seriously doubt that’s a major factor. It is after all a Shi’i Muslim operation.

        Anyway, I assure you I’m not a nut, and I fully retract the part about Hizbullah being manned by Iranians. However, I stand by the rest of my post, which I humbly suggest is worth reading, or at least if you enjoy hearing opinions different from your own.

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 8, 2015, 9:12 pm

        so you expect intelligent people to recognize are fairy tale. biblical Israel never existed. if you want Israel’s actual historical borders your looking at a state a third the size of palestine and giving up giving up any claim to jerusalem. jerusalem was never in Israel until its illegal conquest in 48

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 9, 2015, 3:14 am

        Jerusalem had a plurality of Jews by 1830, and a flat-out majority by 1870. In fact, one of the main reasons the Arabs rejected the Partition Plan was because it stated that the Special Regime in Jerusalem would only last for ten years, to be followed by a referendum of the residents of Jerusalem to determine which state they wished to live under. The Arabs new that Jerusalem was majority Jewish, so by 1958 it would have become a part of Israel. Tactically, I understand why the Arabs therefore rejected the plan.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 9, 2015, 12:26 am

        @ Robert in Israel “By “ideally” if everyone would recognize Biblical Israel as the legitimate borders of modern Israel.”

        Ideally countries should recognize their own proclaimed borders. Why should Israel be any different?

        “The reason I excluded Hizbullah is mostly because they are an evil pseudo-Muslim (“Islamist”) organization, but also because they are Iranian Persians and enjoy little support from the native Lebanese Arabs, be they Christian or Muslim”

        Hezbollah are native Lebanese Arabs, Christians, Muslims, even atheists. They’re the official Lebanese resistance movement. Since their forming, the Lebanese military have not engaged with Israel. See UNSC res 1701. Lebanon does not want a war between states. Israel threatens all its neighbours and even further afield by having nukes.

        ” I just wanted to answer your question directly, without getting into the myriad political ramifications of those borders.”

        Of course, the illegality of Israel’s actions outside of its proclaimed and recognized borders are too many and too confronting to consider.

        “So if an organization’s charter calls for Israel’s destruction”

        The Hamas charter doesn’t. The Lukid charter on the other hand requires the destruction of Palestine

        “I see negotiating as pointless and dangerous to the point of being immoral”

        Indeed. Negotiations mean only one thing, Israel wants the Palestinians to forgo legal rights so Israel can keep what is not legally Israeli. Negotiations are Israel’s ONLY legal way out of the quagmire it has purposefully created over the last 67 years. The Jewish state cannot afford to adhere to the law. Under the law it is required to withdraw from ALL non-Israeli territories and take all its illegal settlers and pay astronomical reparations for 67 yrs of belligerence

        ” if a Palestinian organization simply states that it believes the Palestinian Arabs have a right to self-determination, but seeks a permanent peace with Israel, then I have no problem negotiating with them”

        They’ve been agreeing to than for decades. Read their declaration of statehood. Israel keeps adding ridiculous conditions that have no legal basis. The demand for recognition as a Jewish state, has no legal basis. Recognition cannot be demanded and recognition is not mandatory. Numerous UN Member states do not recognize each other.

        Territorial swaps have no legal basis. Israel wants to swap Palestinian land for Palestinian Land so Israel can keep Palestinian Land.

        Israel keeping Palestinian territory for its self defense has no legal basis.

        The Israeli demand that Palestine disarm has no legal basis, all states have equal right to defensive arms.

        The Israeli demand for a peace treaty sans Israeli withdrawal from all non-Israeli territories has no legal basis. Read the Israel/Egypt Peace treaty. Israel was required to withdraw BEFORE peaceful relations were assumed

        The demand that there be a peace agreement before any RoR is considered is ridiculous. Those who might realize their RoR to Israel are Israelis! http://pages.citebite.com/b3n4r7v9f8xit

        Meanwhile, Israel was recognized while at war in territories the Israeli government of May 22nd 1948 claimed were “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine” http://pages.citebite.com/x1r0b4d1y6mkv

        “Likewise, I believe in the Jewish right to self-determination”

        Oh my. Catch up you silly silly person. That right was exercised 00:01 May 15th 1948 (ME time) http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

        “but am prepared to make a permanent peace with a Palestinian state in what we see as our homeland”

        Tough pal. What you ‘see’ is not Israeli and it is against the basic tenets of Judaism to covet other folks territory.

        ” I mean that if I saw a chance for real peace”

        Perhaps if you looked

        ” … I’m not sure how many are willing to make a permanent peace involving less than their own maximalist dreams”

        You’re hilariously funny. The Palestinians are willing to accept only 22% of their legal and rightful territories for peace with Israel. http://pages.citebite.com/e9p5s8u2yhcd Israel has offered NO THING, ever.

        “Israel definitely prosecutes Jews who commit hate crimes against Arabs, and anti-racism is the norm”

        Its the exception and only ever eventuates after huge outcry .

        “As you can see, my insistence on peace education is not trivial; it lies at the core of the conflict as it stands today. “

        We can see you’re promoting trivial nonsense over fact and legality

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 11, 2015, 11:09 pm

        @robert what makes your myths so special that they get to be tresated as historical fact? bibilical israel was a myth it never existed so what your really saying is you made up a bunch of borders based on a country that never existed and demand a country based on that? does that mean i can make up borders for a mythical state and claim those borders. I’d be willing to treat you as honest if you willing to deal with the actual borders of the kingdom on Israel and hell since i’m a nice guy i’ll let you include the borders of the kingdom of judah but to insist on bibl;ical bordefrs is literally demanding reasonable people to admit to a fairy tale.

      • Robert in Israel
        Robert in Israel
        January 12, 2015, 7:55 pm

        PJDude, no Arabs in Palestine, whether the modern ones, or the various Arab and Turkish Muslim tribes who conquered Palestine in the past, have ever had sovereignty here. Yet I don’t here you saying that since there was never a Palestinian state here, their claims are just a myth or simply unjustified. So what gives?

        BTW, I didn’t understand when you said that you would “let me include the borders of Judah”. Do you mean that you think the Jerusalem region and the south of the country should belong to Israel?

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        January 12, 2015, 11:03 pm

        first off their previous sovriegnty is irrelevant as for 1 unlike you there not basing their claim onto that. 2. once the accepted means of creating a new country was self determination not conquest being the native population was enough. and their was no arab conquest of palestine. there was a muslim one but it was of conquerring the already present arab population.

        what gives is the palestinians are basing their claims on self determination of being the legal resident population in the territory. no myths required. there are only facts. you how ever are demanding a jewish state with borders as stated in the bible which have zero basis in any sort of fact. if the palestinians made the same sort of bs claims your making i’d knock them just as hard.

        as fior allowing you to claim the kingdom of judah. I was saying if you’d want to make a legit historical based argument i’d let you combine the kingdom of judah with the kingdom of Israel and argue those borders as a basis rather than the mythical ones your using.

        ???why are you asking if i think any part of palestine should belong to your terrorist country. jerusalem is legally the palestinians. while me and talknic has differences in opinion over the legality of Israel declaring its self the fact remains while those lands fall into a very dark grey part of the law everything out side of that is most asurdedly illeaglly occupied land belonging to the sovriegn state of palestine.

    • just
      just
      January 8, 2015, 9:58 am

      LOL x2! Spot- on abc!

  21. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 8, 2015, 11:50 am

    I do appreciate your (Robert in Israel’s) response to my query about where you think what constitutes the borders of Israel. I will consider just a few of your points.

    “Ideally, I would want the world to recognize the definitive and minimalist Biblical borders which on the West is the Mediterranean Sea as south as Wadi El-Arish (“the River of Egypt”, which is NOT the Nile), and as far north as the Litani River in southern Lebanon..”

    When you say “ideally” I hope you are implying that this is a wish and not something set in concrete because that takes a big chunk out of Lebanon. I know you think that since Jews once lived there Israel claim it but that way lies madness. What about the people who were there before the Jews? Seems to me their claim would be even better by that logic. And do we really want to redraw maps today based on how things were 2000, 3000, or 4000 years ago? Why stop there? Why not 5,000 or 6,000?

    “Re the practical side of these borders, I would leave the southern Lebanese/the Gov’t of Lebanon (but not Hizbullah, obviously) in de facto control unless they voted to fully join Israel.”

    Robert, please, you do not have the right to tell other people who should be their representatives. But even if I agreed that you have that right given the quality of leadership in Israel I don’t think the Jews there are qualified to pick other people’s political talent.

    When you agree to negotiate with someone you negotiate with their people. You do not have to like them. I know you think that it is wrong to sit across from someone who has killed Jews or called for the destruction of Israel but that’s the way of the world. Plenty of Palestinians have sat across from Israelis who have killed Arab civilians. Israel routinely deals with members of the PA that have been implicated in terror attacks in the past; they seem to have gotten over those. As for Hizbullah the only reason Israeli government doesn’t like them is because they make Israel’s periodic invasions problematic. If they were to put themselves at the service of Israel and the US they would be getting glowing write ups in the media. BTW, have you seen the people your government has been getting close to in Syria?

    “Justice can take a back seat to peace if there is sufficient justice in the compromise between the two.”

    I have no idea what this means.

    But in the end all this talk of borders and negotiations won’t get anywhere until there is “peace education.”

    I think “peace education” is a good idea, and we can start with all those young Jewish thugs who are running around scrawling “death to the Arabs” and beating people up. I know you will dismiss them as not representative but that’s not the point. I hear Israeli politicians railing against Palestinian “incitement” and how they need to be more proactive against it. Great, how about Israeli society show us all how it is done. And I don’t think Israel should be lecturing anyone on hate crimes when anti-racism there is looked upon as un-patriotic.

    Anyway, thanks for the response. I have a feeling the discussion may continue.

    • Nevada Ned
      Nevada Ned
      January 8, 2015, 2:35 pm

      Dear “a blah chick”:

      You mentioned the young Jewish thugs who are running around scrawling “death to the Arabs”.

      Good point, but incomplete. They are also scrawling “Arabs to the gas chambers”. Do you think these young Jewish thugs are just bluffing? I don’t.

      Not to mention the middle-aged Jewish thugs who helped to inflict death to over 2000 Arabe in the most recent massacre in Gaza. And the elderly Jewish thugs in policy-making roles who justified these massacres.

  22. pjdude
    pjdude
    January 8, 2015, 8:52 pm

    just how many more concessions should the palestinians make. why doesn’t Israel ever have to make a concession? these people are sick

  23. OyVey00
    OyVey00
    January 10, 2015, 9:28 pm

    Robert in Israel,

    what’d you say if the – say – Hungarians suddenly felt the urge to return to their “eternal homeland” of the Ural Mountains after an exodus of 10000 years and insisted that Russia transferred the land to them.

    I’m sure such territorial irredentism would not just apply to Jews, would it?

    Come to think of it, I wonder what kind of claims the numerous native tribes the Jews allegedly slaughtered and expelled from their “holy land” according to your scriptures would have. Hmmm… seems pretty messy.

  24. eljay
    eljay
    January 10, 2015, 9:29 pm

    [I couldn’t find a “Reply” link anywhere close to the comment quoted below (site admin(s), please fix this!), so I’m replying here.]

    >> Robert in Israeleee: [Jews] have every element in common as any other nation …

    Great! I look forward:
    – to Jewish becoming the bureaucratic nationality of “Jewish State” in the same way as any other nation has its bureaucratic nationality (France=French, Germany=German, Canada=Canadian, etc.);
    – to that bureaucratic nationality being granted to every citizen of, immigrant to and ex-pat and refugee from “Jewish State”; and
    – to constitutionally-enshrined equality for all bureaucratically Jewish citizens of “Jewish State”.

    This will guarantee the Jewish integrity of “Jewish State” (because there will never be any significant non-Jewish demographic), and all refugees from Partition-borders “Jewish State” will be able to return to their homes and lands as Jewish citizens of “Jewish State”.

  25. Mooser
    Mooser
    January 20, 2015, 12:24 pm

    I’m just glad not in hint of self-interest, special pleading, or self-dealing exists in any of “Robert in Israel’s” arguments. The way he continually argues points in which victory of his point of view means great sacrifice is quite inspiring.

    Or maybe every goddam thing “Robert in Israel” said can be covered by one little sentence: “Well, yeah, you would say that!”

    Okay, “Robert in Israel” just kidding. But I’m telling you, if you can get past the point that you get a free country if you win, your arguments are very effective!

    (I’m glad I got back here to see “Zofia” and “talknic” go to town, stepping high wide and handsome!)

Leave a Reply