Skip to main content

View Diary: Israeli Security Chief and Holocaust survivor compares Israel to Nazi Germany (173 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  History does bend towards justice (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bevenro, livosh1, Hey338Too

    That's why Israel exists and is a strong nation after 2500 years of persecution and oppression of the Jewish People.

    Thanks for pointing that out.

    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

    by volleyboy1 on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 04:02:30 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The topic is the persecution of the Palestinians. (0+ / 0-)

      Thanks for trying to reframe the entire conversation though.  :(

      Fail.

    •  Israel was founded in 1948 (0+ / 0-)

      #history

      •  Israel is a lot older than that... (0+ / 0-)

        Remember Israel existed long before it's present incarnation which was indeed founded in 1948.

        #historylearnit

        It is quite just that the Jewish people should once again have a homeland in their ancestoral lands.

        After 2500 years of brutal oppression and persecution (give or take) there is once again a Jewish Homeland. Indeed the arc of history has bent towards justice.

        Now... please remind me, when was there ever a nation of Palestine? Can you please cite the dates and territory it existed in.

        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

        by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 01:50:35 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Palestinians are descended from the Hebrews also (0+ / 0-)

          #facts

          They are just as entitled to that land.  So to answer your question 2500 years ago.

          •  Wait.. so are you saying that the Palestinians are (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hey338Too

            really Jews? You might want to tell them that as I don't think they know.

            No one ever said there shouldn't be a Palestinian State btw, just that there should be an Israel and Jewish State and that the arc of history bends towards justice... which is, the creation of Israel and a Jewish State.

            But my question was a very simple one - straight to the point and has an easy yes or no question. Let's try it again shall we:

            Please remind me, when was there ever a nation of Palestine? Can you please cite the dates and territory it existed in.

            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

            by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 04:00:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Never said Jews, I said Hebrews (0+ / 0-)

              Jew and Hebrew are not synonymous.

              And most Palestinians may or may not know this, but they are genetically similar to the Jewish people.  #science
              http://features.beliefnet.com/...

              By your logic if the Palestinians decide to merely name their country Judea and Samaria instead of Palestine then their claim would be legitimate.  That seems kind of arbitrary and superficial.

              •  Whoops... but no.. . (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Hey338Too

                You say:

                Jew and Hebrew are not synonymous.
                Ummm, yes.. they are. The Jewish people in ancient times were known as "the Hebrews". Hebrew is the ancient language of the Jewish people and it commonly was used even thousands of years as a synonym for "Jews".

                SO.. while some Palestinians are descendents of the Hebrew peoples that populated the area, most are not. But even if they were it still is irrelevant as they are NOT part of the Jewish people. Were they, a separate people there would have been a nation of Palestine would there not?

                then you go to this:

                By your logic if the Palestinians decide to merely name their country Judea and Samaria instead of Palestine then their claim would be legitimate.  That seems kind of arbitrary and superficial.
                Wrong on a few different levels. Let's look at those levels:

                1. You make an assumption in this sentence that I don't think the Palestinians have a legitimate claim to a part of the land, but, that is not true. I very much believe that the Palestinians have a legitimate claim to a part of the land.

                2. So, Israel is just the name of a nation and that is why you think I say that it legitimizes itself? Really? That is very uninformed view. Israel was a nation created by the Jewish people in ancient times and carried over throughout the years of persecution and oppression as a synonym for Jewish People. The term "People of Israel" refers to Jews.

                Now, the Palestinians some of whom are descended from the original Jewish people simply would not name their nation Judea and Samaria, because those are the ancient names for Jewish territory. So it's kind of silly to even make that statement.

                SO again... Please remind me of when there was ever an independent nation of Palestine, and what territory it occupied. Can you do that?

                It seems you can't since you seem to be claiming that Palestinians and Jews are one in the same and that the Palestinians are the descendents of the ancient Jews.

                "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 05:09:55 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  First of all what you are saying is not true (0+ / 0-)
                  SO.. while some Palestinians are descendents of the Hebrew peoples that populated the area, most are not
                  Our recent study of high-resolution microsatellite haplotypes demonstrated that a substantial portion of Y chromosomes of Jews (70%) and of Palestinian Muslim Arabs (82%) belonged to the same chromosome pool (Nebel et al. 2000). Of those Palestinian chromosomes, approximately one-third formed a group of very closely related haplotypes that were only rarely found in Jews. Altogether, the findings indicated a remarkable degree of genetic continuity in both Jews and Arabs, despite their long separation and the wide geographic dispersal of Jews.
                  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...

                  Now please present to me this mythical study that says most are not.

                  You say the Jewish People in ancient times were known as Hebrews.  Well based on scientific analysis the same can be said of Palestinians.  Scientifically Palestinians thousands of years ago were known as Hebrews.

                  Israel was a nation created by the Jewish people in ancient times and carried over throughout the years of persecution and oppression as a synonym for Jewish People. The term "People of Israel" refers to Jews.
                  Actually Israel was created by the Hebrews who were polytheists until the Babylonian exile.  During this period the Yahwehists (monotheists) began dominating Hebrew theological thought.  Before that the Yahwehists were a very small sect among the Hebrews.  By the time they returned they were basically under Persian rule then Roman rule with some brief periods of autonomy sprinkled throughout.

                  So you would be incorrect when you say Israel was created by the Jews.  It was created by polytheists whose religion eventually died out.  Their descendents became the Jews and eventually the Palestinians.

                  So while the "People of Israel" is commonly referred to Jews exclusively, historically and scientifically that is inaccurate.

                  •  that's a simplistic view of things... (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1, Hey338Too

                    most people who pay attention to this sort of thing are well aware of the genetic (and other) similarities (you may also include linguistic similarities--both Hebrew and Arabic are linguistically similar to Akkadian, for example).

                    But 'Hebrews' and 'Israelites' are a tribal identity.  As with other tribal identies--such as the Canaanites or Amorites, there is obviously a question as to self-identity at the time--after all, we're using late Iron Age texts to try to piece together Late Bronze/Early Iron identities, so that is obviously fraught--and you're not always going to have genetic/archaeological/historical/linguistic/evidence line up.

                    But ethnic identities do ultimately develop, and the term Hebrew is clearly identified with the Israelite/Jewish population (Palestine, or Palestinian, is known at least from the period, and (I didn't realize this next bit--but apparently there are poorly defined geographic references as early as the 12th cent. BC in Egyptian and Assyrian texts)

                    My point is this:  VB has never denied that the Palestinians have the right to self-determination, and a state, as does Israel.  But there are lots of legitimate historical reasons for assigning land to each group simply because each group has, for all intents and purposes, always been there.  (by always I mean more than 2,000 years)

                    And while there is always intermixing between groups--these things are fluid--you're really not making any case by asserting that somehow the People of Israel aren't Jewish, or that the Palestinians and Israelis are the same people, or whatever.  No tribal identity is 100% airtight, of course--but they are still accepted as legitimate.  Your framing diminishes both Palestinians AND Jews.

                  •  What bevenro said and...... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hey338Too

                    You said:

                    You say the Jewish People in ancient times were known as Hebrews.  Well based on scientific analysis the same can be said of Palestinians.
                    So are you then asserting that there was a nation of "Palestine"? Can you tell us about that nation. When it existed and what territory it was comprised of?

                    And while we are at it... who then were the people known as Palestinians? Were they occupants of the nation of Palestine?

                    Actually Israel was created by the Hebrews who were polytheists until the Babylonian exile.
                    While I do understand that your whole point here is to show that Jews are not indigenous to Israel or that area and that really the people currently known as Palestinians are, that simple historical fiction will not fly here.  

                    As bevenro succinctly explained religions evolve and take on different traditions from their original base. Look at Christianity or Islam. Both developed different paths and offshoot sects. However, the original Hebrews WERE associated and became the Jewish people.

                    When one talks about "Hebrew" people they mean one group of people and one group of people only; that would be the Jews. Despite your attempt to change that, that my friend, is reality.

                    The original kingdoms of Israel were indeed created by the Jewish People, as were the dual kingdoms of Israel and Judea.

                    Their descendents became the Jews and eventually the Palestinians.
                    And this quote betrays your point, that you are trying to establish that the Jews of today are NOT indigenous to the Land of Israel and that the real indigenous natives are the people now known as Palestinians.

                    Sorry but...

                    So while the "People of Israel" is commonly referred to Jews exclusively, historically and scientifically that is inaccurate.
                    No. But nice try. This is an old trick to delegitimize the Jewish claim to Israel. I'm surprised you pulled that one out here.

                    So again and I keep asking this but, you just don't want to seem to answer...

                    SO again... Please remind me of when there was ever an independent nation of Palestine, and what territory it occupied. Can you do that?

                    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                    by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 10:48:25 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You seem to have trouble understanding the fact (0+ / 0-)

                      that Juadaism didn't exist until sometime during the 6th century B.C.

                      And like I said whatever you call your country is irrelevant.  I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make by saying there has never been a Palestine.  You are pulling your argument out ofthe Newt Gingrich playbook, and not surprisingly making very little sense.  I'm not going to fight your straw men.

                      And yes many of the descendents of the Hebrews became Jewish, in addition many of their descendents later became Christian and Muslim.  

                      Point is the Jewish people are not the only rightful heirs of the Hebrew people.  Palestinians are their heirs as well.

                      •  Say what? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Hey338Too
                        You seem to have trouble understanding the fact that Juadaism didn't exist until sometime during the 6th century B.C.
                        Really now? You going to stick with that one?
                        And like I said whatever you call your country is irrelevant.

                        Actually, I call my country America or more formally, The United States of America.

                        I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make by saying there has never been a Palestine.
                        My point is that history does support that there was a nation called Israel, the Nation of Israel was a Jewish State, and since it was destroyed the Jewish people around the world have faced 2,500 years of persecution and oppression... SO when people talking about "arc of history" bending towards justice here mention the Palestinians, they really should be mentioning the Jews since... They were the ones wronged in ancient times.

                        There was NO ancient state of Palestine and honestly the people there who were not Jews are a conglomeration of those people who traveled through the area and either settled, or were brought there against their own will. Of course some of those people are also descendents of Jews forced to convert during the Caliphate.

                        You are pulling your argument out ofthe Newt Gingrich playbook, and not surprisingly making very little sense.  I'm not going to fight your straw men.
                        LOL, I am not pulling a "page out of the Newt Gingrich playbook" because of two things. First of all, I believe the Palestinians ARE a people. I believe there is enough history behind the Arab inhabitants of the area between the Jordan and the Med. that justifies that there has developed a separate culture of people that now call themselves Palestinian. Unlike Newt and his friends, I don't believe that Palestinians are a new people. I think they have a legitimate claim on part of the land. You don't seem to get that.

                        If anyone is trying to play the "Newt card" it is you, in claiming that the Palestinians are really just the descendents of Jews. You deny the Jewish people our heritage.

                        This is a great fail:

                        And yes many of the descendents of the Hebrews became Jewish, in addition many of their descendents later became Christian and Muslim.  
                        The overwhelmingly great majority of descendents of the Hebrews became Jews. Only through forced conversions and persecutions can the Christian and Muslims claim to share descent. That is the truth, not the pseudo science and simplistic conclusions of those who would deny the Jewish connection to the land.
                        Point is the Jewish people are not the only rightful heirs of the Hebrew people.  Palestinians are their heirs as well.
                        And your point is wrong. The Palestinians are not the heirs to the Hebrew People, they are however, through culture and history heirs to part of the land. Stop trying to make this something it is not.

                        You see, I believe the Palestinians SHOULD have a State in the land between the Jordan and Med. I also believe that the Jews should have a State between the Jordan and the Med. I believe in my heart that there cannot and should not be one State for these two different people. I don't think it would ever work for either group.

                        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                        by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 09:14:21 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  "Really now? You going to stick with that one?" (0+ / 0-)

                          That is historical fact.  You are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts.

                          The overwhelmingly great majority of descendents of the Hebrews became Jews. Only through forced conversions and persecutions can the Christian and Muslims claim to share descent.
                          So when the Polytheists converted to Judaism during the Babylonian exile that was a legitimate conversion, but converting to Islam or Christianity (i.e. the Palestinians) does not make you an heir to the Hebrews?  Interesting...
                          •  Ummm.... What you think are facts are not (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hey338Too

                            But I get that you need to cling to them to maintain your fantasies about the Jewish People and the Land of Israel.

                            Judaism traces it's roots to far before the Babylonian exile and the religion is over 1700 years old (at least).  So maybe only your little mythos places them at 600 C.E. BUT that is about that.

                            #historyfactslearnthemknowthemlivethem

                            The fact of the matter is that the Palestinians and the Jews ARE NOT the same people despite your insistence that they are.

                            As for the this comment... Seriously, stop while you are way behind. Just face it, the pseudo-science you may believe simply doesn't bear up to reality.

                            We all get you have an agenda, and that by cherry picking sentences here and there you want to delegitimize Israel and the Jewish people. But that crap only flies in that place where the Hard Right, meets with the Hard Left (and all the silliness about "TEH JOOZ" ensues. So, saying that Judaism is only 2500 years old AND by saying Palestinians are really the heirs to the Hebrew people is all fine and good for the non-reality based community but not so much for us who live in the real world.

                            Just sayin'

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 10:23:02 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  facts: (0+ / 0-)
                            Both the archaeological evidence and the Biblical texts document tensions between groups comfortable with the worship of Yahweh alongside local deities such as Asherah and Baal and those insistent on worship of Yahweh alone during the monarchal period.[3][4] During the 8th century BCE, worship of Yahweh in Israel stood in competition with many other cults, described by the Yahwist faction collectively as Baals. The oldest books of the Hebrew Bible, written in the 8th century BCE reflect this competition, as in the books of Hosea and Nahum, whose authors lament the "apostasy" of the people of Israel, threatening them with the wrath of God if they do not give up their polytheistic cults.

                            The monotheist faction seems to have gained considerable influence during the 8th century BCE, and by the 7th century BCE, based on the testimony of the Deuteronomistic source, monotheistic worship of Yahweh seems to have become official, reflected in the removal of the image of Asherah from the temple in Jerusalem under Hezekiah (r. 715-686 BCE) so that monotheistic worship of the god of Israel can be argued to have originated during his rule.[5]

                            Hezekiah's successor Manasseh reversed some of these changes, restoring polytheistic worship, and according to 2 Kings 21:16 even persecuting the monotheist faction. Josiah (r. 641-609 BCE) again turned to monolatry. The Book of Deuteronomy as well as the other books ascribed to the Deuteronomist were written during Josiah's rule. The final two decades of the monarchic period, leading up to the Babylonian sack of Jerusalem in 597 BCE were thus marked by official monolatry of the god of Israel. This had important consequences in the worship of Yahweh as it was practiced in the Babylonian captivity and ultimately for the theology of Second Temple Judaism...

                            The oldest writings of Judaism that survive directly date from the Hellenistic period.
                             This includes Hebrew and Aramaic papyri with biblical fragments such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Greek documents such as the Septuagint. The contact of Israelite and Greek cultures resulted in the development of strict monotheism which recast the national god of Israel in the role of the creator of the universe, corresponding to The One or The All of Hellenistic religion[citation needed]. Other scholars contend that the development of a strict monotheism was the result of cultural diffusion between Persians and Hebrews. While (in practice) dualistic, Zoroastrianism believed in escathological monotheism. Some[who?] suggest that it is not merely coincidence that the Zoroastrianism's model of escathological monotheism and the Deuteronomic historians strictly monotheistic model receive formative articulations during the period after Persia overthrew Babylon.

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/...
                            Both Jews and Palestinians share a very similar HLA
                            genetic pool (Table 3, Figures 4, 5 and 6) that support a
                            common ancient Canaanite origin.
                            http://www.stml.net/...

                            And in the words of Vince Masuka:

                            Thanks for playing

                          •  as a professional archaeologist, I find your (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, Hey338Too

                            wikipedia reliance entertaining :)

                            (and I have worked on Canaanite/Israelite sites, by the way)

                            anyway, no one is arguing that the genetic pool is that dissimilar between Semitic peoples.  VB is simply saying that the terms 'Israel' and 'Hebrews' pertain to a Jewish identity--NOT that there weren't other people on the land considered 'Palestine' by the Greeks.

                            You are arguing something--but I'm not quite sure what?  

                          •  I am not sure where he going with this (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hey338Too

                            as well... the fact is that Judaism can trace it's roots to close to 2000 B.C.E. NOT 500 B.C.E.

                            I am sort of thinking he is going with the canard that the ancient Jews became the Palestinians (or some such nonsense) and that it is the Palestinians who are the true inheritors of the legacy of the Jews. The old "Jesus was a Palestinian" thing.

                            And you are right... no one says that there are not commonalities in the Semitic peoples of the Middle East. You are also correct that in saying that I am not claiming that there are not legitimate non Jewish heirs to part of the land between the Med. and the Jordan. Just that those people ARE NOT the Hebrews (and Hebrews used as it really means Jews).

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 12:02:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i think you're right about the diarist's intended (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, Hey338Too

                            point--

                            although it really doesn't make any sense.  I mean, I suppose you can have a whole sociological debate about whether or not ethnic identities are 'real' or not--(I did a seminar on that with respect to the Amorites once) but that's way beside the point anyway...

                          •  Depends on which conotation you are using (0+ / 0-)

                            I'm referring to the ethnicity of the ancient people who lived thousands of years ago.

                            Today their descendents are of multiple ethnicities Sephardic, Ashkenazi, and a community of Arabs who live in the greater Israel region.  And these ethnicities comprise of multiple religions including Jewish, Christian, and Muslim.  The oldest being Judaism and the newest being Islam.  Fact of the matter there is no pure Hebrew ethnicity anymore.

                            But yes another connotation of the word Hebrew refers to any Jew.

                          •  Thanking yourself for playing? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hey338Too

                            Your Wiki link besides being "The simplistic view of Judaism" betrays both your lack of understanding of Judaism AND history.

                            Sure there were polytheistic cults within the religion just as there were different sects within Christianity and Islam (and still are). There are however traces to the Jewish people and their worship that runs back to at least 1700 B.C.E.

                            Hey Obamalover20122 - how about instead of your continued display of only a cursory knowledge of the subject of Judaism and all this... How about you come clean and just tell us what point you are trying to make, and what you think that P.O.V. will support? OR are you ashamed to talk about that here and hence this sort of torturous circuit of nonsense?

                            What is it that you really wish to say?

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 12:11:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh btw... did you think we would not (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hey338Too

                    read your link???

                    I mean there is this comment:

                    In comparison with data available from other relevant populations in the region, Jews were found to be more closely related to groups in the north of the Fertile Crescent (Kurds, Turks, and Armenians) than to their Arab neighbors.....

                    .... Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin differed from the other Middle Eastern populations studied here, mainly in specific high-frequency Eu 10 haplotypes not found in the non-Arab groups. These chromosomes might have been introduced through migrations from the Arabian Peninsula during the last two millennia. The present study contributes to the elucidation of the complex demographic history that shaped the present-day genetic landscape in the region.

                    But in any case... Is it a surprise that Mizrachi Jews who stayed in Israel would be related to parts of the population now known as Palestinians? Of course not, I freely grant that local Arab populations would have a relationship to the Mizrachim. They come out of the same pool.

                    However, the Ashkenazim and Sepharadim... are also Jews and also share markers with Mizrachim but NOT with the local Arab Population.

                    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                    by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 11:00:47 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The data collected by these researchers (0+ / 0-)

                      also found that the Ashkenazi Jews were most closely related to... Palestinian Arabs (see Table 2).

                      •  You did read the analysis of table two didn't you? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Hey338Too

                        Because that comment does not make it seem like you did.

                        Here let me quote from the report:

                        The three modal haplotypes in the Palestinians and Bedouin were entirely restricted to the two Arab populations. On the other hand, chromosomes with the modal haplotypes of the Jews and of the Muslim Kurds were observed in all the populations except the Bedouin. The three Jewish communities had many additional haplotypes in common with Muslim Kurds (table 3). They shared more haplotypes and chromosomes with Muslim Kurds than with either Palestinians or Bedouin. (vb1 emphasis)
                        However, since the Palestinian people are a conglomeration of many other groups AND the original inhabitants of the area this makes sense.

                        As it does that the Jews would have ties to the Turks and Kurds since they were scattered in various diaspora's throughout history.

                        I am going to suggest that you actually read the report you link to rather than like your diary looking to cherry pick lines here and there to justify your points. You might have seen this:

                        About the Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin

                        Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin are largely nomadic Arab herders, with a tribal organization. They live in all Arab countries, constituting about one tenth of the population (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994). The Bedouin population of the Negev desert was found to be most distant from Jews and Muslim Kurds and to be closely related only to Palestinians.
                        which supports that the local population who have become known as Palestinians were a conglomeration of peoples moving through the area that did eventually settle down.

                        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                        by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 09:32:04 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Reading is fundamental (0+ / 0-)

                          In table 2 Ashkenazis are most closely related to Palestinians... not Palestinians are most closely related to Ashkenazis.  Those two statements have two different meanings.

                          Point is they have common ancestors.  And saying the conversion to Judaism from Polytheism still makes them legitimate heirs but not Christianity or Islam from Judaism is silly.

                          •  Nice try.... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hey338Too

                            Some Palestinians do have common ancestors with the Ashkenaz. And some have common ancestors with the Mizrachim and Sepharadim. No one denies that, Of course they would, as they are Middle Eastern people with a basis in the Fertile Crescent but, to say that the Palestinians are infact the heirs to the Hebrew People and the Kingdoms of Israel is ridiculous to say the least.

                            But congrats, because outside of the very Hard Right or Hard Left no one actually agrees with you.

                            "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                            by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 11:55:27 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  heirs to what??? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, Hey338Too

                            Everyone who lived on a land at some point can stake some historical claim to the land.  Whether or not that is achieved, who knows.  But somehow it seems like you're trying to say that since Judaism evolved from polytheism the ethnicity doesn't exist, unless it's also Palestinian..

                            or something.

                            This discussion is nonsensical and weird.  Anyway, you mention 'Christian' and 'Muslim'--both groups of whom have well over a billion people and many millions of square miles of land.  The Jews had NO land until about 70 years ago...and I agree that the Palestinians have the right to land in the region as well.

                            But the contortions  you're going through to get there--when we are actually all in AGREEMENT that the Palestinians have deep ethno-historical ties to the region--is just...

                            strange.

                •  This basically means Solomon and David (0+ / 0-)

                  were Polytheists.  Not Jewish

                  •  false dichotomy. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1, Hey338Too

                    Many monotheistic religions have aspects of polytheism throughout (the tetragrammaton YHWH, for example has different aspects of God reflected in the name), and the trinity--even angels)

                    Anyway, we haven't proven that David and Solomon actually existed anyway--although if they did, and Israel existed as a small kingdom, it's probable that it would have been run under a 'state religion' of Judaism.  Even if Judaism were influenced by other religions (e.g. Canaanite--which undoubtedly it was) that doesn't make it any less Jewish.  As you yourself note, these religions evolve.

                  •  No actually it does not. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hey338Too

                    Again....

                    SO again... Please remind me of when there was ever an independent nation of Palestine, and what territory it occupied. Can you do that?
                    You keep refusing to address that question. I wonder why that is.

                    "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                    by volleyboy1 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 10:35:13 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  And as I pointed out that is a straw man (0+ / 0-)

                      and irrelevant.

                      •  You seem to not want to face (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Hey338Too

                        a very relevant question. Why is that?

                        "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                        by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 08:55:44 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  so is your David and Solomon comment--but so (0+ / 0-)

                        what?

                        I don't think anyone is in disagreement that many peoples can rightly claim heritage to the land.

                        •  Gotta disagree with you bevenro (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Hey338Too

                          My comment is not a "strawman argument".

                          Why? Because it is based on a comment regarding the State of Israel and the "Arc of History". The context of my comment was that the State of Israel bears out their comments regarding the "Arc of History" while their comment about the Palestinians simply does not.

                          THAT said... as I have said multiple times (though Obamalover20122 seems to refuse to be able to read or acknowledge) that I do believe the Palestinians do have a hereditory claim on part of the land. No one here is making any other claim.

                          His "David and Solomon" claim is just silly. Mine has a context.

                          "'Touch it dude' - President Barack Obama"

                          by volleyboy1 on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 12:24:42 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site