Jews, Like Palestinians, Are 'Indigenous' to the Middle East
The Hamas-embraced idea that Jews have no place in Israel fosters extremism on both sides.

Leftists who openly celebrated the horrifying Hamas attacks in southern Israel argued that the end—the liberation of Palestine "from the river to the sea"—justified the means, including the indiscriminate slaughter of young rave revelers, elderly Holocaust survivors, children, and babies. Although that is a minority position even among harsh critics of Israeli policy, it reflects a more widely endorsed view that Jews, as "settlers" and "colonizers," have no legitimate claim to any of the country's territory and no business living there.
That view, in turn, is based on a simplistic morality tale that pits white European oppressors against "indigenous" people, eliding Israel's demographic roots and the ancient Jewish connection to the land. While this missing context is unlikely to faze people who see mass murder as a noble and heroic act of resistance, it is relevant for anyone who can imagine a less bloody resolution of Palestinian grievances.
In a speech last August, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who supposedly is committed to a peaceful settlement with Israel, asserted that "the Ashkenazi Jews, at least, are not Semites," meaning it is impossible for them to be victims of anti-Semitism. Abbas was invoking a theory positing that the Jews of Europe descended from the Khazars, a Turkic tribe that supposedly converted en masse to Judaism in the ninth century.
According to a 2016 summary by genetic researchers Ariella Gladstein and Michael F. Hammer, however, "Ashkenazi Jews are not closely related to modern populations that best represent the Khazars." Rather, they "appear equally close to both Middle Eastern and European populations," and they "likely arose from a genetically diverse population in the Middle East."
Notably, Abbas did not address Mizrahim, Jews of Middle Eastern and North African origin, who account for about 45 percent of Israel's Jewish population, compared to 32 percent for Ashkenazim. Overall, a 2000 study found, "a substantial portion" of Jewish and Arab Y chromosomes (70 percent and 82 percent, respectively) belonged to the same chromosome pool, results that were consistent with "previous studies that suggested a common origin for Jewish and non-Jewish populations living in the Middle East."
A 2001 study by the same researchers, which found "a high degree of genetic affinity" among Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, and Kurdish Jews, also found that Jews were "even closer to populations in the northern part of the Middle East than to several Arab populations." The authors suggested that "the Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs" reflected "early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area," which "are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews," combined with the impact of subsequent migrations from the Arabian Peninsula.
While genetic research belies the notion that Jews are newcomers to the Middle East, it gets you only so far. In particular, it does not address conflicting land claims based on much more recent developments.
Israel's founding in 1948, which most Jews celebrate but most Palestinians remember as the Nakba (catastrophe), involved a mixture of prior land purchases, arbitrary line drawing by the United Nations, and a war in which the nascent state was attacked by the combined armies of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Some of the 700,000 or so Palestinians who fled their homes planned to return after the anticipated Arab victory, while others were forcibly expelled.
Israel's defenders have long argued that it could rightly claim land won in defensive wars—in 1967 as well as 1948. They have noted that Israel absorbed Jewish refugees from Arab states and wondered why Arab states could not likewise absorb Palestinian refugees.
While there is something to these arguments, the overall message—that Palestinians should suck it up and start over somewhere else—is less than completely satisfying for anyone who values individual rights and peaceful coexistence. But that no-compromise position is only reinforced by extremists who take a similar view of Jews, whether or not they are prepared to endorse the final solution that Hamas prefers.
© Copyright 2023 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Ooooh, now we're using DNA to decide who belongs where?
I'll go back to .... wherever ... if the Native Americans go back to Siberia and all the Mideast people go back to Africa.
“ Why can’t the Jews have just one Jewish state?”
Uh, how about because of a little thing called the human rights of the non Jewish people who already live there.
From the Balfour declaration specifically recognize the line, “ it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine,” because that CERTAINLY ISN’T what Jews have done or are doing in Palestine.
If the Balfour Declaration was considered “crap” why did Jews reference it in the fourth line of their declaration of the state of Israel in 1948?
Jews demonstrate that systematic discrimination and terrorism is a motivator.
Here is Miko Peled, a prominent Israeli Jew, author, public speaker and the son of a famous Israeli general describing systematic Israeli discrimination and terrorism against the indigenous Palestinian people.
Between 40:40 and 43:45 in the video he describes it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaxAckFCuQ
Fuck off
Nice response. You really took down his arguments. Poser
It’s all he deserves..
Yeah, the spam was more on-point than the idiot.
That's not an argument, it's propaganda and you seem too stupid to understand that.
He pukes up the same discredited shit every time. He’s been debunked here for years. No one has any more patience for his Nazi shit.
Rob Misek is a Holocaust Denier Nazi!
If you sympathize with Herr Misek, then you can go jump in a Grist Mill!
this is where Abattoir usually chimes in on Misek's baloney wonder where he's been?
Didn’t he say he’s been really sick? Like he might not live much longer?
Yeah, he did. Hopefully he has better things to do than spend a lot of time here.
He posted on another thread; seems to be improving.
Oh, that's good to hear.
^^^ didn't know any of this muchas gracias.
Are you familiar with Misek? Fuck off is more than this Jew hating scum deserves.
Or do you participate is his conspiracies?
will do
Fuck off and die, Nazi shit.
So doesn't this mean that you are collaborating with a Jew, the ones you think are the people of the lie? Doesn't that make you an aider and abetter to lying?
Shouldn't you turn yourself into yourself whenever you and your ilk outlaw lying?
You know, if I could turn myself into myself, I'd never leave the house.
🙂
😉
But enough about my fantasies, my biggest fantasy now is that you...
Fuck Off, Nazi!
“Human Rights” isn’t a thing – it’s a trademarked slogan of the politically correct Democratic Socialists. Although the Zionists might have “cited” the Balfour Declaration, it’s still crap – the Haganah and Irgun had to bomb British military installations to get them to finally give up that part of their silly Empire. Finally – the Jewish State of Israel has consistently tried to provide Palestinian Arab Muslims with fundamental property and political rights since day one. Historians are still disagreeing over how many Palestinians went into exile voluntarily and how many were “expelled” because they violently attacked Jews – also from day one – in opposition to the Jewish State of Israel.
Historians are still disagreeing over how many Palestinians went into exile voluntarily and how many were “expelled” because they violently attacked Jews
The only reasons historians disagree about numbers is because Folke Bernadotte (the guy who was originally charged with figuring out what was happening and mediating among those people living within the partition areas as well as the Arab nations) was assassinated the day after he issued his first mediation report. His successor, Ralph Bunche, focused entirely on Arab-Israeli armistice and ignored 'Palestinians'.
Your characterization of the reasons/pigeonholes of those numbers - and the exclusion of, by far, the two largest categories - is pure lies and propaganda and you know it.
Outside of some pedantic disagreement, did you have a point?
Just being clever about his antisemitism.
Having trouble reading again, are you?
1. Many Jews also already lived there even before the creation of the modern Israeli state.
2. Until the wars of 1948 and 1967, the Arabs already living there were not displaced. The new Jews were immigrants who lived mostly-peacefully with their new neighbors.
3. Some Arab chieftains lost governance of land they'd previously claimed but a) their right to govern was questionable under the collapsing rules from the Ottoman Empire and b) that decision was made entirely by the superpowers of the time, not by the Jews who were being shipped there.
One of the better histories of the time is A Peace to End All Peace by D Fromkin.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart
This Website➤---------------➤ http://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM
Benny Morris, "1948" is a good read also.
At the time that the UN declared Israel a Jewish state, Jews owned more land there, through purchases from residents, than native Arabs, and turned much of it into arable land, instead of the desert it had been.
Oh look, the Nazi makes an argument against Jews. Who would have thought?!
If the issue is whose ancestors were "indigenous", what about the fact that the Emperor Hadrian re-named the area from "Judea" to "Palestine" in the 2nd century as punishment when the local Jewish leaders attempted to rebel against the Roman occupation at the time? The same empire occupied the southern UK at that time, btw, and there's even a "wall" named for that same Emperor which runs along the boundary between Roman territory and the Scottish/Gaellic "barbarians" in the north.
There were Jews living in that area for centuries before the Anglo-Saxon tribes who eventually became the "English". Why should anyone believe that a piece of paper written more than a millennium after that is somehow undoing history? I'd say that the Balfour letter was assenting to the restoration of a situation which existed prior to the times of Alexander and Julius Caesar, and at that point most recently occupation of the Ottoman empire who had carried out the first documented incidence of organized genocide against the Armenian people.
Half of the holidays in the Jewish religion are commemoration of times when the original Jews either defended, liberated, or were driven from their homeland. Even the "last supper" which preceded the crucifixion (and in Christian belief resurrection) of Jesus was a Passover Seder, commemorating the events described in the Book of Exodus, including the belief that God himself promised that particular patch of land to the Jewish people. That Book is part of Christian Scripture as much as it is Jewish scripture, so if Christianity is "the religion of truth", then aren't all true believers required to accept that Israel and Jerusalem are the homeland of the Jews not only by history but by divine intention?
Although the Armenian Genocide was indeed a genocide in the Twentieth Century, there was another before it that started in the Nineteenth Century, namely, Belgium King Leopold II’s genocide in Congo. Raphael Lemkin, the coiner of the term “genocide,” also considered Colonialism as inherently genocidal.
Leopold II of Belgium–Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_II_of_Belgium
Genocides in History–Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history
As for “religions of truth,” dragging that into the conversation destroys any common frame of reference of rationality and makes solving the problems of genocide and the Middle East Crisis impossible.
You are deeply mistaken. On the contrary, religion has actually enlightened billions of individuals with knowledge that they wouldn't have gotten had they not been religiously motivated. You owe religion your gratitude for stuff like universities, hospitals and even the Golden Age of Islam.
You should repent of your erroneous ways.
The reference to the "religion of truth" is a reference to Misek's nonsense (like when I point out that he's lying "by his own standard", or refer to the concept of "properly applied logic"). It's not meant to imply that I think that Christianity is the "one true faith", but to point out that his own beliefs are in direct conflict with scriptures held sacred in what he claims to be that.
I know there's no hope of getting him to comprehend logic, or his own hypocrisy and bigotry, but I'm hoping to maybe throw him in to all-out cognitive dissonance (as if we'd notice any difference in his rantings that way).
Not gonna lie I was hoping most self-identified libertarians would have more nuanced takes than “Israelis good, Palestinians bad” but this is also the website that gives a platform to ENB so maybe I shouldn’t be surprised that everyone who criticizes Israel is considered a Nazi.
I don't see it as "Palestinians bad", but I will always see Hamas and Hezbollah; groups founded for the express purpose of genocide and ethnic cleansing who intentionally attack the civilian population of their enemy and to the best of their ability keep their own civilians between their own fighters and potential incoming fire.
In general, the "Palestinian" people have been betrayed by their own chosen leadership since long before those two groups existed, and nothing that Hamas has done, is doing, or ever will do is likely to advance the best interests of the nationality they're pretending to be doing it all in the name of.
You tried this yesterday. This is the view of exactly ONE Jew with one tilted opinionb about who is right and wrong.
Moral cl
Rob Misek ; You tried this yesterday. This is the view of exactly ONE Jew with one tilted opinion about who is right and wrong.
Moral clarity is a mess when both sides commit atrocities, but the obvious and undeniable moral clarity consist in this: Israel wishes to provide a country to Jews who, after centuries of oppression , want a country of their own that no one can throw them out of. Hamas however aims to destroy Israel and wipe Jews off the face of the earth. There is no middle ground and Hamas has no sane objective that Jews can work with. Therefore Israel is within its rights to fight Hamas in any way it can.
In the youtube link you reference, the Peled dude admits that his talk is not “balanced”. So how do we know that it is true and objective?
People migrate. People join groups by marriage, adoption, migration, etc.
The modern State of Israel exists. It was not created in Uganda or Patagonia. It was created in the Middle East.
Some of the people who lived in the region were expelled, true. Some of them left voluntarily, anticipating that they would return to a defeated, exterminated people whose lands and goods would be theirs for the taking.
Those events, too, occur repeatedly through human history;
So here we are. Hamas was created by Israel to provide a counter to the Palestinian Authority. Israel has a massive military force that just magically disappeared allowing penetration of the borders and failed to materialized for hours after the enemy forces somehow overcame the most secure border in the world.
Forced migration with some genocide throw in for good measure is supposed to solve this mess?
Clearly there is a geopolitical game with the sock puppets playing the role they have been given ON BOTH SIDES.
As with the COVID jabs, once sufficient despair, fear and desperation sets in, we are supposed to run, terrified and grateful, into the sheltering arms of the globalist saviors who will give us urban dog kennels to live our little lives in while they provide the bugs for us to eat, the 3 new garments per year for us to wear, the video games and Neuralink stimulation for us to experience.
Anyone fighting the old game of alleged ancestral hate and (for God's sake, arguing over who deserves to be the target of antisemitism!) is a willing dupe of the gaming globalists.
As I wrote years ago, with reference to the globalist agenda laid out decades ago, we are all the new Jews.
The mRNA holocaust is underway and the rest is a vicious, callous distraction.
Unless we start successfully breaking the globalist bonds that are controlling us, we have no hope of survival. And manufactured hate is one of those bonds.
Check out PreventGenocide2030.org for ways to get out of WHO and the UN, and more.
Crazy, right? Next we'll be deciding what gender people are from their DNA. Insane.
American Ivy league colleges are loaded with hyper-ignorant racist progressive student democrats. They are calling for the global extermination of Jewish people to complete the Great Reset Green New Deal in the name of global warming. This is hatred of individual rights taught by Extreme Far Left Wing Racist Collectivists in the name of Altruism.
This is why the poor Jewish people found the communist main stream muslim democrats chopping off the heads of innocent little baby girls with pointed shovels that recent morning.
"BUILD BACK BETTER"
No Arabs are not indigenous to Israel. They invaded the area just as they are not indigenous to Egypt or North Africa, they took the lands by conquest. I found it rather amusing when the Egyptian government was up in arms over the movie about Cleopatra when she was Greek and the Egyptians were not Arabs. They claim the history of others as their own. You could say they were 'colonizers' before the empires in Europe.
Re: Cleopatra - they were up in arms over the ideologically driven lie in casting denying actual history. They're drawing an arbitrary line for valid conquest vs invalid but at least they're still tethered to reality, if only their own.
Arab is a cultural-linguistic grouping. Arabs conquered all those places, but they didn't completely replace all of the native populations.
Correct. In fact, it's quite likely that many of the "Arab" Palestinians are descended from Jews living in the region who converted to Christianity and/or later to Islam.
Elizabeth Taylor doesn't look Greek.
I’m also of Middle Eastern origin — 40,000 years ago. And of African origin — 67,000 years ago. Right now I’m a native American, having been born in the USA, as were my parents, and their parents. I never met the people before that, who knows where they were from.
Somehow the Census Bureau wanted to know my country of origin, but it's this one.
When any government agency inquires as to my race or ethnicity, I respond with "None of your fucking business, you racist asshole".
-jcr
Good answer. Probably not so good for an employment application (check “I prefer not to answer”) but spot on for everything else.
On the Census, I basically say "One. 'Bye!". That is all they Constitutionally need to know.
When the hospital surveyed me on the quality of care and asked for "Race" and "Ethnicity," I replied: "I don't want stupid prizes so I don't play stupid games! My 'Race' and 'Ethnicity' are irrelevant to quality of care!"
I got selected for that special "crawl up your ass" version of the census this time, and some pushy little bint showed up on my doorstep. I played along for a little bit, told her how many people lived in the house, and as soon as she asked my race, I said "fuck off" and slammed the door in her face.
She knocked again, and I came out and yelled in her face and called her a goddamned racist, and slammed the door harder. She fucked off.
-jcr
Had the same experience in 2010. Two of them came back the next day. I told them they'd need to send a federal marshall with a warrant. Never heard from them again.
I think there's some country named White where you have to say you originated from.
The Jews took the Levant from the Canaanites 3600 years ago and since they killed all the Canaanites to the point the streets were ankle deep in blood they have the superior claim.
According to John McCarthy’s documentary It Ain’t Necessarily So the Hebrew people known as Israelites were actually from another part of Caanan, and did not leave captivity from Egypt. So they always had a presence in the area.
Further evidence of this is that, of all the thousands of Egyptian written papyrus documents and hieroglyphics on walls, statues, and stele, the only Egyptian artifact that refers to Israelites was the Merneptah Stele form 1208 B.C.E., where the Pharaoh Merneptah proclaimed that the Israelites were destroyed along with Tjehenu, Khatti, Asqaluni, Geser, Yanoam, and Kharru. No reference was made anywhere in Egyptian writings and hieroglyphics to Israelites being held as slaves.
The Merneptah Stele and The Torah can’t both be right about the Israelites, although they could both be wrong.
Also, Canaan was part of Egypt’s imperialist holdings at the time of the alleged biblical Exodus. What sense would it make for the Israelites to move from one part of Egypt to another to escape the Pharoah?
Anyway, since the Hebrews were always there, they have as much historical claim to the land as anyone else.
Everything you wrote may well be true. And it doesn't have a damn thing to do with any claims to land today. I still think Thomas Jefferson has the best thought re land claims:
The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government. The course of reflection in which we are immersed here on the elementary principles of society has presented this question to my mind; and that no such obligation can be so transmitted I think very capable of proof.—I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, ‘that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living’: that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. The portion occupied by any individual ceases to be his when himself ceases to be, and reverts to the society. If the society has formed no rules for the appropriation of it’s lands in severality, it will be taken by the first occupants. These will generally be the wife and children of the decedent. If they have formed rules of appropriation, those rules may give it to the wife and children, or to some one of them, or to the legatee of the deceased. So they may give it to his creditor. But the child, the legatee, or creditor takes it, not by any natural right, but by a law of the society of which they are members, and to which they are subject.
If the society has formed no rules for the appropriation of it’s lands in severality, it will be taken by the first occupants.
TJ loved him some chaos! Or maybe he thought might makes right.
Hasn't this been the rule for almost all of human history?
Long before then. Animals don't pee on trees for the hell of it. Course they don't last long as alpha in their territory. Ain't no government to continually protect their claim.
Eat a fucking bullet, JFree. Nobody actually cares about your opinion, and the planet will be better off when you are a corpse useful for fertilization.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You left out the fact that Egyptian histories also do not mention their defeats.
The Merneptah Stele and Torah do not contradict each other.
Give these a read:
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/does-the-merneptah-stele-contain-the-first-mention-of-israel/
https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/merneptah-stele/
I know a Canaanite, he lives right down the street. He would like to claim his land, with interest.
Poor Jacob is so far in front of his skis. Just like 99.999% of people commenting on this situation. Including me. And everyone reading this.
Which is why our government should only be involved in getting American hostages out.
Not even that. America should not be involved in any part of the Middle East tarpit in any way for any reason. Israel is quite capable of handling their own security. UN human rights efforts are now, have always been, and will always be a joke! American hostages in the region have only themselves to blame - and, of course, their kidnappers.
"from the river to the sea"
said the unapologetic nazi.
Anyone uttering that phrase deserves the same retaliatory global might we brought down on that jack-booted goose-stepping Evil.
Any that we don't kill can live out their days hoping to escape notice in Argentina. Or get a standing ovation from Canada.
I strongly recommend Sir Martin Gilbert's book "In Ishmael's House: a History of the Jews in Muslim Lands", which is largely about the Jewish experience in Arab lands.
If there had never been a Holocaust, if there had never been pogroms in Europe, if Europe had been a safe space for Jews for 1,000 years, the treatment of Jews in Arab lands from the founding of Islam utterly justifies the establishment of Israel, and the Arab reaction to that founding, as far as their treatment of Jews in their own countries are concerned, provides additional justification.
And there was never a point in the last two thousand years where there were not Jews living as autochthonous residents in the land now called Israel.
There is a question I sometimes ask in a forum with Palestinian advocates when I get the opportunity. "There's a people in the Middle East who for generations have been treated as third class citizens or worse, deprived of civil rights, tortured, murdered, ethnically cleansed, homes and property seized, victims of apartheid regimes, (etc.) who want a state in their traditional homeland. Should they get it?"
And the pro-Palestinian posters respond with a loud "yes!" and then I say, "I was, of course, talking about Jews. I'm pleased you recognise the justice of our claim". They tend to get pissed off at that point.
I can imagine = They tend to get pissed off at that point.
Wonderful! That is a genius way to counter their hateful propaganda!
According to British records, 97% of land in Palestine in the 10s and 20s was "Arab"-owned (not necessarily Moslem), while 3% was Jewish-owned. But that's not consistent with the zionist narrative, right?
This reminds me of the claim that 87% of the land in South Africa was owned by whites, who were only a small proportion of the population.
What if The Science showed they were indigenous to an area 1000 miles to the east?
Have progressives finally found the issue which slows down their blitzkrieg?
On other issues, they have been able to roll up prompt victories, call their opponents ‘phobes and haters, and move along to the next issue. Gay marriage, chicks with dicks, etc.
They’ve occupied a lot of areas after encountering fairly ineffectual resistance, so maybe they thought they could just as easily go after the Jews.
This time, they’re getting major pushback not only from Jews, but from Gentiles who dislike antisemitic murder.
The progs have gotten away with a lot of insane crap, but this Jew-baiting and terrorist sympathizing may be overreach.
I sure hope so. And I hope those who went along with the previous instances of insanity will now have second thoughts about the whole progressive project.
Or will there be a lot of, “well, I’m progressive except about terrorism”? Will there be no lessons learned?
The American Progressive Left’s instinctual, instantaneous support of Hamas should surprise no one, the murderous fucks.
Lefturds have always hated Jews, all the way back to Marx itself. I really have no sympathy for suicidal Jews who are suddenly shocked to see that their comrades want them dead. Maybe they should have pulled their heads out of their asses when they were out of their stupid teen years.
Talking to YOU, Larry Summers.
-jcr
Well, Gay Marriage and Transgendered people per se harm no one. Libertarians and even Economic Conservatives have gotten behind those causes.
Terrorism clearly does harm people, and if so-called “Progressives” start making apologetics for this barbarism, they have just proclaimed themselves intellectually and morally bankrupt and mentally deranged.
Well, Gay Marriage and Transgendered people per se harm no one.
This is not true. The LGBT movement is now controlled by far left progressives who are obsessed with sexuality and want to push their lifestyles to the public, and particularly to children. There video proof of this.
I will not let these people force me to play by their delusional game, and I will not have them make government do that bidding for them. A man cannot turn into a woman, and vice versa!
It seems like the "progressive/intersectional" left in the US and Europe are perfectly willing to push up hard against anyone they know with certainty won't push back.
When presented with Islamist believers and those who would institute Sharia law on a global scale if given the chance, suddenly it's "just their culture" to impose a death penalty for homosexuality, or to deny that the Holocaust happened (but also think it'd be a good idea to do it for real), or do harmful genital mutilation on female infants, or to require "honor killings" to redeem victims of rape, and as such "we can't judge".
It's a parallel kind of doublethink that goes along with the idea that "bodily autonomy" is a "fundamental human right" unless someone with a body is looking to smoke (tobacco, not pot), or vape (nicotine, not THC), or drink a 20oz soda, or eat a cheeseburger or a twinkie, or get food cooked with salt at a restaurant, or opt out of a vaccine for a virus which isn't particularly dangerous to themself and which also doesn't meaningfully slow the spread of that virus, or trust the medical advice of a doctor making an off-label prescription, or make virtually any other decision affecting their body which isn't either superficial or related to their reproductive system.
Sullum’s next article: “Water is wet say experts.”
I'd bet it's more along the lines of "Trump caused the conflict in Israel" as we're already seeing other leftist crackpots insist.
"Some of the 700,000 or so Palestinians who fled their homes planned to return after the anticipated Arab victory, while others were forcibly expelled."
It's funny how the writer gives great detail about other features of the wild illogic of the origin arguments here and skips over the most relevant detail - the Palestinians' mostly self-inflicted exile. Everything else is just propaganda and mythology. "In 1948, more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs – about half of prewar Palestine's Arab population – fled from their homes or were expelled by Zionist militias." So about half of the Palestinian Arabs remained, yet we never hear about them, and very few of the articles I read agree upon how many of the 700,000 left voluntarily and how many were expelled for attacking Jews - which seems to me to be a crucial point in the blame game!
Not to mention a war in which the nascent state was attacked by the combined armies of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.
The “Palestinian refugees” would be living in Palestine or Israel right now if they had simply managed to not be a bunch of cunts back in ’47, ’48, ’49, ’50, ’51, ’67, ’73, ’94, etc.
While there is something to these arguments, the overall message—that Palestinians should suck it up and start over somewhere else—is less than completely satisfying for anyone who values individual rights and peaceful coexistence.
They have firmly rejected the possibility of "peaceful coexistence" over and over and over again. Nobody fucking cares what they want anymore.
The Palestinians have been engaging in "peaceful protest" long before BLM coopted the idea by setting American cities ablaze in 2020.
In the 1980s, it started to seem like the PLO was the only group on the planet with any interest in hijacking airliners, and that they had little else to do with their time.
The “Palestinian refugees” would be living in Palestine or Israel right now if they had simply managed to not be a bunch of cunts back in ’47, ’48, ’49, ’50, ’51, ’67, ’73, ’94, etc.
I've wondered at times why the Palestinians seem to be such abject morons. I mean, I've met some Palestinians who live here and they seem like reasonable, fairly intelligent people. And then I remembered an old joke - Why does Mexico always do so poorly in the Olympics? Because any Mexicans who can run, jump or swim live in the U.S. And maybe it's something similar with the Palestinians. The ones who are reasonable and fairly intelligent got the hell out
Yes: the people living in the Palestinian territories are people who were too angry to live in Israel and too unskilled to emigrate.
It's similar to what you see in US Indian reservations: anybody capable of building a good life for themselves has left/leaves.
Any Palestinian who can leave Gaza or the West Bank, does.
-jcr
Well, the Pro-Hamas rallies at our elite institutions, justifying and glorifying the savagery of Hamas was revealing. The tepid response of university leadership at our elite institutions has been painful to watch. There is a serious problem with antisemitism here in the US, and especially within academia. That is a bigger long-term problem.
As for Hamas, they will be located, pursued and killed. There will be no more Hamas in Gaza.
Not just anti-semitism. American academia is maggoty with communists like Pol Pot who would happily commit mass murder to bring about their glorious workers' paradise. A lot of them showed their asses this week by cheering on the head-choppers, and we need to plan accordingly.
One obvious need is new universities without marxist faculty.
-jcr
When my children were bullied in school the teacher was reluctant to take sides . They implied that somehow they might be causing the bullying themselves. I responded at great sacrifice to the family budget by enrolling them in MMA they became black belts and we never had a problem again . I went from telling my kids violence doesn’t solve anything to sometimes violence is the only way to solve a problem. Israel should stay strong that’s the only way they will continue to exist.
It was like what Jack Marshall wrote.
https://ethicsalarms.com/2023/10/18/unethical-quote-of-the-week-squad-member-cori-bush-d-mo/#more-118555
The only thing the Muslims understand is strength, and the willingness to use that strength.
My dad made it clear to me that fighting back against bullies was the best strategy. Even if the bully won, they don't want a fight, they want to pick on kids who don't fight back.
Didn't have a lot of trouble with bullies as a kid, but the few I did encounter only fucked with me once.
-jcr
The scrub morons on this site. Backing an international government decision to implant a people back into a place they hadn't inhabited in any real sense for centuries. I hope you all take the same stance if the UN decides that Native Americans should get their land back. I hope they come and evict your family from your home and just...live in it instead. How would you react? Would you just say "welp, that's fair, I'm leaving" or would you fight? You're hypocrites just like you are on everything else.
The above is ahistorical nonsense.
Dissect it then. Go ahead. Ill wait
OK:
Fuck off and die, you ignorant pile of shit
"international government decision to implant a people back into a place they hadn’t inhabited in any real sense for centuries"
This is the only part of your statement with any substance, so it is the only part that can be dissected.
"international government decision to implant a people"
The UN didn't implant anyone, they gave recognition to a nation created by people (jews) who mostly bought land from the ottomans and/or the british, and developed it and made it livable. (This may be the only decent thing the UN ever did in its entire history) After that occurred, the jewish side celebrated, and the arab side started shooting.
"inhabited in any real sense for centuries"
You stated it this way to make it impossible to pin down wtf you mean - what counts as a "real sense"? Does real sense mean purchasing land? Does it mean draining swamps? Does it mean establishing cities?
You gave that asshole far more than s/he deserved.
Ever heard of the Balfour Declaration? Didn't think so.
The Balfour Declaration doesn't contradict anything Bertram has said.
Jews lived in that area even before the partitioning that the then-superpowers imposed during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Jews were between 11 and 30 percent of the population (depending on the period and the methodology used by different researchers).
Look, the things you say are lies and distorted bullshit. Just like you. The bottom line is that Israel is a real country and has been for 75 years. Israelis are both culturally and morally superior to any of their neighbors.
The fact is that the so called ‘Palestinians’ refuse to live in peace with their beneficent Israeli neighbors. Now they will suffer for that.
Case closed. Now fuck off, m’kay?
No, you fuck off. Pussy.
Guys, we found the sockpuppet
I have, in fact, explicitly stated that if the NA manage to drive me out, I'll deserve it. And I say that as someone who lives on a city surrounded three sides by reservations.
That said, given the fuck all they managed on this continent in the fifteen millennia prior to Europe's arrival, I'm not super concerned.
Even the parts that aren't historical.
The masked sockpuppet idea is every bit as cogent as the anarco-fascist theory. That one holds that because there is a Canadian border across which American ladies can flee to find birth control, all states and provinces, nay, all counties and municipalities must logically secede and empower corporate purveyors of coercive force unsusceptible to ballot suffrage. Voters, by the same theory, are not repelled by that as a libertarian platform plank.
Oh, you’re one of those. Everything you’ve said is discredited, cliche, anti semitic bullshit. You need to go back to Vox, or Stormfront, or whatever fuck rock you crawled out from. Or maybe just blow your brains out.
Speaking as someone with Cherokee and Blackfoot in my ancestry, once again, go jump in a grist mill, Nazi!
There is so much wrong with your argument that it's hard to know where to start.
So, it seems that there were Jews in what is now Israel before there were even any Muslims at all.
JFC, great insight. Islam didn’t even exist yet. Your historical acumen is super impressive. There were Arabs.
Your historical acumen is super impressive.
Well, yours isn’t. There were people who would later be identified and (self-)categorized as Arabs but there weren’t Arabs when people in the region known as Israel were internally and externally identified as Israelites historically any more than there were Englishmen in England when Julius Caesar arrived.
Edit: Again, again, not that I affirm any "We were here first!" claim one way or the other, but that the "Our non-descript and unrecorded proto-ancestors who share nothing in common with us predate *your* proto-ancestors who may or may not be *slightly* more like you." is just a retarded and obvious excuse to murder people in the current day.
Well, life is about first showing up, then next doing the work of mixing the labor with objects of nature or making the exchange to make it yours.
Both individual Jews and Arabs have done this, so both have the right to own what is theirs in a rational Universe that holds to Lockean Libertarian principles of real property ownership.
None of that involves inheritance or transmittal of that property to someone else beyond death.
If you are saying it does, then you are saying the Earth is owned by the wishes of dead people.
Oh shut up, you want government to control all property, don't deny it.
Then NO ONE has a historical tight to the land, neither Jews nor Arabs.
Were you born this stupid, or have you spent years working at it?
Eat shit and die, fuckface.
Fuck off nazi.
Yeah, I don't know how this isn't universally understood. Not that I necessarily agree that ethno-cultural land grant hereditary succession policy is a reasonable or viable thing but (rather intrinsically the opposite) both ways:
If Palestinians have claim to lands prior to European colonization because of some ethno-cultural land grant hereditary succession policy, then Palestinians simply renaming cities we factually know to be the Jewish cities of Jerusalem and Bethlehem doesn't void that same ethno-cultural land grant hereditary succession policy. Again, not that "They were here first." necessarily justifies forcible expulsion. Just that your claim of "We were here first after 1948 (or 1848 or 1448 or...) no further backsies!" isn't any less retarded or more justified.
This is the same bullshit, use-the-law-to-bludgeon-your-opponents policy Leftists in the US are using now. The same they allege America uses against the slaves and the Colonizers used against the Native Americans in the past. They don't care about the law or DNA or history or culture or equity or peace, they only care about bludgeoning their opponents.
The patch of land Israel, the West Bank and Gaza sits on, because of it location betwen Asia, Africa and Europe has been run over so many times by empires great and petty over the millenia that you could go batty trying to figure out what an “indigenous” person to that area is. Suffice to say though, is that are is the origination point of the people called the Jews and remnants of that people never entirely left the place, and that the grouos calling themselves Palestinian demand that they should be the culturally and politically dominant people in that entire area is a nonstarter as a goal.
Italy should claim it belongs to Rome and all of them need to swear fealty to the emperor.
And then fight a war with Turkey who also claims it as the last remnant of the Ottoman Empire.
Gaza has the same choices Japan had on August 5, 1945.
That’s honest, but not completely accurate. The US didn't claim Japan as their own. Nevertheless, Palestinians were conquered, as many other people were in the past. “We took your houses, land, olive groves, and orange plantations by force or threat of force, and now everything is ours” is legitimate. It’s the denial of that reality, the zionist attempt to claim the moral high ground, which is so morally repugnant.
Yes, they were conquered, by the Ottomans, and before that the Crusaders (mostly Franks and Normans) after they, the Arabic Muslims, took it from Byzantines, who inherited it from the Romans, who conquered the native Jewish people. Keep digging asshole.
My guru in matters historical or cultural, Thomas Sowell, was asked, "what can the jews do to bring about peace?" He chuckled and answered, "in one word, fail..". The jews succeed, build, prosper and advance wherever they are. culturally frozen societies hate that.
I had posted his video on this subject earlier. Here it is again for all who missed it:
The Truth About Antisemitism
https://youtu.be/VkTHbJhvlLY?si=yRFfNYIxsOf35AHa
Sullum might have recalled how Christian National Socialist Germany had no problem enlisting help from Mohammedan semitic conservatives in its efforts to exterminate Jewish semitic liberals. Hitler's hypnotic gospel speeches and policies are now an embarrassment to Republican faithful. Hence the convenient story that nazi ideology is entirely racial and not another Lutheran Christian Crusade exploiting populist envy of Jewish ability and success.
Nazi ideology is a take on socialist narratives with race and ethnicity substituting for class. Jews in Nazi ideology are th representative of the international bourgeoisie which cannot be appealled to change their ways from nationalistic sentimentality, which is why they have to be eliminated by that way of thinking.
The national socialist and international socialist ideology is all horrific bunkum.
A modest correction: owing to the coinage "anti-Semitism" - intended as a sort of euphemism - people make the mistake of thinking that "semitic" is an ethnic/racial/tribal description. It isn't. It's a family of languages spoken by people who do not all share the same ethnicity. Ethopia is a semitic country as it Malta by virtue of language. It would be almost like calling Ghanaians "Germanic"..
Only some of the languages of Ghana are Germanic. Others are imposter languages and at least a few dozen may not even exist in polite society.
Shem, Ham, and Japheth are the progenitors; Semites from Shem. (often Sem).
And people who seriously thinks you could regenerate the entire human species from four families of two Heterosexuals, male and female–without genetic defects and with sufficient genetic diversity to survive every place on Earth–are known as Shemps:
Shemp–Be-Be-Be-Be-Be
https://youtu.be/XBOrcsqY6xo?si=BBASUOPA6Jv4uC9b
🙂
😉
It's been done before. Ask Adam.
Perhaps you should consider the thought that genetic defects are not so universal as you claim.
I didn't think even Hank was this retarded.
Live and learn.
Are European Christians indigenous to Palestine? Should they have had the right to colonize Palestine and commit genocide against Palestinians? Christianity was wholly founded in Palestine.
Biblical Judaism was probably created in Alexandria Egypt in the early third century CE.
Rabbinic Judaism is a Mesopotamian religion that does not crystallize until the 10th century CE and that does not have much connection to Palestine. The holy scripture of Rabbinic Judaism is the Babylonian (Mesopotamian) Talmud.
Palestinians are the natives of stolen Palestine. Christians and Jews are only connected to Palestine by religious fairy tales, which establish no legal rights. Both Judaism and also Christianity have at times proselytized massively. Christian proselytization was based in the proselytization of Judaism.
Here is my short summary of ancient pre-Rabbinic Judaism.
During the Greco-Roman period, there were three separate populations that practiced Judaism. The Hellenistic Judaism of the Occidental Roman Empire was Greek-language based and used the Septuagint or later Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible for its Holy Scripture. Only descendants of non-Judean converts practiced Greek-language Judaism. This Judaism was also practiced in Alexandria among Greek speakers. European Judaism was Hellenistic, often used a vernacular version of a Greek Bible, and was ignorant of Hebrew or Aramaic until approximately 850 CE when merchants that practiced Mesopotamian Judaism established a seminary in Venosa, Italy. The Mesopotamian merchants were willing to admit Europeans into their trade networks in the role of junior partners but only if the Europeans were willing to use Mesopotamian religious law for the sole Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).
Palestinian and Phoenician Canaanite/Hebrew-language-based Judaism was practiced among Phoenician and Palestinian Canaanite/Hebrew speakers including those that lived in Alexandria, Carthage, and other Phoenician colonies in N. Africa and elsewhere on the shores of the Mediterranean, Black, and Caspian Seas. This version of Judaism was tied to the Jerusalem Temple cult and was mostly shattered by the destruction of the Jerusalem and Leontopolis Temples. (The Casifia/Ctesiphon Temple probably continued to function until about 300 CE.)
The maniac Bar Kochba and his lackey Tannaim (e.g., Rabbi Akiba) completely discredited Biblical and Tannaitic Judaism for the peasantry because Bar Kochba persecuted the peasantry and the Tannaim supported him. The Palestinian population, which practiced Biblical Judaism, converted entirely to Christianity and subsequently mostly to Islam, which is a slight variant of Judean (Jamesian) Christianity in which Jesus is the messiah but not divine. By the beginning of the 3rd century CE most of the Judean peasantry (90% of the population) practiced some form of Judean Christianity.
The Roman Exile is a metaphor for the transformation of Judaism from the religion of Judea into a religion that only descendants of non-Judean converts practice. The ancestors of Palestinians are Greco-Roman Judeans, who converted first to Christianity and then mostly to Islam.
Aramaic-language-based Judaism was practiced in Mesopotamia/Babylonia. It was initially an Aramaic-language version of Zoroastrianism but adopted the Hebrew Bible in the early Hellenistic period. This community created Rabbinic Judaism.
Judah the Prince and Nathan the Babylonian tried to introduce an early form of this version of Judaism to Palestine during the 3rd century CE in the form of the Mishnah, but their efforts were mostly scorned by the peasantry.
As everyone in Palestine became Christian, the regional distinctions like Judea, Samaria, Idumea, Galilee, Nabatea, etc. became mostly obsolete, and it made sense to refer to the whole region by the territorial name Palestine. The Saints and Church Fathers of Palestine were routinely called Palestinian.
"Are European Christians indigenous to Palestine? Should they have had the right to colonize Palestine and commit genocide against Palestinians? ..."
Do you expect a reasoned response to your pathetic attempt to poison the well asshole?
If the truth poisons the well, I should certainly add the truth to the discussion.
You're adding something, but it ain't truth. More like shit.
Worded another way: "If I must kill people in order for them to accept what I claim to be true, so be it."
Name-calling. How lefty of you.
No, calling history twisting Nazi like yourself an asshole, is being polite.
Nicely done! However, the point here is not to establish the Jews as the original, original inhabitants of the region but, rather, to debunk the propaganda that alleges that the Jewish occupation of Judea and Samaria is illegitimate because of it. It does not matter whether who was the most recent occupants or the second most recent occupants or ... well, you get the idea! The argument was launched by political correctness apologists for Palestinian terrorists to deflect horror at the Hamas atrocities and try to illegitimize the Jewish State.
Palestinians have been waiting for 75 years for the international community to obey its own law, to end the Zionist state, and to enable Palestinian return.
Because the creation of a Zionist state in Palestine was always predicated on the genocide of Palestinians, dolus specialis of genocide has always been explicit and implicit in Zionism. (See Note at bottom of comment for discussion of the crime of genocide.)
Hamas was provoked!
Zionist colonial settlers went insane when they realized
1. that Palestinians constitute a slight majority of the population in stolen Palestine and
2. that the Palestinian population is much younger than the Zionist colonial settler population.
Since this Israeli government took power, it accelerated the never ending genocide.
The international community did not address Zionist outrages effectively. Hamas was intensely provoked into responding by making a stand now instead of waiting for a death of a thousand cuts as Zionist colonial settlers murder children, make living conditions unbearable, and steal el-Aqsa along with other Palestinian holy sites.
Demonization of Hamas only serves the purposes of depraved Zionists. The terrorist designation of Hamas is purely political because the designation is made by a US administrative agency that responds primarily to campaign contributions of hyperwealthy US Zionists.
US federal law has only one clear definition of terrorism. Genocide is a form of terrorism. Genocide is defined in black letter law in 18 U.S. Code § 1091 - Genocide. A statute like § 1091 is a matter for a court and not for an inherently political executive administrative agency, whose judgment is tied to the president's political strategy.
The Israeli government and Zionists in general have no reason to change their behavior unless the issue of Zionist genocide becomes the central topic of US public discussion. I have put together a list of basic principles (rationes decidendi) to apply to the theft of Palestine.
Ten Fundamental Principles (Rationes Decidendi) That Apply to the Theft of Palestine
1. Zionism is an ideology of genocide.
2. Since 1881 Zionists have provided explicit evidence of dolus specialis of genocide.
3. The ridiculous fairy tale of Roman Expulsion does not constitute a legitimate active defense to a charge of committing genocide even if this fairy tale were true.
4. Genocide is an international and US federal capital crime without a statute of limitations.
5. On Dec 11, 1946, the international community banned genocide and made this ban jus cogens.
6. The Zionist movement and the Zionist state are in probable violation of international and US federal anti-genocide law.
7. The US Zionist movement is in probable violation of the US federal statute that criminalizes material support to terrorists (= genocide-perpetrators).
8. Palestinians have no right to violate jus cogens by negotiating with the Zionist state.
9. No agreement with the Zionist state is valid because it would legalize genocide in violation of jus cogens.
10. The mere existence of the Zionist state negates the international anti-genocide legal regime and undermines international law.
Note
What is genocide?
When the international community banned genocide, there was only one legal definition of genocide. It is found in Count Three of Indictment of the 1946 Nuremberg International Tribunal. Genocide and (mass) murder are completely distinct crimes. Murder is a crime against an individual while genocide is a crime against s group. Americans often confuse genocide with mass murder and believe incorrectly that Holocaust-like systematic killing is required for genocide. If kings still ruled in Europe and if the King of France decreed that all Jews in France must convert to Christianity or leave, the King of France would have committed the crime of genocide of the French Jewish religious group
• even if no one died on account of the King’s decree and
• even if 70 years later the size of the population of French Jewish exiles was larger than the size of the French Jewish population at the time of the decree
because the King of France exterminated or physically destroyed the Jewish religious group within the territory of France.
Even though murder is unnecessary for a legal determination of genocide, one must keep in mind that Zionists routinely murder many Palestinians and have done so since the Mandatory period.
There is no "international law" that allows children and grandchildren to "return" to places they have never been and that are part of a different nation now. Nor do any of these Palestinians have legal or property rights claims to lands in Israel.
"Palestinians" are not a distinct group of people, they are indistinguishable from Arabs in neighboring countries. Israel isn't trying to kill them. They have been offered self-determination multiple times and used it to wage war and terrorism on Israel. They have lost their right to self-determination.
Since this Israeli government took power, it accelerated the never ending genocide.
Funny genocide when the population of Palestinians keeps increasing. I thought the point of genocide was to remove/exterminate a population (see: Holocaust, The).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_State_of_Palestine
Out of 224 listed countries and territories, the West Bank ranked 48th with a total fertility rate (TFR) of 3.2, and the Gaza Strip ranked 31st with a TFR of 3.97 according to The World Factbook in 2018. In 2018, the West Bank had an estimated population growth rate of 1.81% (country comparison to the world: 56th) and the Gaza Strip had a population growth rate of 2.25% (35th).
"Palestinians have been waiting for 75 years for the international community to obey its own law, to end the Zionist state, and to enable Palestinian return..."
Obviously you and 'the truth' are but distant acquaintances.
Obviously you and ‘the truth’ are but distant acquaintances.
In Jonathon's case, I doubt they've even been within 5 miles of meeting.
TLDR
You are one sick bastard to try to justify the unprovoked murder of innocents.
"Hamas was provoked!
Zionist colonial settlers went insane when they realized
1. that Palestinians constitute a slight majority of the population in stolen Palestine and
2. that the Palestinian population is much younger than the Zionist colonial settler population."
Zionist settlers were unilaterally removed from the area which is "governed" by Hamas 17 years ago. Unless, like most other pro-Arab activitsts, you refer to the "occupied territories" when talking about all of the land "from the river to the sea" but use that particular phrase knowing that the Western Left will interpret it as meaning only Gaza and West Bank areas because they're looking for excuses to pretend that Hamas and Hezbollah are merely "political parties" similar to the US Democrats or the UK Labour Party as opposed to militant proxies for Islamist fundamentalists like the Iranian Revolutionary Council and Arab Nationalist groups looking to re-establish and expand the theocratic Islamic Calipahte.
Probably most of the peoples (including Ukrainian Jews) in the region around and near the Black and Caspian Seas have a genetic profile similar to a genetic profile of the northern Middle East, duh.
Such a genetic profile does not make Zionist colonial settlers any less invaders, interlopers, thieves, impostors, and genocide-perpetrators in the region of Palestine within the Levant.
We get it. You want to exterminate the Jews and are babbling at length instead of just being intellectually honest enough to come out and say that.
+1
I don’t agree with “I just want to kill Jews.”, but at least it doesn’t require the sweeping, active retardation of *all* other people (in addition to killing the Jews) the way “Christianity was wholly founded in Palestine.” does.
I for one appreciate idiots like Affleck deflecting attention from anything that might be considered controversial coming from my keys.
I don’t know that he wants to kill them himself. But I have no doubt that if the Israeli’s are exterminated, that he will be cheering and popping open a bottle of champagne to celebrate.
Everything else he writes is just rationalizing drivel.
Yikes. Let the hate flow through you...
Fuck, you're stupid. I'll repeat what SRG had to say as it's relevant.
https://reason.com/2023/10/18/jews-like-palestinians-are-indigenous-to-the-middle-east/?comments=true#comment-10279997
If there had never been a Holocaust, if there had never been pogroms in Europe, if Europe had been a safe space for Jews for 1,000 years, the treatment of Jews in Arab lands from the founding of Islam utterly justifies the establishment of Israel, and the Arab reaction to that founding, as far as their treatment of Jews in their own countries are concerned, provides additional justification.
And there was never a point in the last two thousand years where there were not Jews living as autochthonous residents in the land now called Israel.
Holy shit, seriously? SRG managed something sane?
No, no they don't. Some have Turkic roots (Turkic originated not in the Middle East but on the Central Eurasian Steppes) and Mongol (also Eurasian Steppes) roots, the tartars of Crimea. But the main grouping in that area genetically is Slavic, Germanic and Hellenistic. None of these groups are closely related to the Middle Eastern, semitic speaking people. They are related to the Persians, some of the peoples of the Indian subcontinent. But these groups, are not closely related to the Arabic and Jewish peoples.
From a libertarian perspective, who deserves to rule? Answer: the one’s who would rule in the most libertarian way. So who would rule in the most libertarian way – the Jews or the Islamic Arabs? I think we all know the answer to this. All else is irrelevant.
Or rule in the least unlibertarian way.
"Palestinian", like "Jordanian", is an identity created artificially in the mid-20th century; they don't constitute a distinct ethnicity.
Furthermore, nobody is systematically killing Palestinians. In fact, Palestinian populations have been growing rapidly.
So, the term "genocide" is objectively wrong.
Nazis gotta Nazi.
“Palestinian”, like “Jordanian”, is an identity created artificially in the mid-20th century; they don’t constitute a distinct ethnicity.
And even if you try to assert other historical notions it runs into what I connote below where you're effectively adopting the non-Arab/non-Muslim use of the word, secondhand, in a selectively/thoroughly anachronistic fashion that makes no logical or tractable sense and is, likely, even more of a ridiculous fabrication, especially ethnically.
There are no East German people ethnically and quite reasonably never were. There certainly were people who lived in East Germany but even when there was an East Germany, they identified as the Deutsche Demokratische Republik, which specifically identifies them as part of the larger German Culture/Heritage/Sect/"Ethnicity" and indicates that specific regional government is a Republic or representation of the people, not an actual genus or race or ethnicity or lineage.
There are Palestinians from the mid-20th Century on, but to extrapolate to the region described by the Ancient Greeks and Egyptians and back is akin to saying the tearing down of the Berlin wall genocided the indigenous people of the DDR.
It's the same "fudge facts, history, definitions, and even reason until you make it" that's rampant among Left/Liberals.
Also, after WWII, millions of Germans were expelled from their homelands in East Prussia, Silesia, Pomerania, Kaliningrad, and others. They moved to East or West Germany and were integrated into societies there. None of them have a "right to return". To the contrary, Germany actually rejected return of some of those lands when it was discussed after the fall of the USSR.
Funny thing is, that those Prussians that Hitler and his ilk held up as poster children of the German Race where strongly intermixed with the Slavic peoples that also inhabited those lands. Like I said below, rarely do a people disappear, they more often get absorbed when conquered.
Much of Russia was settled by Vikings.
These same people also claim that the Sami are indigenous people's while the Germanic Scandinavians are colonizers. This despite the archeological evidence suggesting that the proto-Germanic people cultures were present before the Proto-Uric tribes that would become the Sami. And further, like the Amerindians who claim to want their land back from the colonizers, the vast majority of Sami are a mix of Uric and Germanic ancestry as a result of generations of intermarriage (and warfare).
Here is the thing, and why the colonizer trope is so stupid, humans migrate. And when we migrate, we generally run into other humans (or in the case of the first homo sapiens to leave the Rift Valley, other species of homo) and when we run into these groups, one of the other group gets absorbed, generally through both breeding and warfare. Very few people in the world today are in the same area that their ancestors where 10,000 years ago (even in Africa). People migrated, especially before the agricultural revolution of 10,000 years ago, rather for resources or because they were being pressured from another group migrating into their territory. Or both. Even geographically isolated groups such as the Aboriginal tribes of Australia, underwent this process. One aboriginal tribe would push out or absorb another. And all to often the ones pushing the colonizer trope have a piss poor understanding of history. Such as claims that the Powder River area is the ancestral homeland of the Northern Cheyenne and Lakota and the white people drove them out. No, the Lakota and Northern Cheyenne didn't gain control of that region until the 1860s after driving out the Eastern Shoshone and Crow people. At the time of Columbus's journey, the Sioux people's were living around the Great Lakes. Which is where they stayed until the late 17th century. And one of the impudence for their migration west was the westward migration of the Algonquin and Iroquois people, who because migrated because of Europeans and who had firearms because of their long association with Europeans. Trying to lay claim to any ancestral homeland of any people, outside all homo sapiens claiming the Rift Valley (likely) is complete nonsense.
That's why I always think that "first nations" is a ridiculous term to use for indigenous Americans. The Indian tribes/nations that exist today are really the last nations.
And with all the wokeness infecting academia you now get people insisting that archaeologists defer to the origin myths of the current native tribes rather than actual archeological evidence.
At the time of Columbus’s journey, the Sioux people’s were living around the Great Lakes. Which is where they stayed until the late 17th century.
Yeah. The phrase “The native tribes of Illinois” is like fingers on a chalkboard to me, but you don’t point out to anyone that it’s factually like saying “The native tribes of (the French translation of the Greenlandic word for) NAFTA.” unless you’re wearing shoes you don’t mind getting other people’s blood on.
I demand my place to live in Olduvai Gorge!
So, because they don't have a nation, they can be denied any right to property. Got it.
Pretty fucking much. If you don't own the land, you cant have property, that's kind of the fucking definition of property moron.
What "right to property" do you think they have? About 80% of Israel/Palestine were state owned (originally the Ottoman empire), and most of what was privately owned was owned by Jews.
So, Palestinians neither "own" Israel/Palestine in the sense of private property, nor in the sense of having collective ownership as a nation state.
Christianity was wholly founded in Palestine.
“Ballistic missile technology as we know it was originally invented by the East Germans.”
So what? They live there now and have a right to defend themselves. That's all it comes down to for me.
Most countries in the world exist as they do because the borders are what they were after the last war. I'm not endorsing it necessarily, but the fact is that when it comes to the establishment of nation states, might makes right. If who occupied what land 1000 years ago is the right way to look at things, then no nation states are legitimate. I don't think that is a tenable way of dealing with the world as it exists.
Well Judaism today does not proselytize, unlike Christianity and Islam, and Judaism puts tough conditions on conversion.
And Zoroastrianism neither seeks nor wants converts. Just the way I like religion.
🙂
So what bearing does your post have on Israel and "The Holy Land" and the Middle East today?
You do not believe in the freedom of religion.
Nobody gives a fuck about the Philistines, dickbag.
Go strangle yourself quietly, and don't intrude on anyone by making a mess of your death. Nobody deserves to be traumatized by your worthless passing.
"Here is my short summary of ancient pre-Rabbinic Judaism."
Says the dude who is obviously getting paid by the word.
"Christianity was wholly founded in Palestine."
If its founders were the Disciples of Christ, then it was founded in Judea. The Roman occupation didn't change the name of the region to Palestine (retribution for a Jewish-led revolt against the occupation) until the mid 2nd Century (Hebrew year 3906, Julian Year 146), which was well after the crucifixion unless the guesses at what year the actual transition from "BC" to "AD", or "BCE" to "CE" happened were off by more than a few decades, and around 300 years after the events commemorated by Hanukkah in which the second Jerusalem Temple was sacked by invaders (and more than 1000 years before Muslims built a Mosque on the site after destroying it again).
In the language of intersectionalists, the construction of the site which modern Palestinian muslims use to claim ownership of Jerusalem would be potentially one of the earliest incidents of "cultural erasure" by an invading "colonizer"; but since the modern left also sees victimhood as virtue they have to pretend like the side which has greater strength currently have always been the agressors (and ignore the obvious fact that if Israel had been intent on Genocide for 50 years, it would have been accomplished 40 years ago).
You're projecting meaningless and irrelevant American concepts on this conflict. Palestinians don't care about who is "indigenous". Islam destroyed their indigenous culture (many may well have been Jews before Islam conquered them).
Here are the explicitly stated objectives of Hamas:
Goals of Hamas: “The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine”.
On the Destruction of Israel: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (Preamble).
The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area: “The land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No one can renounce it or any part, or abandon it or any part of it” (Article 11).
The Call to Jihad: “Their scheme … is a vicious one, for the enemy hopes that the Muslims will be negligent in fulfilling their duty towards Allah, so that the Jews will keep ruling over the Muslims” (Article 13)
In US and international law, genocide is a capital crime without statute of limitations. Zionist colonial settlers put the long planned genocide into operation in Dec 1947 with the start of the Nakba. This genocide will not have ended until Palestinians return to their homes, property, villages, and country.
Every Zionist colonial settler is a perpetrator or participant in the ongoing never ending genocide. If the USA and white states obeyed their own law, they would express exactly the same ideas that Hamas proclaims even if western states referenced western laws and sacred texts.
Lucky then that Israelis have not and are not committing genocide.
Until the founding of Israel, "Zionist settlers" obtained their land through private purchases and land that was controlled by the former Ottoman/British empires.
The population of Palestinians in the entirety of Israel and the Palestinian territories has more than tripled since the founding of Israel, and that is despite massive emigration of Palestinians. That doesn't quite meet the definition of "genocide".
If they did so, they would do to the Palestinian Arabs what the West did to the Germans after WWII: after electing a fascist and racist government, after waging a war of aggression and losing it, they should be deprived of some of their lands, limiting their capacity to hurt others. In the case of Palestinians, that means moving them to neighboring Arab countries and giving Gaza and the West Bank fully to Israel.
The flow of Zionist propaganda continues unabated.
What is genocide?
When the international community banned genocide, there was only one legal definition of genocide. It is found in Count Three of Indictment of the 1946 Nuremberg International Tribunal. Genocide and (mass) murder are completely distinct crimes. Murder is a crime against an individual while genocide is a crime against s group. Americans often confuse genocide with mass murder and believe incorrectly that Holocaust-like systematic killing is required for genocide. If kings still ruled in Europe and if the King of France decreed that all Jews in France must convert to Christianity or leave, the King of France would have committed the crime of genocide of the French Jewish religious group
• even if no one died on account of the King’s decree and
• even if 70 years later the size of the population of French Jewish exiles was larger than the size of the French Jewish population at the time of the decree
because the King of France exterminated or physically destroyed the Jewish religious group within the territory of France.
Even though murder is unnecessary for a legal determination of genocide, one must keep in mind that Zionists routinely murder many Palestinians and have done so since the Mandatory period.
Land Ownership
Zionists purchased some where 10%-20% of the land in Palestine. By means of the genocide, which started in Dec 1947, the Zionist colonial settlers stole practically all land that came under Zionist control.
You still haven't defined genocide as far as I can see.
And what is a crime against a group?
"...Murder is a crime against an individual while genocide is a crime against s group..."
If this is the shitbag's definition, every Hamas member should be found guilty.
Funny genocide when the population of Palestinians keeps increasing. I thought the point of genocide was to remove/exterminate a population (see: Holocaust, The).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_State_of_Palestine
Out of 224 listed countries and territories, the West Bank ranked 48th with a total fertility rate (TFR) of 3.2, and the Gaza Strip ranked 31st with a TFR of 3.97 according to The World Factbook in 2018. In 2018, the West Bank had an estimated population growth rate of 1.81% (country comparison to the world: 56th) and the Gaza Strip had a population growth rate of 2.25% (35th).
Israel's actions do not meet the definition of "genocide" under international law, period.
As for your ownership numbers, yes, 10-20% was privately owned by Jews. But the rest didn't belong to Palestinians. Rather, almost the entire rest was state owned and legitimately transferred to Israel by state actors at the founding of Israel. Arabs owned a few percent, and they were either compensated or continued to own it as Israeli citizens.
Sorry, that is completely wrong. State-owned? In the 1920s? Seriously?
Yes, state owned land dates back to as long as we've had civilization, moron. Rather you labeled it Crown Land or common land, etc, it was land owned by the state. In the 1920s that was Great Britain who took it over from the Ottomans, who took it over largely from the Crusader Kingdoms. The Arabic people hadn't controlled it since about the before the 11th century, after they had taken it by conquest from the Byzantines in the two centuries before that. Have you ever fucking opened a history book? Or just regurgitate ahistorical propaganda.
By your definition, All of the Arab states committed genocide of their Jewish populations by expelling them from their countries effectively the day that Israel was founded.
On the contrary, there has been no systematic expulsion of Muslims from the land. Muslims can buy and hold land and live in Israel.
So even by your own moved goalposts, you still are wrong
"In US and international law, genocide is a capital crime without statute of limitations..."
Yes, and Hamas should be hauled before the bench.
You’re a raving idiot. Fuck off.
There is only one group in the Middle East that has been targeted for genocide: the Jews. Hitler killed nearly half of them in 1940-45, then in 1948 the Arabs tried to genocide those that had escaped to Israel, as well as the Jews that had lived scattered around the Middle East for nearly 2 millennia. The Arabs proclaimed intention was to "drive [the Jews] into the sea". They didn't expect Jews to swim to Greece or the USA, they expected them to die.
But in spite of the great provocation, the Israelis did not try to exterminate their enemies. They roughly sorted the Palestinians into the peaceful families, who were allowed to remain and now are better off than 90% of Arab-Muslims in Arab-Muslin nations, and those that had been out kill them and loot their homes. These hostile Arabs were not killed, they were pushed across the borders to their Arab kin and coreligionists. But the Arab nations did not take in the refugees - they locked them in "refugee camps" that looked a lot like concentration camps, and left it to Christians to feed and house them.
And the Arabs never let the refugees out. Their grandchildren are still in the camps, they are far more numerous than the original refugees, they elected Hamas to lead them, and Hamas is still trying to complete the genocide of the Jews. It's past time to end this mess - but not by insanity such as Israel taking in the refugees who are still determined to kill the Israelis.
The issue is one of moral absolutes. Who deserves to rule - Hamas or Israel? The one that morally deserves to rule is the one that is most libertarian, that would least initiate force. That's not Hamas.
There is no right to rule. That moral right is earned by refraining from initiating force or fraud. If outsiders migrate in and would rule with less initiation of force than the natives, then they deserve to rule. The Philistines would establish a harsh theocratic dictatorship (caliphate) where Jews and non-Muslims are persecuted, whereas the Jews have established a mild religious (Jewish) state in which the rights of Muslims and all non-Jews are respected. There are even Muslims in the Knesset - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arab_members_of_the_Knesset
When the Philistines learn to respect individual rights as well as the Jews have, then they'll have some moral right to rule over something, and not until. They've had Gaza and the West Bank. They should have been happy. Learn how to respect individual rights or tough shit.
This is easy . When an individual, group or government claims to be a socialist, believe them.
NAZI: National Socialist German Workers Party USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics CCP: Chinese Communist Party
DSA: Democratic Socialists of America
Virtue signaling that “I Care” about working or poor people is more important than the history of slaughter from murderous despots.
Family lore says that in the 16th century, my family lost its castle on the Isle of Mann, so I assume that I qualify as an "indigenous person."
Does that mean that I am entitled to some prime real-estate on the Isle of Mann?
If you bought unoccupied land on the Isle of Mann legally, settled there, were attacked because neighbors thought the sale was illegal, won a war against your attackers and then were settled on your land (and the land the neighbors subsequently fled) for 70-odd years, then you are entitled to the prime real estate you bought.
Israel was right this whole time
Did you drag that strawman all the way from home, or find it on the way?
Hmmm, the only way your family lost it's castle on the Isle of Mann in the 16th century was either you sold it, your lost it by not paying a debt, or you pissed off the Tudors and disenfranchised your families nobility. The Isle of Mann was completely controlled by the English Crown by 1399, and the Scots took control via purchase from the Norse in 1266. So which is it? Piss of Bess or Henry? Deadbeats who can't pay their debt? Sold it?
about zero of this matters to the animal side of the conflict.
Yeah, no. It's mostly a religious thing. And a hatred of western civilization.
wondered why Arab states could not likewise absorb Palestinian refugees.
Probably because of their penchant for trying to overthrow the governments and seize power in every country that let them in.
-jcr
I've heard Arafat's Paris hotel was always kept in spic & span form.
Utter shit history there Sullum.
Israel's founding in 1948, which most Jews celebrate but most Palestinians remember as the Nakba (catastrophe), involved a mixture of prior land purchases, arbitrary line drawing by the United Nations, and a war in which the nascent state was attacked by the combined armies of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.
You seem to be omitting the actual Nakba. Which was not 'arbitrary line drawing by the UN'. It was ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Palestinians (roughly 3+ million descendants) by Irgun and Stern Gang along/across those lines BEFORE Israel declared independence. The 1948 Arab-Israeli war was as much a war as a WWE match is legitimate wrestling. Those Arab armies combined had half the size of the now-Israeli army. The David v Goliath imagery is all Biblical bullshit - not real today.
The totally arbitrary line drawing - across the entire Arab part of the Middle East (including many of the centers of Mizrahi population) occurred by the British-French in the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement as their post-WW1 plan for the dismantling of the Ottomans. The purpose there was entirely colonial with intentions to make sure everything remained hostile and would thus require Western intrusion forever. It's mind blowing that you can even avoid mentioning any of this in your article. That British stuff is the origin of the entirety of anti-Western sentiments among Arabs, the promises of Balfour that become Israel, and the reason the US has now taken over (now willingly whole-hog) the role of Western shit-stirrer.
The genocide of Palestinians started with the Nakba in Dec 1947 as soon as the Zionist colonial settlers had the fig leaf of the non-obligatory Partition Proposal (Nov 27, 1947). Palestinians were not even given an opportunity to respond. The Arab League did not make a humanitarian intervention until after the British departed in May 1948.
The Zionist leadership started planning the logistics, PR, and legal defense of the genocide in Dec 1947 because it realized the ban on genocide (Dec 11, 1947) had made Zionism a criminal genocidal movement according to international law.
Ten Fundamental Principles (Rationes Decidendi) That Apply to the Theft of Palestine
1. Zionism is an ideology of genocide.
2. Since 1881 Zionists have provided explicit evidence of dolus specialis of genocide.
3. The ridiculous fairy tale of Roman Expulsion does not constitute a legitimate active defense to a charge of committing genocide even if this fairy tale were true.
4. Genocide is an international and US federal capital crime without a statute of limitations.
5. On Dec 11, 1946, the international community banned genocide and made this ban jus cogens.
6. The Zionist movement and the Zionist state are in probable violation of international and US federal anti-genocide law.
7. The US Zionist movement is in probable violation of the US federal statute that criminalizes material support to terrorists (= genocide-perpetrators).
8. Palestinians have no right to violate jus cogens by negotiating with the Zionist state.
9. No agreement with the Zionist state is valid because it would legalize genocide in violation of jus cogens.
10. The mere existence of the Zionist state negates the international anti-genocide legal regime and undermines international law.
Palestine wasn't "stolen", and Palestinians are not suffering a genocide; in fact, their numbers are growing rapidly.
When a Zionist propagandist attempts to redefine genocide to exculpate the Zionist movement of the charge of genocide, he practically makes a legal admission of the genocide that started in Dec 1947 and has never ended.
What is genocide?
When the international community banned genocide, there was only one legal definition of genocide. It is found in Count Three of Indictment of the 1946 Nuremberg International Tribunal.
Genocide and (mass) murder are completely distinct crimes. Murder is a crime against an individual while genocide is a crime against s group. Americans often confuse genocide with mass murder and believe incorrectly that Holocaust-like systematic killing is required for genocide. If kings still ruled in Europe and if the King of France decreed that all Jews in France must convert to Christianity or leave, the King of France would have committed the crime of genocide of the French Jewish religious group
• even if no one died on account of the King’s decree and
• even if 70 years later the size of the population of French Jewish exiles was larger than the size of the French Jewish population at the time of the decree
because the King of France exterminated or physically destroyed the Jewish religious group within the territory of France.
Even though murder is unnecessary for a legal determination of genocide, one must keep in mind that Zionists routinely murder many Palestinians and have done so since the Mandatory period.
"When a Zionist propagandist attempts to redefine genocide to exculpate the Zionist movement of the charge of genocide, he practically makes a legal admission of the genocide that started in Dec 1947 and has never ended."
When lying shit-bags offer bullshit like this, they are to be ignored.
Fuck off and die, bigot.
Is this Affleck cunt a sock for one of the usual traitors? Or someone new?
Sounds like Misek. Just substitute "Lying" with "Genocide".
I’m not sure Misek would bother with a sock. He’s such a deranged zealot that I don’t think it would occur to him. He really is a true believer in his Nazi bullshit.
There are always some new idiots who show up when some high-emotion/politically contentious event like this comes up.
According to Article II of the Genocide Convention, genocide is defined as any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group:
- Killing members of the group
- Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
- Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
- Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
- Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
Palestinians in the territories arguably are not a "a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group". And even if you think they are, Israel has not committed any of those acts with the intent to destroy these people.
However, it is the declared goal of the government of the Palestinians to destroy all Jews in the Middle East.
Therefore the only logical course of action for the Israelis is to destroy Hamas before they do the same to them.
Damn, you're cut from the same cloth as Misek, and just as stupid. So tell me, how much of that crap did you plagiarize from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
When a Zionist claims Jewishness to legitimize genocide, he defecates on the memory of all Jews, who including practically all my father's family were murdered in the Holocaust.
A Zionist is post-Judaism because Zionism murdered Judaism by transforming Judaism into a program of genocide.
When lying shit-bags offer bullshit like this, they are to be ignored.
Fuck off and die, bigot.
You’re the genocidal lunatic here. Kill yourself.
Fuck off, Nazi scum.
When a Zionist claims Jewishness to legitimize genocide, he defecates on the memory of all Jews, who including practically all my father’s family were murdered in the Holocaust.
This is like Killmonger’s retarded rant about “Bury me in the ocean with my ancestors who would jump ship and die free rather than live in bondage.” at the end of Black Panther.
Uh, first, clearly they didn’t all jump ship because you’re here and, you know, biology and physics. Second, from a more story-based(out of universe)/epistemological(in unverse) perspective the only reason you’re here and didn’t *already* get tossed into the ocean after knocking on the front door is because of your bloodline to the throne. So claiming your royal bloodline for no other reason to fuck shit up and then forsaking it and trying to claim the that you’re choosing to die free after your royal bloodline shitfuckery compelled me to stick a spear in your chest is really kind of a dick move to pretty much everybody. If you want, we can take turns seeing how *far* into the ocean we can throw you, you know, to better honor your ancestor’s commitment to freedom.
I know you're just copypasta-ing from some white supremacist site, but international law was always founded on sand.
It's a joke when it comes to enforcement, otherwise the USSR would have been destroyed before it collapsed. No one tried.
"1. Zionism is an ideology of genocide."
Assertions from anti-semitic shits =/= argument or evidence, they ssimply show your bigotry.
Your overuse of the word genocide is clearly not intended to illuminate anything but merely to inflame. I chose the word ethnic cleansing - and used it once - because I actually do think a legitimate argument could be made that that's what happened that might lead some some ethical aha. Your overuse is not intended to do anything but create heat. Indeed, your use of the word is intended partially as a look at me shock tactic.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are merely choosing to exercise and practice rhetorical hyperbole. So here’s the challenge – post the same thing using meiosis or euphemism or understatement.
Same to you; "ethnic cleansing"?
Ethnic cleansing? Gee are Muslims banned in Israel? No they aren't. Are Arabs banned in Israel or forced to convert? No they are not. Are Arabs allowed to practice their own religion and culture. Yes they are. So they aren't being fucking ethnically cleansed. Fucking idiot.
Ethnic cleansing - the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, and religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making a region ethnically homogeneous. That can certainly apply to the Nakba depending on how systematic is defined (but 700,000 out of 900,000 is imo pretty systematic).
Even today, Basic Law of Israel (2018) - ie both systematic and still in the present - indicates how easy it is for reality to undermine your kindergarten view of history.
The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation. That is what is happening in the West Bank - outside of the State of Israel. That absolutely involves forced removal.
Oh look. Another Nazi retard. Whee.
"...It was ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Palestinians (roughly 3+ million descendants) by Irgun and Stern Gang along/across those lines BEFORE Israel declared independence..."
Given your history as a lying piece of shit, it's no surprise that your use of the phrase "ethnic cleansing" is probably nothing of the sort.
You ARE a lying piece of shit.
You seem to be omitting the actual Nakba. Which was not ‘arbitrary line drawing by the UN’. It was ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Palestinians (roughly 3+ million descendants) by Irgun and Stern Gang along/across those lines BEFORE Israel declared independence.
And you're seemingly ignoring the fact that the local Arabs had started attacking Jews who were buying land and moving into the area back in the 1880s.
Oddly enough when you shoot at people, sometimes, they fight back. Though your claim that the 700k were expelled before independence is ahistoric nonsense. It was about a third of that, with the other two-thirds occurring after independence, and, oh by the way, after every country in the region declared war on Israel the day after they declared independence.
So, the Arabs got 95% of the territory, including a vast portion of the oil, but couldn't stand the fact that the Jews were going to get any of it and pitched a hissy fit that got their asses beaten. And then kept doubling down and getting more and more beaten. So, yes, the Israelis decided that maybe, just maybe, they didn't want to share a country with a rabid dog, and put it in a pen.
Some ethnicities ask for cleansing.
As I understand it, genetic studies of European Jews show that, through the paternal line, as shown by Y-chromosome DNA, they are indeed of Middle-Eastern descent. But through the maternal line, as shown by mitochondrial DNA, they aren't. In other words, some time in the distant past, Jewish MEN from the Middle East emigrated to Europe, and took wives from the local population, and today's European Jews (and those who "returned" to Israel from Europe and America) are the descendants of those pairings. Does that qualify them as "indigenous" to the area? I don't know. Should it matter? Probably not.
Islam destroyed all indigenous societies in the Middle East. Arguably, Jews returning to the Middle East are the only "indigenous people", since they are the only ones who have preserved the culture and religion from the earliest settlement of the region.
Slight disagreement. Child *brides* and violent destruction as religious act are way more common in Muslim culture.
But the whole idea that we should be moving away from honor killings and hanging entire cities full of people because they believe in Allah, but not Muhammad, is probably my stupid, post-Enlightenment, Judeo-Christian White Privilege talking.
What does that have to do with anything I wrote???
Aisha was ~7 at her betrothal and 9 at the consummation of the marriage to Muhammed, one of whom's claim to fame was the conquest of Mecca taking it back by force from his Qurayshi tribe-mates.
Jews aren't the only ones preserving their culture and religion from the earliest settlement of the region. They are predominantly the only ones doing it without raping children, establishing religious/ethnically-pure "Muslim Only" zones, and tossing existing property owners off of roofs at gunpoint rather than just buying their land.
Really? What other religion has been preserved since the earliest settlement of the region? Not Islam, since that is a cult that was created from scratch in the 7th century.
There were Jewish families who lived In Israel/Palestine all through the eras of Christian and Muslim rule, but only a few hundred of them. And they are genetically indistinguishable from the Muslim Palestinians. In general, showing that your ancestors lived somewhere 2,000 years ago doesn't get you citizenship in whatever country that place is now part of.
What next, measuring skulls? Genetic studies are really beside the point. Israel is a real existing country in every sense, and a U.N. member state. No amount of genetics could conceivably justify forcibly destroying it.
And the fact is that countries exist because some group managed to control the territory. They don’t exist because someone’s ancestors lived somewhere. That’s just reality and there is no way to undo thousands of years of empires and conquest and people being horrible to each other and to try would cause enormous harm.
And any destruction or cleansing being perpetrated by Israel has nothing to do with ethnicity/genetics.
As I indicated, saying Israel wiping out Hamas in Palestine is genocide is like saying the fall of the Berlin Wall was a genocide perpetrated against the people of the DDR. The fall of the USSR was a genocide against the Soviet race. The postwar division of Germany by the Allies was a genocide of the German people.
Palestinians and their supporters are rather transparently trying to have it both/all ways. Either the violence is in your blood, in which case, your cries of genocide against self-defense don’t apply anywhere and everywhere “your people” tread, (You are, by your own claims, culturally, intellectually, and genetically prone to mass violence) or it’s not in your blood and the eradication of violence while leaving the rest of the race undisturbed does not in any way constitute a genocide and evicting people from their homeland, while potentially cruel, isn’t genocide either way.
It’s rather obviously throwing the spaghetti against the wall to see what sticks.
The Jewish people have been living in Israel since close to 2000 BC. And they were called "Palestinians" prior to the formation of the State of Israel. Palestine is NOT and has never been a State or Nation.
And they were called “Palestinians” prior to the formation of the State of Israel.
The correct form of this sentence could be more clearly stated, especially given the other sentences.
The people who then identified as "Palestinians" were called Palestinians prior to the formation of the State of Israel in 1948.
Presumably, no one would interpret it as "The Jewish people living in Israel since close to 2000 BC were called "Palestinians" prior to the formation of the State of Israel." or otherwise similarly terribly, but there's abundant evidence of, intentional or not, people being abjectly retarded about the subject.
No, back in biblical days they were known as "Philistines".
It would probably be better for everyone to stop making land claims based on genetics of dead people or grants by talking sky balloons or resentments of old people.
Maybe it would be better for the kids to sit down and talk about how to treat each other where they are for the rest of their life. Like – you know – a social contract among the living.
I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, ‘that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living’: that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. The portion occupied by any individual ceases to be his when himself ceases to be, and reverts to the society. - Thomas Jefferson
Naah. That’s a crazy idea.
OK... so you support the right of the Israelis to claim the land they occupy? Excellent.
“A simplistic morality tale.”
As if there is any such thing as a complex morality tale. That would totally undermine its propaganda value.
In the late 1800's, when Jews started to move back and join with Jews who had never left, most inhabitants of the "holy land," lived in a few cities, e.g. Jerusalem, and a few towns. The returning Jews had two differences from others who had come over prior centuries. (1) The Jews came with money to buy land not to capture it with the sword. and (2) They returned to "make the desert bloom." To do that they had to install infrastructure from scratch in a countryside had become vast wasteland under the Ottoman Empire. Old wells have become filled with human excrement and old sources of water had been forgotten and had dried up. There were no streets or roads. There also were no Arabs and Palestinians did not even exist. There were Bedouins nomads who had adjusted to the harsh environment and made no real demands on the earth. They would periodically move with the various seasons and cycles.
After Jews had bought large tracts of land and installed infrastructure, they established towns and farms, which attracted workers. That is when many Arabs moved to the area -- the Jews had made the wasteland inhabitable, had established and economy which provided economic opportunities for workers, be they Arab, Jewish or Christians. No doubt the Arabs added to the growth of the economies, but their return to the former wasteland was due to the Jews' first making the area livable.
I mention this aspect because too many people assume that when the Jews returned that some people called Palestinians had thriving communities and the Jews just moved in and took over. It was essentially the opposite; the Jews made the vast wasteland productive so that Arabs moved there. The Jews did not take anything away from anyone and there was no actual functioning Arab society to colonize.
But your story is more part of a founding myth than accurate. The population of the area from 1517-now. The population in that area started growing with the Suez Canal opening in 1869. In one fell swoop going from the worst possible trade backwater to the best in the Med
More bullshit from the resident chicken little. Did you have a point? Or just your ability to cite irrelevant data?
Fuck off and die, asshole.
I don't see how that data proves your point. The region lost half its population about the time it was incorporated into the Ottoman Empire by Selim I and Suleiman the Magnificent, without affecting the tiny Jewish population. The population recovered by 1882, with nearly 5 times as many Jews and twice as many non-Jews, but it doesn't show whether this was a gradual increase from 1539 to 1882, or whether the population remained low until the Zionists began settlements, in the 1800's and then the non-Jewish population also jumped because the Zionists created jobs for Arabs and Muslims as well as for themselves. Next, the Jewish and non-Jewish populations grew together, at a rate so high that much of the increase had to be from immigration rather than births, until 1948, when most of the Muslims tried to murder the Jews, failed, and were banned from Israel. (The 1948 numbers are for Israel only, while the earlier numbers were for a wider area.)
So it does not prove that _all_ the population growth after 1539 was due to Zionists and then Muslims moving in to take advantage of Zionist improvements, but it does look like the greater growth after 1882 certainly followed the Zionists.
What is clear from the data is that the growth in the area started before Zionism/Balfour/Brits led to significant Jewish population influx from mostly Ashkenazi (non-Ottoman) areas and a change in the demographics from 8% – 13% Jewish population (pre-1922) to 32% Jewish population (pre-partition – 1947) to 82% (post partition/Nakba – Israel – 1948).
Wiki itself describes pre-1922 Jewish migration in post-facto terms of later Zionism as 1st Aliyah and 2nd Aliyah. But Jews who migrated there then – during the Ottoman period and mostly Mizrahi – were overwhelmingly economic migrants – not making aliyah or ‘making the desert bloom’. Which is precisely why Arabs were moving there as well. Yemeni Jews (the largest group) obviously moved from the other side of the Suez Canal and for that reason.
The area was NOT what that comment explicitly says: a vast wasteland – with water wells either dried up or full of shit – no roads – no people – uninhabitable. It wasn’t a wonderful place. It’s why the VAST majority (like 99%) of Jews who were suffering under the (mostly) Russian boot at that time moved to the US/UK/France/Germany/etc during that time. But it was growing and obviously habitable.
That founding myth of Zionism is simply – a founding myth. There was more land under agriculture owned/cultivated by Palestinians in 1947 than there was total agricultural land in Israel up to the late 1970’s (when wasting water in the Negev became a crappy idea). IOW – all the ‘growth’ during those years is simply ‘under different ownership’. NOT growth. NOT ‘making the desert bloom’. NOT Isaiah 35:1 The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.. Founding myth.
"From the 1880s to the 1930s, most Jewish land purchases were made in the coastal plain, the Jezreel Valley, the Jordan Valley and to a lesser extent the Galilee.[11] This was due to a preference for land that was cheap and without tenants.[11] There were two main reasons why these areas were sparsely populated. The first reason being when the Ottoman power in the rural areas began to diminish in the seventeenth century, many people moved to more centralized areas to secure protection against the Bedouin tribes.[11] The second reason for the sparsely populated areas of the coastal plains was the soil type. The soil, covered in a layer of sand, made it impossible to grow the staple crop of Palestine, corn.[11] As a result, this area remained uncultivated and underpopulated.[5] "The sparse Arab population in the areas where the Jews usually bought their land enabled the Jews to carry out their purchase without engendering a massive displacement and eviction of Arab tenants".[11]"
“BLACΚ COUNTRIES FOR THE BLACΚS, ΑSIA FOR THE ASIAΝS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!”
It is said that there is this RACE problem.
They say this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries.
The Netherlands and Belgium are as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote “assimilating” with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to "assimilate," i.e., intermarry, with all non-Whites.
What if I said that there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-Blαcks were brought into EVERY Blαck Country and ONLY into Blαck countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a RACE problem?
I am talking about the final solution to the BLACΚ problem?
And how long would it take any sane Blacκ man to notice this and what kind of Blacκ man wouldn't object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the White race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am nazι
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-White.
"ANTI-RACIST IS A CODE WORD FOR ANTI-WHITE."
What they call for is GENOCIDE
This is the billboard put up near Zinc, Arkansas. Or the long version of it, anyway. It's the mantra of the latest version of the White Supremacist Movement, which they try to somewhat disassociate with the actual KKK. But the same people do both their White People Radio and their KKK rallies. It's strange seeing it on a post on Reason, but I figured I would at least point it out. It's such a tiny group, I actually never thought I'd see one in the wild.
Oh, I'm familiar with it. It's been around for years and makes the rounds of most every comment section of every publication online.
I guess somebody has to crawl out from under their rock at night to leave their trail of slime. Well, the snail-killer of rationality is good for repelling them.
"...It’s strange seeing it on a post on Reason, but I figured I would at least point it out. It’s such a tiny group, I actually never thought I’d see one in the wild..."
Thank you. The Nazi shit posting above gets far more push-back, but they both do.
Get back to Stormfront or your local cross-burning ceremony and Fuck Off, Klansman!
Oh, and keep the burning cross off the premises of my dwelling or you'll get such a crossbow pinch!
Eat shit and die, asshole.
That reminds me of the slogan: Africa for Africans. I thought libertarians approved of that slogan.
I hoped you had a brain cell.
Libertarians approve of freedom of association.
If you want to live in a multicultural, multi-ethnic neighborhood, that ought to be your choice.
If you want to live in a racially segregated neighborhood with only people "of your kind", that ought to be your choice too.
The Zionist invaders are from Europe, Jacob. Every Zionist is a liar, thief, and murderer, as you demonstrate here.
"The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews." British Government's Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine, 1921
You do realize the Ottomans controlled Palestine for hundreds of years and banned immigration and sale of land to Jews, right?
gherdsty
As long as individual rights are violated in favor of the mythical "group", "tribe", "religion", "nation", what have you, these nightmares will persist.
except most of the jews in Israel are not native / indigenous to the land. majority have immigrated to israel from the early part of the 20th century. there are certainly some native israelis, but definitely a minority in comparison to the arab population. anything contrary is really just ahistorial, zionist revisionism. https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B004GXATG2/reasonmagazinea-20/
I will cut to the chase because these redresses of history aren't helping anyone understand how to help these people.
The destruction of Hamas is non-negotiable. You can't enshrine hostile parties. Context is irrelevant.
Palestinian autonomy in Gaza is also non-negotiable. The Palestinians of Gaza voted Hamas into power. Israel needs guarantees they will not do so again.
Occupation is off the table. Israel is tired of dealing with Palestinians. Israel doesn't want Gaza. They want East Jerusalem and Palestinian statehood is conditional depending on whether or not Israel feels it will be a threat to security.
Most forms of compromise appear to be off the table for Palestinians. It is impossible to gauge genuine opinion in Gaza and somewhat difficult in the current West Bank. I would like to believe that, in an environment where all Palestinians can speak freely, the majority are not anti-Zionist and want to compromise with Israel, but until they can elect representation that makes this point clear, it's very hard to trust them.
Genocide/ethnic cleansing/all forms of traditional conquest and slaughter are off the table.
With these conditions, what do you do? Israel has been in uncharted waters for a while now. They're the regional power and kingmaker, but they're dealing with people who so far have been unreasonable. I think the solution will continue to look like what we've seen. There won't be a central plan or big peace conferences. It will be realpolitik. Palestinians will receive what is currently feasible for Israel and nothing more. This hasn't been a negotiation in a long time. Negotiation requires intent.