Maps of Israel, Jordan and Palestine

[StrawDog]

?? How can you invent something that isn't? I reiterate:

"I'd be interested to know what massive differences exist [between Palestinian and Jordanian culture]. They must be stunning ones."

So?

"The bulk of"? The partition was actually almost exactly according to the split of the population. Also, how does a "strange family" enter into this? Jews have been living in the ME for thousands and thousands of years. It's not as though a bunch of Hindus showed up. I can't see where you're going.

It is very clear where I am going.
1. Palestine was not (technically) anyone's to split. It was, very simply, the home and birthright of the Palestinians for generations. Splitting a homeland based on 2000 year old mythology is naive and unfair.
2. The strange family are European Jews, thousand and thousands of non Semitic European Jews. There was no issue with the handful of indiginous Jews, they were living there anyway, and by default would have had the same birthright as Palestinians.

 

[StrawDog]

Do the Poles have an ancestral claim to living in the area? Is their immigration good for employment and agriculture? Have I, perchance, attacked them or put down their ancestors as second-class humans for the past 1400 years?

No. And neither do the Jews have an ancestral right.
1. The blood of the immigrant Jews was European.
2. What has employment and agriculture to do with stealing land?
3. ?

 

[StrawDog]

Of course, property rights are important in any society. I wouldn't want to be forced out of my house for any reason. That being said, if circumstances beyond my control led to me settling somewhere else, not too far away, I wouldn't use that as an excuse to start killing people and subjecting my children to the threat of death in war.

Ahh. But have you ever had this unsettling experience? How do you possibly know how you would react?

 

[StrawDog]

Well, Jews are an ancient religious group and culture with no other homeland, while Palestinians are Arabs that happen to be born in Palestine and are a part of the larger Arab and Muslim world. Note that few people use this as the sole reason that Palestinians should not be allowed residence in Israel, there are other more immediate reasons for that.

This is total and utter nonsense.

 

[StrawDog]

You or someone on your 'side' advanced the notion of a Palestinian identity. I wanted to know what that identity was. Now I find it isn't. On we go.

There is a distinct Palestinian identity that was formed before the creation of Israel, and became more pronounced as a contrast to Zionism.
Below is some background to put the issue into context. What is unquestionable is that a Palestinian identity "did" and "does" exist.

After the collapse of the empire, a wrenching transformation occurred that forced a reorientation from an Ottoman and pan-Islamic identity to Palestinian national consciousness. Once existing among a set of loyalties, Palestinian identity became the primary focus of the leaders, intellectuals and politicians of Mandate-era Palestine.

(http://www.jerusalemites.org/jerusalem/ottoman/8.htm)

She looks like a dye-job, actually. BTW, are there no Palestinians with blue eyes? I seem to recall some scare-article accusing the Jews of stealing their blue eyes. Anyway, unless you know what the ancient Jews actually looked like, this is pointless. For all you or I know, they were a very diverse group. And lastly - again - the genes responsible for physical appearance comprise a very small percentage of the entire genome. Shall a 5% similarity invalidate a 95% difference now?

1. Nice try, but dye job or not, this blue eyed princess is of European stock.
2. No, there are no Palestinians with blue eyes.
3. The indigenous Jews, Mizrahim, look like Arabs.
4. Genetically, there is much dispute, but European Jews who make up the vast majority of Israelis are 75% skewed towards European gene proifiles.

I don't know that for certain, and neither do you. The fact is more that Israel is the central area of interest to Judaism, the only area of interest to Judaism, and I think that deserves something. One place, at least, where they can't be persecuted by the rabidly open-minded.

1. Which does not, once again, justify stealing land based on a 2000 year old legend.
2. The persecution card has been played to death. It is patently obvious that today, the state of Israel is the PERSECUTOR of the Palestinians.

Hard to say. But it's no different than a lot of people in a lot of other countries. Shall they all go home too? Should they?

America is a land of immigrants. Fact.

Well, if you're arguing against the return on a genetic basis, I'm afraid they do. Geneology is distinct from geography.

They have nothing to prove. They were living on the land. The land was stolen. Hence the conflict.

 

[John99]

They are all Caucasoid.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...eyvqm9Cw&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

 

[GeoffP]

Depends on who is reporting.

And whether or not they agree with you, it seems.

So?

Well, what are they? This was the issue raised: Palestinian identity. Was there one or no?

It is very clear where I am going.
1. Palestine was not (technically) anyone's to split. It was, very simply, the home and birthright of the Palestinians for generations. Splitting a homeland based on 2000 year old mythology is naive and unfair.

It would be more naive to express the events of 1916-1948 in the manner you have done. Jewish people were permitted to immigrate. They were attacked ruthlessly by Arabs in the area, and refused to simply buckle under. Eventually, rather than try and export these people again, it was decided to give them a proportion of the land equal to their population.

2. The strange family are European Jews, thousand and thousands of non Semitic European Jews.

??? All Jews are Semitic.

There was no issue with the handful of indiginous Jews, they were living there anyway, and by default would have had the same birthright as Palestinians.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow you here. The Jewish community of 'Palestine' had been under cultural siege for over a thousand years, driven back into tiny ghettos. (Sam, meanwhile, portrays this as the way the Jews wanted to live...like rats or hamsters, perhaps. "They're much happier when you box them in like animals. Honest!") They were second-class citizens persisting entirely at the indulgence of their Turk and Arab overlords. What sort of "birthright" is this, perchance?

No. And neither do the Jews have an ancestral right.
1. The blood of the immigrant Jews was European.

?? Again, you elude me. Jews are related to various other Middle Eastern populations; a fact so well known as to be irrefutable. I'm not sure what you're trying to present here.

2. What has employment and agriculture to do with stealing land?

?? The Jews didn't arrive and start 'stealing land', Strawman. You do understand this? They bought their land and at exorbitant prices, and usually land of poor quality. Their development produced employment. Seriously: hundreds of thousands of Palestinians migrated into the area once the Jews arrived.

There is a distinct Palestinian identity that was formed before the creation of Israel

Then please illustrate this identity as distinct from Jordanian. Your link was not at all clear as to what this identity constituted in such a manner.

1. Nice try, but dye job or not, this blue eyed princess is of European stock.

Why? How do you know what any ancestral Jew looked like anyway? In the event that you were right, what is the tiny fraction of the genome that determines colouration against the massive remainder of the genome?

2. No, there are no Palestinians with blue eyes.

Are you sure? There was an old conspiracy theory that Israelis were stealing the blue eyes of Palestinian kids. My suspicion is that the genes persist there at low frequency.

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000034.html

3. The indigenous Jews, Mizrahim, look like Arabs.

And you expect that this cannot be from introgression, but that it can with European Jews? Why or why not?

4. Genetically, there is much dispute, but European Jews who make up the vast majority of Israelis are 75% skewed towards European gene proifiles.

Nirakar?? Is that you? A reference would be good.

2. The persecution card has been played to death. It is patently obvious that today, the state of Israel is the PERSECUTOR of the Palestinians.

I would agree with this in part. I think Israel perhaps goes too far. I think a proper two-state solution should be adhered to by all parties. Whether this would stop the missile attacks and suicide bombers is another thing, of course.

America is a land of immigrants. Fact.

So are lots of places. Fact. But what to do then?

They have nothing to prove. They were living on the land. The land was stolen. Hence the conflict.

Really? Jews were living on it before. Was their land not then stolen also?

Let's all have a look in the mirror and ask whether or not our perspectives are being coloured (no pun intended) by our preconceptions.

Best,

Geoff

 

[S.A.M.]

Do you know if the Jews land was stolen 2000 years ago? Got anything apart from mythology to support your contention? Aren't you living on stolen land? The irony is astonishing. You're British, your national history is based on colonisation. You live in a colonised country. Even the mess in Palestine was created by the British.
And now we have these racist notions where you believe mythology trumps basic human rights.

Unbelievable.

 

[Vkothii]

America is a land of immigrants.
So are lots of places. Fact. But what to do then?

Well, if you're a group of European immigrants, you start shooting the natives and 'containing' them so they aren't a problem, don't you?

"I hear that Laurel canyon is full of famous stars
I hate them worse than lepers, and I'll kill them in their cars..."

 

[StrawDog]

Well, what are they? This was the issue raised: Palestinian identity. Was there one or no?

There was a distinct Palestinian identity from about 1936 onwards.

It would be more naive to express the events of 1916-1948 in the manner you have done. Jewish people were permitted to immigrate. They were attacked ruthlessly by Arabs in the area, and refused to simply buckle under. Eventually, rather than try and export these people again, it was decided to give them a proportion of the land equal to their population.

Some background. After the establishment of Zionism by Theodore Herzl in Europe, (not Palestine)

The Zionists established farm communities in Palestine at Petah Tikva, Zichron Jacob, Rishon Letzion and elsewhere. Later they established the new city of Tel Aviv, north of Jaffa. At the same time, Palestine's Arab population grew rapidly. By 1914, the total population of Palestine stood at about 700,000. About 615,000 were Arabs, and 85,000 to 100,000 were Jews.

This was largely a peaceful co-existence. After WW2 and the end of Ottoman rule,

Britain and France planned to divide the Ottoman holdings in the Middle East among themselves after the war. The Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 called for part of Palestine to be under British rule, part to be placed under a joint Allied government, and for Syria and Lebanon to be given to the France. However, Britain also offered to back Arab demands for postwar independence from the Ottomans in return for Arab support for the Allies and seems to have promised the same territories to the Arabs.

In 1916, Arabs led by T.E. Lawrence and backed by Sharif Husayn revolted against the Ottomans in the belief that Britain would help establish Arab independence in the Middle East. The United States and other countries pressed for Arab self-determination. The Arabs, and many in the British government including Lawrence, believed that the Arabs had been short-changed by the British promise to give Syria to the French, and likewise by the promise of Palestine as a Jewish homeland. The Arabs claimed that Palestine was included in the area promised to them, but the British denied this.

The Balfour Declaration - In November 1917, before Britain had conquered Jerusalem and the area to be known as Palestine, Britain issued the Balfour Declaration. The declaration was a letter addressed to Lord Rothschild, based on a request of the Zionist organization in Great Britain. The declaration stated Britain's support for the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine, without violating the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities.

After the war, the League of Nations divided much of the Ottoman Empire into mandated territories. The British and French saw the Mandates as instruments of imperial ambitions. US President Wilson insisted that the mandates must foster eventual independence. The British were anxious to keep Palestine away from the French, and decided to ask for a mandate that would implement the Jewish national home of the Balfour declaration, a project that would be supported by the Americans. The Arabs opposed the idea of a Jewish national home, considering that the areas now called Palestine were their land. The Arabs felt they were in danger of dispossession by the Zionists, and did not relish living under Jewish rule.

By this time, Zionists had recognized the inevitability of conflict with the Palestinian and other Arabs. David Ben Gurion, who would lead the Yishuv (the Jewish community in Palestine) and go on to be the first Prime Minister of Israel, told a meeting of the governing body of the Jewish Yishuv in 1919 "But not everybody sees that there is no solution to this question...We as a nation, want this country to be ours, the Arabs as a nation, want this country to be theirs."

The Zionists and others presented their case to the Paris Peace conference. Ultimately, the British plan was adopted. The main issues taken into account were division of rights between Britain and France, rather than the views of the inhabitants.

The fact of the matter is that the Arabs (Palestinians) were actually living on this land at the time, and had been for generations. This was the root of the conflict. The Brits in their imperial wisdom gave the Palestinian birthright away to the Zionists, to create the State of Israel after promising Palestinian self determination and a Palestinian homeland.

??? All Jews are Semitic.

No they are predominantly European.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow you here. The Jewish community of 'Palestine' had been under cultural siege for over a thousand years, driven back into tiny ghettos. (Sam, meanwhile, portrays this as the way the Jews wanted to live...like rats or hamsters, perhaps. "They're much happier when you box them in like animals. Honest!") They were second-class citizens persisting entirely at the indulgence of their Turk and Arab overlords. What sort of "birthright" is this, perchance?

There were a handful of Jews that had always lived in Palestine in peace with their Arab neighbors. They were Semites, essentially indistinguishable for Arabs apart from their religion.

?? Again, you elude me. Jews are related to various other Middle Eastern populations; a fact so well known as to be irrefutable. I'm not sure what you're trying to present here.

Zionism and the call for a return to "Israel" is an European construct and import. The Jews who immigrated into Israel were Europeans. Not Semites like Arabs. Outsiders to the Arabs.

?? The Jews didn't arrive and start 'stealing land', Strawman. You do understand this? They bought their land and at exorbitant prices, and usually land of poor quality. Their development produced employment. Seriously: hundreds of thousands of Palestinians migrated into the area once the Jews arrived.

However you want to package it, the land was first stolen by the British who gave it to the European Jews, who then systematically by war and imprisonment, to this day, have enlarged the area they were given. The land was stolen from the Palestinians who had lived there for generations, and given to European Jews.

Then please illustrate this identity as distinct from Jordanian. Your link was not at all clear as to what this identity constituted in such a manner.

That is covered above.

Why? How do you know what any ancestral Jew looked like anyway? In the event that you were right, what is the tiny fraction of the genome that determines colouration against the massive remainder of the genome?

As exhaustively demonstrated above, the princess is an European import, hence the blue eyes.

Are you sure? There was an old conspiracy theory that Israelis were stealing the blue eyes of Palestinian kids. My suspicion is that the genes persist there at low frequency.
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000034.html

Unless intermarried with blond, blue eyed Europeans, the Palestinians display Semitic features, ie. brown eyes and hair.

And you expect that this cannot be from introgression, but that it can with European Jews? Why or why not?

As stated above. Of course the poor Palestinians, imprisoned as they are, don`t have a lot of luck with Western women.

I would agree with this in part. I think Israel perhaps goes too far. I think a proper two-state solution should be adhered to by all parties. Whether this would stop the missile attacks and suicide bombers is another thing, of course.

Unconditional dialogue should be initiated.

So are lots of places. Fact. But what to do then?

Start talking and stop fighting.

Really? Jews were living on it before. Was their land not then stolen also?

The Jews were living in Europe. Their dignity was stolen and they were persecuted. That is a tragedy. Yet, tragedy should not lead to further tragedy, in this case the Palestinians.

Let's all have a look in the mirror and ask whether or not our perspectives are being coloured (no pun intended) by our preconceptions.

That is always possible, but the facts are on the table.

Shalom.

(http://mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm)

 

[GeoffP]

Do you know if the Jews land was stolen 2000 years ago?

\

Sure. They were on it. Then they got conquered.

Aren't you living on stolen land?

Aren't you? The irony is astonishing. You're muslim, your religious history is based on colonisation.

Unbelievable.

You certainly are, yes.

Well, if you're a group of European immigrants, you start shooting the natives and 'containing' them so they aren't a problem, don't you?

And you think this is a good idea? I see.

There was a distinct Palestinian identity from about 1936 onwards.

Excellent. Now let's have some proof of that.

This was largely a peaceful co-existence.

Oh dear. I regret to say that it was not. Look up the Nebi Musa riots and their foundations. Ask yourself what political self-determination the Jews had prior to this, given the outcome of those riots. "Peaceful" does not translate to "equal", sorry.

The fact of the matter is that the Arabs (Palestinians) were actually living on this land at the time, and had been for generations. This was the root of the conflict. The Brits in their imperial wisdom gave the Palestinian birthright away to the Zionists, to create the State of Israel after promising Palestinian self determination and a Palestinian homeland.

Well, not really. If the populations of Jews and Palestinians in the area were approximately equal at the time of partition, then no, Arabs were not actually living on the land at this time.

No they are predominantly European.

Proof please. Otherwise desist.

There were a handful of Jews that had always lived in Palestine in peace with their Arab neighbors. They were Semites, essentially indistinguishable for Arabs apart from their religion.

Meaning they had equal rights with Arabs? What would have happened had they become, shall we say, too noticeable?

That is covered above.

Actually it isn't. I'm still waiting some explicit differentiation between Jordanians and Palestinians.

As exhaustively demonstrated above, the princess is an European import, hence the blue eyes.

I'm going to stop your argument here and ask you whether you understand the difference between phenotype and genotype. These are concepts critical to the understanding of the genetic issues and they cannot be ignored.

As stated above. Of course the poor Palestinians, imprisoned as they are, don`t have a lot of luck with Western women.

Well, I did all right with the Arab ladies but I don't think you follow me. Introgression for the Palestinians could as easily have been from outside sources, and is just as likely - more likely - than introgression into the much more closed Jewish population. I think you should look this term up before we continue on the genetic argument. Note that it doesn't need to refer to recent introgression either.

Unconditional dialogue should be initiated.

Sure. I wonder what the outcome would be, but I agree with this notion.

The Jews were living in Europe. Their dignity was stolen and they were persecuted. That is a tragedy. Yet, tragedy should not lead to further tragedy, in this case the Palestinians.

Agreed.

Peace,

Geoff

 

[StrawDog]

Excellent. Now let's have some proof of that.

From the Book, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness by Rashid Ismail Khalidi, an American historian of the Middle East, is the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University - cited from http://www.jerusalemites.org/jerusalem/ottoman/8.htm

Khalidi states,” the intellectuals, writers and politicians who were instrumental in the evolution of the first forms of Palestinian identity at the end of the last century and early in this century…identified with the Ottoman empire, their religion, Arabism, their homeland Palestine, their city or region, and their family, without feeling any contradiction, or sense of conflicting loyalties”. After the collapse of the empire, a wrenching transformation occurred that forced a reorientation from an Ottoman and pan-Islamic identity to Palestinian national consciousness. Once existing among a set of loyalties, Palestinian identity became the primary focus of the leaders, intellectuals and politicians of Mandate-era Palestine.

Khalidi believes that “Although the Zionist challenge definitely helped to shape the specific form Palestinian national identification took, it is a serious mistake to suggest that Palestinian identity emerged mainly as a response to Zionism”. This is because Palestinian nationalism developed alongside the nationalism of the Arab world, and in fact helped revitalize and refocus a Arab identity that had roots as far as the 18th century.

And he goes on the caution that “While studies of Palestinian nationalism have concentrated on its evolution in recent decades, in fact most elements of Palestinian identity- particularly the enduring and parochial, local ones- were well-developed before the climactic events of 1948, although they continued to overlap and change both before and after that date”

Oh dear. I regret to say that it was not. Look up the Nebi Musa riots and their foundations. Ask yourself what political self-determination the Jews had prior to this, given the outcome of those riots. "Peaceful" does not translate to "equal", sorry.

Of course there was conflict at times like anywhere else in the world, but historically speaking,

King Hussein, writing circa 1947, to give a better perspective on the conflict in Palestine.

He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe.

(http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html)

Well, not really. If the populations of Jews and Palestinians in the area were approximately equal at the time of partition, then no, Arabs were not actually living on the land at this time.

No the population was nowhere near equal, and yes, the land was inhabited continuously by Palestinian Arabs. The Zionist mantra "A land without people for a people without a land" is a known myth.

By 1880, about 24,000 Jews were living in Palestine, out of a population of about 400,000

By 1914, the total population of Palestine stood at about 700,000. About 615,000 were Arabs, and 85,000 to 100,000 were Jews.

(http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm)

Proof please. Otherwise desist.

The two dominant Jewish ethnic groups in Israel are the Ashkenazim (the term comes from the old Hebrew word for Germany), which now includes Jews from northern and eastern Europe (and, later, their descendants from America); and Sephardim (the term comes from the old Hebrew word for Spain), which now includes Jews of Mediterranean, Balkan, Aegean, and Middle Eastern lands.

(http://countrystudies.us/israel/49.htm)

Ashkenazim (about 38% of the national population) Jews whose ancestors came from Germany, France, and Eastern Europe.

Mizrahim and Sephardim (about 38% of the national population): The word Sephardi refers to Jews whose ancestors lived in Spain and Portugal until 1492, and sometimes until later, then spread to Greece, Italy, England, the Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe, as well as into the Ottoman Empire and in North Africa. The Jews of Iran and Iraqi Jews are always considered Mizrahi as well as the Yemenite and Omani Jews.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel)

I think this speaks for itself.

Meaning they had equal rights with Arabs? What would have happened had they become, shall we say, too noticeable?

I meant their ethnicity.

Actually it isn't. I'm still waiting some explicit differentiation between Jordanians and Palestinians.

I have never raised any issues regarding Jordanian Arabs vs. Palestinian Arabs. We are discussing Palestinian Arabs.

I'm going to stop your argument here and ask you whether you understand the difference between phenotype and genotype. These are concepts critical to the understanding of the genetic issues and they cannot be ignored.

Outward, inward. The girls is a blue eyed blond. Where do you think that comes from, a Semitic relation? or a European relation? What you see is what you get.

Well, I did all right with the Arab ladies but I don't think you follow me. Introgression for the Palestinians could as easily have been from outside sources, and is just as likely - more likely - than introgression into the much more closed Jewish population. I think you should look this term up before we continue on the genetic argument. Note that it doesn't need to refer to recent introgression either.

Suffice to say these are both equally closed societies where marriage is primarily based on culture and religion. Jewish and Muslim. So the obvious conclusion is that there are way more blond Jews in Israel that blond Palestinians in Palestine. In fact, I have yet to see one.

Sure. I wonder what the outcome would be, but I agree with this notion.

Let us remain positive.

Shalom

 

[S.A.M.]

You're wasting your time.

One month from now, Geoff will say:

Excellent. Now let's have some proof of that.

 

[StrawDog]

You're wasting your time.

One month from now, Geoff will say:

I am hoping for a wider readership.

 

[GeoffP]

Your sources are a bit unobjective - Khalidi and Hussein?

I ask again about your respect of the difference between phenotype and genotype. Also - again - your quotes cite only location, rather than genetic origin. The two are not at all the same. If a man is born in a barn, does that make him a horse? And so, frankly, your sources don't "speak for themselves".

The thing is, I'm not sure you understand the difference between national origin and genetic history? Is there much point to continuing in this case? I could explain it a bit more thoroughly, but frankly I don't have the time.

 

[GeoffP]

Oh, also, your Khalidi cite doesn't distinguish between Palestine and Jordan.

 

[S.A.M.]

Wouldn't matter if he did. If a Palestinian was living on the West Bank and wanted to continue to live in his own home, why should he care what Khalidi thinks?

 

[GeoffP]

Well, I don't agree with Israeli encroachment on the West Bank. But this is a different issue than Palestinian identity prior to 1948.

 

[S.A.M.]

Again, irrelevant. If my homeland is the square of land in Mumbai where my house is, you can't put me in Rawalpindi on the basis of what the political situation was decided by political leaders before 1947. The Palestinian are refugees, evicted from their homes, their villages, their farms.

Why don't German/Polish/Russian/American Jews have a national identity? Does this mean Jews everywhere have a loyalty to race, religion and ethnicity first, their nation and birthplace second?

 

[GeoffP]

Well, it was a mixture of being evicted and leaving in 1948 so that the Arab armies could have a good go at the Israelis - in their homes, their villages, their farms.

I believe firmly in having a Palestinian nation, but not with Israelis giving up sovereigny over territory captured in 1948. On what reasonable basis could you possibly demand its return? Can Germany argue for the return of Prussia and the Sudetenland? Should Japan have the Sahkalins back?