TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Who Are the Palestinians???
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Who Are the Palestinians???

Who Are the Palestinians?
Yashiko Sagamori
25 November 2002


A rebuttal:

If you are so sure that "Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history", I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of "Palestine":

1. When was it founded and by whom?

2. What were its borders?

3. What was its capital?

4. What were its major cities?

5. What constituted the basis of its economy?

6. What was its form of government?

7. Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?

8. Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?

9. What was the language of the country of Palestine?

10. What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?

11. What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and try and find the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, British pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.

12. Have the Palestinians left any artifacts behind?

13. Do you know of a library where one could find a work of Palestinian literature produced before 1967?

14. And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

If you are lamenting the "low sinking" of "once proud" nation, then please tell me, when exactly was that "nation" proud and what was it so proud of?

And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call "Palestinians" are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over - or thrown out of - the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat by Israel in the 1967Six Day War?

I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day "Palestinians" to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won�t work here.

The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal through military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it "the Palestinian people" and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the "West Bank" and Gaza, respectively, in the aftermath of the 1967 war?

The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less of a claim to nationhood than the American Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so-called "Palestinians" have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel. In my book that is not sufficient to consider them a "nation" -- or anything else -- except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled.

In fact, there is only one way to achieve piece in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side, should pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited upon it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and acceptance of Israel�s ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria.

That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again was its beginning?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant.

Halas...

quote:

Originally posted by TranceGiant Halas...

hehe

lama halas?

Lets see the answers to this one!!

quote:

Originally posted by melech_mike lama halas? Lets see the answers to this one!!

These are all questions made to reinforce the straw-man fallacy argument.

What were Isreali's considered before their nation was formed?

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King These are all questions made to reinforce the straw-man fallacy argument. What were Isreali's considered before their nation was formed?

If you are a religous man and believe in the old testament, god has supposedly given the jews the land from Sinai (or the mid sea, can't remember) to the Prat (or whatever it is called in English) river which means Iraq .

quote:

Originally posted by oDrori If you are a religous man and believe in the old testament, god has supposedly given the jews the land from Sinai (or the mid sea, can't remember) to the Prat (or whatever it is called in English) river which means Iraq .

This means nothing to me...again.. religion shouldnt be interchanged with historical fact.

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King This means nothing to me...again.. religion shouldnt be interchanged with historical fact.

Then whatever the territories were when the Romans conquered the land of Israel.

Palestine was a part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. Palestine had been ruled from Constantinople by the Turkish sultans for nearly 500 years and was populated largely by Arab farmers, most of whom had never heard of Zionism.

In 1917 imperialist Britain created a national homeland as is stated in the Balfour Declaration. The Balfour Declaration involved a promise by an imperial power to establish a nationanl home for a MINORITY in a county that had a population which WAS NOT recoginzed in that declaration. The existing non-Jewish populations were the 92 percent majority of the country. (as cited in MEIRP) Their national and political rights were IGNORED in a declaration which promised national and political rights to the Jewish people.

Some twenty years later, the British declared their tactics and reasons for the Balfour declaration a failure in a document known as the "White Paper on Palestine," which repudiated Zionism and the Balfour Declaration.

You learn something new everyday...thanks for the post Peaceful warrior.

quote:

If you are so sure that "Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history", I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of "Palestine":

Palestine never was a country. It was always a colony or a region. But that doesn't mean there are no palestinians. Are there no Kurds because they don't have their own country?

good point

quote:

Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior In 1917 imperialist Britain created a national homeland as is stated in the Balfour Declaration. The Balfour Declaration involved a promise by an imperial power to establish a nationanl home for a MINORITY in a county that had a population which WAS NOT recoginzed in that declaration. The existing non-Jewish populations were the 92 percent majority of the country. (as cited in MEIRP) Their national and political rights were IGNORED in a declaration which promised national and political rights to the Jewish people.

WOW!! Settle down, were starting to spew down falasies now! The Balfour declaration DOES recongizes the native population in the areas belonging to 'imperialist britian'. Furthermore it ensure that their rights would not be violated. The Balfour decleration states this SPECIFICALLY. If you like I can quote this (in any other post I would, but I just got back from a saturday night out and im lazy now).

quote:

Some twenty years later, the British declared their tactics and reasons for the Balfour declaration a failure in a document known as the "White Paper on Palestine," which repudiated Zionism and the Balfour Declaration.

Again false, white papers do not void Balfour, they simply provided more restrictions on Jewish migration into the mandated area, and promote more rights for the Arab inhabitants of the land over their Jewish counterparts.

The one reason I can think of to give the land of Israel to the Palestines is that things were like that for a while, and that we shouldn't moan about losing the land to the romans and that that's the way history goes etc. etc.

Then why should the palestines or Arabs that lived in here till the Jewish settlement have the right to complain about our (Or the British, irrelevant) taking it back by force and claiming the land?

quote:

Originally posted by oDrori The one reason I can think of to give the land of Israel to the Palestines is that things were like that for a while, and that we shouldn't moan about losing the land to the romans and that that's the way history goes etc. etc. Then why should the palestines or Arabs that lived in here till the Jewish settlement have the right to complain about our (Or the British, irrelevant) taking it back by force and claiming the land?

Well the 'native' inhabitants of Palestine, didn't seem to complain when they were controlled by the Ottomans, and previously the Turks.

Furthermore you see a dramatic influx of 'native' Arab inhabitants to Palestine during the British Mandate. Almost a 200% influx. Many from diverging Arab countries and backgrounds.

WHY CANT ANYONE TELL ME WHO THE PALISTINIANS ARE??

WHY CANT ANYONE ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS POSTED EARLIER.

PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME... IT SEEMS AS THOUGH I'M IGNORANT ABOUT THE SUPPOSED 'PALISTINIAN' PEOPLE!!

ALL YOU PRO-PALISTINANS: ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!!!

quote:

Originally posted by melech_mike WHY CANT ANYONE TELL ME WHO THE PALISTINIANS ARE?? WHY CANT ANYONE ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS POSTED EARLIER. PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME... IT SEEMS AS THOUGH I'M IGNORANT ABOUT THE SUPPOSED 'PALISTINIAN' PEOPLE!! ALL YOU PRO-PALISTINANS: ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!!!

Who were the Israeli's before the nation was formed?

I don't consider myself to be pro-palestinian, although by your standards I probably am, but anyways, I'll try to answer you.

quote:

1. When was it founded and by whom? 2. What were its borders? 3. What was its capital? 4. What were its major cities? 5. What constituted the basis of its economy? 6. What was its form of government?

An established country of Palestine is NOT necesarry for the palestinians to exist. Do Kurds have their country? Did Ukranians during USSR? Did Israel have it before 1947?

quote:

7. Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?

No, but I can't name more than two or so Israeli leaders either.

quote:

8. Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation? 9. What was the language of the country of Palestine? 10. What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine? 11. What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and try and find the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, British pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.

Again, the countries existence is not necesarry for the people of it to exist.

quote:

12. Have the Palestinians left any artifacts behind?

Have East Timorians left any?

quote:

13. Do you know of a library where one could find a work of Palestinian literature produced before 1967?

Do you know of one where you can find literature from Rwanda?

quote:

14. And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

So only countries that have previously existed have a right to exist now? In other words, USA doesn't have the right to exist, but Carthaga has?

quote:

The one reason I can think of to give the land of Israel to the Palestines is that things were like that for a while, and that we shouldn't moan about losing the land to the romans and that that's the way history goes etc. etc. Then why should the palestines or Arabs that lived in here till the Jewish settlement have the right to complain about our (Or the British, irrelevant) taking it back by force and claiming the land?

Because one of those things happened 2000 years ago and the other one 50 years ago.

quote:

Well the 'native' inhabitants of Palestine, didn't seem to complain when they were controlled by the Ottomans, and previously the Turks.

One reason is that they all shared the same religion. The second one is that nationalism is a relatively new invention dating back to 19th century.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Because one of those things happened 2000 years ago and the other one 50 years ago.

I thought for a moment someone would actually pos this... but think of it this way, 1950 years ago, the older thing could be said to have happend "50 years ago" . In 1950 from now on, the newer one will be talked of as something that happenned "2000 years ago".

Does that give it legitimacy? If Israel will "Hold" the occupied lands and the country of Israel for another fwe centuries, that will make it legitimate and grant it the right to exist?
Some sick idea of bringing the "Survivors" show to life... Seriously, this is like a game of human lives.

Ok, think about these 2 cases:
Someone kills your brother. 10 years later you find him and kill him.
An English man meets a dude from norway whose ancestor from middle ages was a viking and the vikings attacked the English dudes town back then. He kills the norway dude.
It's not the same thing.

i remember hearing that the jews were going to make their land somewhere in south america, but i dont remember who said it was israel,and that is why it is what it is today

i dont know if this is true or not, but has anyone else heard something like this?

quote:

Originally posted by Cyrus King Who were the Israeli's before the nation was formed?

you put the retard in his place
On a side note, whoever said God gave the Jews Israel, prove it, because that wouldn't stand up in any court on earth.....except maybe texas

quote:

Originally posted by Az you put the retard in his place On a side note, whoever said God gave the Jews Israel, prove it, because that wouldn't stand up in any court on earth.....except maybe texas

Yes but on the other hand the mere essence of this new intiphada (sp?) is because they want Jerusalem and the Al Aqsa temple. Where are religous reasons ignorable and where are they not?

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Ok, think about these 2 cases: Someone kills your brother. 10 years later you find him and kill him. An English man meets a dude from norway whose ancestor from middle ages was a viking and the vikings attacked the English dudes town back then. He kills the norway dude. It's not the same thing.

Of course not but looking at it the way U presented it could make one think that if we are going to keep this country for another 100 years or a bit more we could say "Ah, that happened quite a while ago. Let's forget it".

quote:

Originally posted by oDrori Yes but on the other hand the mere essence of this new intiphada (sp?) is because they want Jerusalem and the Al Aqsa temple. Where are religous reasons ignorable and where are they not?

for one thing, the al aqsa mosque (not temple) is for muslims, not jews. it wasnt built as a temple, it was built as a mosque.
in an earlier post on this thread, i said israel wasnt even the first choice of the jews for their holy land (someone please verify this), and i think it was somewehre in south america. lets say it is in south america, what are they going to do, take over the mayan temples and say "yea these were built for us".

quote:

Originally posted by liquidxxd for one thing, the al aqsa mosque (not temple) is for muslims, not jews. it wasnt built as a temple, it was built as a mosque.

Yeah I'm sorry I wasn't sure what the English word for it is...

quote:

Originally posted by liquidxxd in an earlier post on this thread, i said israel wasnt even the first choice of the jews for their holy land (someone please verify this), and i think it was somewehre in south america. lets say it is in south america, what are they going to do, take over the mayan temples and say "yea these were built for us".

Uganda was a first choice, it was a Zionist choice, I believe Benjamin Theodor Ze'ev Hertzel chose it, it was never a religous choice. I will not try to back up HIS theory though, just as I would not ask an Arab person to back a terrorist's way.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.