Palestinians: We don't deserve a state

"We are telling the world that we don't deserve a state"

Some of us already knew this.

Today I'm ashamed to say that I'm a Palestinian."...

Fine, but what about Iran's paying converts up to $1,000.00? At least there's proof from Syria so far. Palestine's going to be next.

I am soooo tired of Rice! Does that make me a 'RICIST?'

Here's a link:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/02/04/rice-lets-give-them-a-state-pali-arabs-we-dont-deserve-a-state/

...and yesterday she was proud to be Palestinian!? Why? ...if the two factions stop fighting amongst each other, would she then be proud again to be a Palestinian tomorrow? if so, why? What have they done or accomplished to be 'proud' of? Of course they don't deserve a state... sadly, what they don't seem to understand is that it has very little to do with the fact they are killing one another... sounds like they need a serious reality check.

Today I'm ashamed to say that I'm a Palestinian."...

First of all there is no such thing as an arab Palestinian, so go back to egypt or jordan,syria,

Tens of millions of people now look at us as worthless gangsters with no values," he complained....

this loser needs to know the civilized world has always looked at them as worthless gangsters, murderous people.
they kill themsevles with the same zest as when they kill unarmed civilians by ambush,belt bombs, etc.
they kill their own daughters in honour killings
so get a cluer loser, being a so called muslim palestinian a waste of humanity. what ever happened to all those Green Houses the gracious Isralies gave you, are you producing food to feed your people? no, you rather have you hand out for money from the West. Yes Arab pali are becoming a worthless lot in life, and need to sent packing over to their home land, Jordan, Egypt,Syria,

This from caroline Glick.
She always comes up with the goods!

The Jerusalem Post Internet
Edition

Our World: Welcome to Palestine

________________________________

Caroline Glick, THE JERUSALEM POST Jan. 29, 2007
________________________________

In the world of international diplomacy few issues receive
more wall-to-wall support than the notion that it is
essential to establish a Palestinian state. Leaders
worldwide are so busy speaking of how essential it is for a
State of Palestine to be founded that none of them seems to
have noticed that it already exists.

This state was officially founded in the summer of 2005,
when Israel removed its military forces and civilian
population from the Gaza Strip and so established the first
wholly independent Palestinian state in history. Israel's
destruction of four Israeli communities in Northern Samaria
and curtailment of its military operations in the area set
the conditions for statehood in that area as well.

And so it is that as statesmen and activists worldwide
loudly proclaim their commitment to establishing the
sovereign State of Palestine, they miss the fact that
Palestine exists. And it is a nightmare.

In the State of Palestine 88 percent of the public feels
insecure. Perhaps the other 12 percent are members of the
multitude of regular and irregular militias. For in the
State of Palestine the ratio of
police/militiamen/men-under-arms to civilians is higher than
in any other country on earth.

In the State of Palestine, two-year-olds are killed and no
one cares. Children are woken up in the middle of the night
and murdered in front of their parents. Worshipers in
mosques are gunned down by terrorists who attend competing
mosques. And no one cares. No international human rights
groups publish reports calling for an end to the slaughter.
No UN body condemns anyone or sends a fact-finding mission
to investigate the murders.

In the State of Palestine, women are stripped naked and
forced to march in the streets to humiliate their husbands.
Ambulances are stopped on the way to hospitals and wounded
are shot in cold blood. Terrorists enter operating rooms in
hospitals and unplug patients from life-support machines.

In the State of Palestine, people are kidnapped from their
homes in broad daylight and in front of the television
cameras. This is the case because the kidnappers themselves
are cameramen. Indeed, their commanders often run television
stations. And because terror commanders run television
stations in the State of Palestine, it should not be
surprising that they bomb the competition's television
stations.

SO IT WAS that last week, terrorists from this group or that
group bombed Al Arabiya television station in Gaza. And so
it is that Hamas attacks Fatah radio announcers and closes
down their radio station claiming that they use their
microphones to incite murder. Because indeed, they are
inciting murder. What would one expect for terrorists to do
when placed in charge of a radio station?

And so it is that in the State of Palestine, journalists -
whether members of terror groups or not - are part of the 88
percent of their public who are afraid. Sunday they
protested outside the offices of one terror faction or
another that controls the Palestinian Authority.

Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, reporter Ala Masharawi
explained, "No one goes outside, no one moves without
thinking twice. Gaza's streets have become terrible streets,
especially at night. Gaza is a ghost town."

As the Post's Khaled Abu Toameh reported last week, in the
State of Palestine, Christians are persecuted, robbed and
beaten in what can only be viewed as a systematic campaign
to end the Christian presence in places like Bethlehem. As
Samir Qumsiyeh, owner of the Beit Sahur-based private
Al-Mahd (Nativity) TV station lamented, "I believe that 15
years from now there will be no Christians left in
Bethlehem. Then you will need a torch to find a Christian
here."

MANY GOVERNMENT ministers and commentators seek strategic
meaning in the strife in the State of Palestine. Foreign
Minister Tzipi Livni, for instance, goes on and on about the
need to strengthen the "moderates" - that is, the Fatah
terror group - over the "extremists" - that is, the Hamas
terror group.

Helping her to propound this nonsense is PA Chairman and
Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas and his men tell Westerners
how pro-Western they are at the same time as they name
streets and schools financed by US aid after Saddam Hussein
and build sports facilities on the American taxpayers' tab
in memory of terrorists who killed American soldiers in
Iraq.

For the umpteenth time, on Sunday Fatah spokesmen in PA
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's office blamed Iran and Syria for
the escalating violence in Gaza and Judea and Samaria that
has killed 29 people, including two children, in four days.
"Iran and Syria are encouraging Hamas to continue fighting
against Fatah," they alleged.

And yet, just last Thursday the Shin Bet arrested Omar
Damra, a Fatah terrorist in Nablus. Damra is accused of
manufacturing suicide bomb belts and attempting to smuggle
them into Israel. He also stands accused of plotting to
place explosive devices along roads in Judea and Samaria
with the intention of blowing up IDF patrols.

Damra and his partner and fellow Fatah terrorist Mahmad
Ramaha, who was arrested a month ago, were working under the
instruction of Hizbullah - that is, under the direction of
Iran. According to the Shin Bet, Hizbullah - that is, Iran -
has taken over Fatah operations in Nablus. Since Israel's
withdrawal from northern Samaria in August 2005, the Shin
Bet has noted that, like Gaza, the Nablus area has become a
mini-Afghanistan.

So not only are Hamas terrorists operating under Iranian and
Syrian direction today, Fatah terrorists are as well. Yet
this doesn't stop the US and Israel from pouring guns and
money into the hands of Fatah terror chiefs. They fail to
recognize that what you see is what you get.

These guns are not used to encourage moderation. These guns
are used against Israelis and Palestinians alike in a turf
battle between terror groups over money, guns and power that
will never end. And it will never end because fighting and
killing for money, guns and power is what terrorists do.

FOR THE past 13 years, since the Palestinian Authority was
established in 1994, the contours of the State of Palestine
have taken form in front of our eyes. Starting with Yasser
Arafat's abrogation of the rule of law and murderous
campaign against land dealers and journalists, with each
passing year and with each move to further empower the PA,
the situation has only grown worse. And yet, international
pressure on Israel from Arabs, Europeans and the US to
surrender more territory, curtail its authority, abrogate
its claims to the areas set for Palestine, and finance the
Fatah terror group have only grown in intensity.

And with each passing year, as the reality of Palestine has
become clearer, the Israeli leadership's will to resist this
pressure is increasingly eroded.

So it is that last week Defense Minister Amir Peretz
announced that he supports negotiating with Hamas. Peretz
laid out his "vision" for the reinstatement of the so-called
peace process with the Palestinians, and stated that, to
"empower" the Palestinians, he supports extending the ban on
IDF operations from Gaza to Judea and Samaria. It should go
without saying that such IDF operations are aimed at
preventing massacres of Israeli civilians like the one that
happened in Eilat Monday morning.

LIVNI, FOR her part, has become the international champion
of Fatah. Gushing to an audience of international peace
processors in Davos, Switzerland, last week, Livni said, "In
order to achieve peace and in order to promote a process, we
must stick to this vision of a two-state solution and
examine what the best steps to take are."

Of course, neither Livni nor Peretz, who insist that
Israel's most urgent priority is to establish Palestine, is
willing to recognize that Palestine exists already. They
refuse to acknowledge what we already know: Palestine is a
terror state and an economic basket case fully funded by the
international community. Indeed, over the past year since
Hamas won the Palestinian elections, international
assistance to the Palestinians has increased dramatically.

As Ibrahim Gambari, the UN under-secretary-general for
political affairs, noted last Thursday, official Western aid
to the Palestinians, not including Arab and Iranian support
for Hamas and Fatah, increased by 10 percent in 2006 over
2005, and stood at $1.2 billion.

The Palestinians, who receive more aid per capita than any
people on earth, are needy not because they lack funds. They
are poor because they prefer poverty, violence and war to
prosperity, peace and moderation. So it is that 57 percent
of Palestinians support terror attacks against Israel.

The multitude of protesters worldwide who demand an end to
the so-called "occupation" and the establishment of
Palestine should be made aware of the fact that Palestine
already exists. The hordes of political leaders mindlessly
squawking about "visions" and "two-state solutions" should
know: This is Palestine. Enter at your own risk.

Time to undo the recent fiction (born round about 1968 or 1969, died ??? reads the prepared tombstone), of the "Palestinian people."

What should be engraved on that tombstone?

It could be:

"We tried, but in the end they saw through us."

Or

"We tried, but Bin Laden managed to wake the cursed Infidels up in time"

Or perhaps just the celebrated words of Zuheir Mohsein to James Dorsey of the Dutch paper Trouw, back in 1977, when the "Palestinian people" propaganda was going full-blast. You remember Zuheir Mohssein, head of the terrorist group As Saiqa (yes, I know it's hard to keep them straight, I know there are so many, I know their particular names may reflect some internecine struggle or power play by this or that Muslim group, but their names don't really matter much to their common target, the Infidels), and a member of the PLO’s Supreme Council. What was it, again, that Zuheir Mohsein said, putting it so straightforwardly, just the way Saudi clerics, and the Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers, and the leaders of Hamas (as compared to the smoother Slow-Jihad leaders of Fatah and their supporters) like to put things, without an attempt to make things palatable for the Infidels (but you see, now the Infidels can eavesdrop on any remark, by Muslims, including those within mosques that are meant, as in England recently, for Muslim ears only -- and what a surprise when tapes then appear on the national television, available for non-Muslims to hear as well).

Oh, those words again? Yes, here they are, the words that should be engraved on that collective tombstone for the concept, long due for burial, of that absurd concoction, the "Palestinian people":

"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation... the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons."

Yes, it’s a bit longer than the usual tombstone engraving, but if the lettering is small, there may be just enough room to contain it all. And it will serve as a moral, a little lesson, engraved in stone and, as someone once wrote, “bound in moss,” for those who enjoy wandering through the graveyard of history.

Finally, a palestinian who tells the truth.

Kind of refreshing, eh?

"We are telling the world that we don't deserve a state"

I think we should listen to them.

There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation.

Hugh, you are an absolute joke.In the real world of academia you would be ridiculed. Whats is the great difference between French,Germans and Belgians? You want an ethnic difference or a lingiuistic one?You speak as if the criteria that make a nation are objective and scientific. To come to the point, is there a Jewish people, or an American people, or an Australian one? The American identity grew ouf of opposition to the British,just like the Palestinian identity grew mainly from opposition to Zionism and its land grab.But that is not the worst thing. You seriously try to convince the people that the Arab label is an ethnic one, when Palestinians,Syrian and Lebanese would never claim such a thing. There is no historic, ethnic or genetic basis and no one would claim that the people of the Levant are Arabs from the Peninsula, except either an idiot(the vast majority here) or a fanatic Zionist racist(you), someone who in his own little word can still quote the book by Joan Peters "From Time immemorial" and be applauded for it.A genuine fraud of a book. Like I said in the real world of serious scholarship you would be a joke.

Judging by the post above from "searcher," it sounds like the mohammadens are just a wee bit upset that the world is coming to realize the true nature of the "palestinian" people, and the fact that they can never even live at peace with each other, much less Israel.

t sounds like the mohammadens are just a wee bit upset that the world is coming to realize the true nature of the "palestinian

No my friend,everyone today whether they be historians, academics, politicians, artists has
accepted the fact of a seperate Palestinian identity.There is no argument.Even genetically it is proven that Palestinians are much to closer to Ashkenazi Jews, then they in return are to European Non Jews.Palestinians, like Syrians,Lebanese and Egyptians ecs are rooted in the land and are in the vast majority descendants of the converted non-islamic people.Except in the world of crackpot Zionism.I for once never see the world Palestinians anywhere else in brackets.You have to come to Jihad watch to see that.Even you accept a genuine Jihad threat or dislike Islam, dont swallow this side hook and sinker.

Sorry I misspelled some words. I meant the word Palestinians

What does genetic identity have to do with the fact that "Palestinians" (Arabs currently occupying Israel) have no capacity to live in peace with anyone, including each other? You were the one who said in your first post that 'You speak as if the criteria that make a nation are objective and scientific.' And now you are trying to use the same logic (which you previously and clumsily tried to debunk) to say that Palestinians somehow have a unique ethnic identity which in turn gives them the right to have their own state.

Searcher you are the fool, l am in complete agreement with Hugh on this point, and most. so you are going seek out the truth because the so called "real world of academia" would not agree with Hugh's statement. Your "real world of academia" is to be ridiculed, they are the ones that repeat the nonsense of Fisk,etc. The so called real world of academia is fed with money tainted by the sowdis.
l am sure if Hugh feels any sympathie for you he can send you a list of books on history and other factual posts of his on the history of Isreal, the "True Palestinians", Arabs need not apply.

No my friend,everyone today whether they be historians, academics, politicians, artists has
accepted the fact of a seperate Palestinian identity.

Posted by: Searcher [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 5, 2007 09:13 AM

That should be corrected from 'everyone' to 'every Gramscian, leftwing-Marxist, self loathing, Islamoappologist whether they be...'. Which I would wager is exactly what you are Searcher.

Let me parphrase that, what does not wanting to live in peace have to do with saying that Palestinians dont exist?Cant a people be warlike and still exist?
Why are you so biased that you cant even call them Palestinians, even saying they are currently occupying Israel, which does tell me much about your mental ability and education? Maybe they fight because people like you deny them their roots in the land, meaning that by always saying they are Arabs and have no identiy, implying that that they are subhumans who have no connections to the land and can therefore be treated at whatever way you choose.
People like you are the problem. Your deep racism. Your chauvinism. Your everything.

I dont care whether it is in agreement with Hugh.Hugh is wrong. To go against everything established in history and by dismissing intellectuals and historians, by simply calling them Marxists, is mental suicide. If there is genetic evidence saying that Palestines are a pre-arab population, then either Hugh is a liar or he is reading the wrong books.

I challenge you to send me his list of books. I already know whats top of the list. Joan Peters,Alan Dershowitz,Bat Yaoer... Like I said in crackpotland that would be taken serious.

Yes, I'm the problem. I created the conflict. Never mind the fact that the Israeli Arab conflict began long before my father was even born, or the fact that I have never been to the middle east, nor do I have any desire to ever step foot on that cesspool of a geographic region. But somehow it is still all my fault. This is the problem with you Arabists. Always trying to shift the blame. Hell, why not blame all of your problems on the Gypsies while your at it.
And by contending that these so-called "Palestinians" cannot live in peace, I never said that "Palestinians" don't exist. My contention is that no separate Palestinian ethnicity has ever existed, and there certainly never existed a Palestinian nation-state. I also contend that there are quite a number of groups who are more deserving of their own state (including Kurds and others), than the Arabs of Israel.

Well, ofcourse you cant say they dont exist. You would be nuts. You say they dont exist as a people.
Whats your idea of a people? You think the people in Scandinavia are all different? Is being Amerian an ethnicity? Does one make a genetic test before declaring statehood? Israelies are composed of Athiopians,Arab Jews;European Jews, Indian Jews even Chinese Jews. Palestinians have Egyptian,Persian,Jewish;Roman, Arab and Greek blood,their genetic material is even 15 perecent sub-saharan African. Who are you to say there is no Israeli nation if they desire it, or to declare who has the first right to call himself a people? You dont have that right. Because you take it you are the problem. People like you stand in the way of peace, by making the Palestininas into a non-entity and then wondering why they resist.

The Palestinians are the indigenous people of the land, the Caananites, the descendants of the pre-islamic Christian and Jewish population. That is something to be proud of. Enough said.

Searcher, if what you say is true, then why are Lebanon and Syria members of the Arab league? Why do they call themselves Arab states? Why does the constitution of Iraq demand that Iraq be called an Arab state, despite the historic existence of Assyrian, Turkomen, Kurdish, and other groups. Would you find it acceptable for the U.S. and Canada , for example, to add statements in their constitutions that they are "Anglo-Saxon" nations, or to join a "Caucasian League," or to deny the immigration and citizenship of those who are not seen as 'Anglo-Saxons?"
Searcher, why is it that Arabs who stayed in Israel after the '48 war are referred to as Israeli Arabs, but Arabs living in Judea and Summara and Gaza are referred to as "Palestinians." Why is it that the people living in these same regions, prior to 1967, were referred to, and referred to themselves, as Jordanians, and Egyptians, respectively?

Well, it is quite simple. The Arab label is a political and nationalistis remnant. The Arab nation is one of culture and similarites, not ethnic similarity and has its root in the cultural arabization and islamification of the region, similar to the spread of hellenism. It is widely contested however. Many Egyptians contest it and especially many Lebanese Christians.But most Lebanese call themselves Arab and still point to their Phoenician ancestors with pride. There is no contradiction as long as you dont take the word Arab literal. These people all have a diverse history.

The Arab label has created a lot of diffculties, especially in countries with strong Nationalistic govermenents and also ties to Arabia, like Iraq, where it has led to discrimination against Assyrian and Kurds. All Israeli Arabs think of themselves as
Palestinians.

Searcher, I don't stand in the way of peace. I am not the one setting of suicide bombs in Pizza shops. In reality, my opinion does not really effect the conflict. And for that matter, their violence really doesn't effect me. When a Palestinian father of 12 young children decides selfishly to 'Shahid' himself, leaving his wife and children to fend for themselves, it doesn't hurt me at all. The difference is, that unlike most people in the west, I understand this fact. Why should my tax dollars go to aid the "Palestinian" people? What have the 'Palestinian' people ever done for me or my country? Why should I care about the lives of their children when they don't even care themselves? Personally, I couldn't care less if they ever have peace. If they can eventually love their children more than they hate the Israelis, and finally find peace, that will be great, and I will be happy for them. But its not something for which I am responsible.
On the other hand, as an American, I see military aid to Israel as a great investment. This aid helps protect the only stable democracy in the entire region, and helps to contain the spread of Islamic imperialism, and the Sharia hell that can be witnessed in Gaza. Israel is currently on the front lines of the attacks of the Imperialists, and if that line were to collapse, the fighting would most certainly shift to Europe (if it doesn't anyway.)

Judging from her name, Shireen Atiyeh could be a Christian. There are both Christians and Muslims named Atiyeh.

I thought that before Israel was a nation, when it was called Palestine - that the Jews living there were also refered to as Palestinians. Isn't this historically correct?

I read somewhere that today's 'palestinians' are ethnically the same as Jordanians?

By the way, do the 'palestinians' have a separate culture from Jordanians (language, religion, etc.)? Aren't they just arabs?

Also, WHO are the 'arabs' that are Israeli citizens? How did this happen? If they are the same (ethnically) as today's palestinians, then how did they end up Israeli citizens whilst the 'palestinians' ended up in Gaza?

History lesson anyone?

BTW, I know the answers, but I think they should be posted here for those who do not.

Here is a little history Searcher.

Palestinians? There never was a Palestinian people, nation, language, culture, or religion. The claim of descent from a Palestinian people who lived for thousands of years in a land called Palestine is a hoax! That land was Canaan, inhabited by Canaanites, whom God destroyed because of their wickedness. Canaan became the land of Israel given by God to His people.

Those who today call themselves Palestinians are Arabs by birth, language, and culture, and are close relatives to Arabs in surrounding countries from whence most of them came, attracted by Israel's prosperity. The name Palestine comes from the Philistines, who were not Semites, but invaded Canaan from Crete and parts of Asia Minor. Yet Arafat, an Arab, claims that ancestry.

In A.D. 130, the Romans rebuilt Jerusalem as a pagan city with a temple to Jupiter where the Jewish temple had stood. Provoked to rebellion, about 500,000 Jews were killed and thousands sold into slavery. The Romans angrily renamed Israel "Syria Palaestina." Jews living there became known as Palestinians. During World War II, the British Army had a Palestinian Brigade made up entirely of Jewish volunteers. The Palestinian Symphony Orchestra was all Jewish, and The Palestine Post was a Jewish newspaper.

In 1948, Arabs who had fled from Israel (attacking Arab nations had broadcast, "All Arabs get out!") began to claim they were the true Palestinians and that the land of Israel had always belonged to them. World media eagerly promotes that lie. Yet in 1948, Arabs owned a mere 3 percent of so-called Palestine.

Israel's claim to the land goes back 4,000 years to Abraham's purchase of the cave of Machpelah in Hebron. There Sarah, Abraham, Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob and Leah are buried. In Hebron David was crowned king. This sacred Jewish site has no relationship to Arabs or Muslims. Yet Muslims claim Hebron as their own, built a mosque to keep Jews and Christians from visiting the cave, and are determined to drive out every Jewish resident.

For 3,000 years Jerusalem was the capital of Israel. Temple Mount on the summit of Mount Moriah is the heart of Jerusalem. This 35-acre parcel arouses such explosive passions that it could trigger World War III at any time. This is where Abraham built an altar to offer his son Isaac to God. That spot was purchased by King David from Ornan the Jebusite to build there an altar to God. There Solomon built the first temple. In its place now sits the Dome of the Rock, a monument to Islam's unbiblical and irrational claim that Abraham offered, not Isaac, but Ishmael.

Perpetuating a Muslim lie, Ikrema Sabri, mufti of Jerusalem, declared again early this August that the Temple Mount is Islamic and "not subject to negotiations." Given its 3,000-year Jewish history and importance to Christians, on what basis should Muslims control this site? That Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran exposes the lie of Islam's claim to any part of Jerusalem as a holy site.

In the real world of academia you would be ridiculed.
Posted by: Searcher
talk about a contradiction in terms!

" tens of millions look at us as worthless gangsters..."
.................

No no no..that is just not so. Many more than that look at you as worthless gangsters not deserving of a state.

"I thought that before Israel was a nation, when it was called Palestine - that the Jews living there were also refered to as Palestinians. Isn't this historically correct"
From The Goobs above.

Absolutely! If you check the 1911 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica it defines "Palestinian" as a "Jew, Christian, or Samaritan native to the Holy Land" and goes on to say that there are also "Druze and Moslem communities present in Palestine" but they refer to themselves as "Arabs or Turks".

This is also clear if you read the text of the Balfour Declaration which refers to guaranteeing the "rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine" upon the establishment of a Jewish state. Notice that "communities" is plural, meaning the various indigenous Christian Palestinian groups such Melkites, Orthodox, Catholics etc.

In other words, only the Christians, Jews, and Samaritans have a right to be called Palestinian. The Muslims are not real Palestinians but simply Arab invaders. Until Israel and the West realize that and start funding the real Palestinians instead the Muslims, we'll never have security. Israel should expel the Muslim invaders and establish a Christian Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Nazareth. This Christian majority Palestinian state will be in federation with Israel with the Jordan River as a more secure and defendable border.

"We are telling the world that we don't deserve a state....Tens of millions of people now look at us as worthless gangsters with no values," he complained...."
(from above)

That's right! You don't deserve a state and you never did! But you can raise our opinions of you all if you all, right now, line up single file and march straight into the Mediterranean Sea.

Hey A.I. Steamroller

So why does the ANTI-SEMITIC world (much of Europe) INSIST on giving Israel to the arabs?

Oh yeah, that's right. They always did hate the Jews, because their religious leaders taught that the Jews were Jesus killers. Even though the scriptures clearly tell us that Jesus CAME to die. He GAVE his life. No one took it from Him.

Also, Israel does not have oil and even if it did, the world would probably try to take it off them.

Goobs,

I'm much more cynical than that. Israel is nothing but a second Czechoslavakia to the European elites. The fools think if they sacrifice it the same way the Arabs will accept their appeasement and leave them in peace. The whole thing smacks of cowardice and the dullards could not be more wrong.

In other words, only the Christians, Jews, and Samaritans have a right to be called Palestinian. The Muslims are not real Palestinians but simply Arab invaders.

You have to be kidding! Tell me, is it really an American trait to be an ignorant,self satisfied,triggerhappy slob or are just doing your best to cement the stereotype? Muslims in Palestine are Arab Invaders? Thats almost verging on borderline stupidity, dividing religious groups into ethnic enclaves. I will tell you something else. The Palestinians, you so detest, have real roots in a real country and they dont need MTV and Mickey Mouse to substitute for a culture. They dont need your royal fakeness to give them a liscense to live. The world has seen enough of fascists trying to play with the lives of other people. They dont need a member of a fake culture,from a fake country, with a fake history and a fake selfconfidence, having to do everything to with power but nothing to do with real culture,to tell them who they are. The Indian culture is thousandths of years old and has survived, the chinese culture is thousandths of years old and has survived,the Middle Eastern culture and Islam will survive and in fifty years, when MTV; Hollywood and Mac Donalds are long gone,you will be no more. And trust me, noone will be a pompous, vain, colonial monkey like you.

historians? It just keeps on getting better. That is
Mark Twain you fool, a humorist and writer. Another famous quote by Zionist pioneer Ahad Ha'Am.

We abroad are used to believe the Eretz Yisrael is now almost totally desolate, a desert that is not sowed ..... But in truth that is not the case. Throughout the country it is difficult to find fields that are not sowed. Only sand dunes and stony mountains .... are not cultivated."

The Palestinians, you so detest, have real roots in a real country and they dont need MTV and Mickey Mouse to substitute for a culture.
Posted by: Searcher at February 5, 2007 03:18 PM

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA! That's funny! The only culture the Palestians have is how to blow themselves up! That, and how to wear a Holiday Inn towel on their head!

Another quote by the great man.

"[The Jewish settlers] treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, trespass unjustly, beat them shamelessly for no sufficient reason, and even take pride in doing so. The Jews were slaves in the land of their Exile, and suddenly they found themselves with unlimited freedom, wild freedom that ONLY exists in a land like Turkey. This sudden change has produced in their hearts an inclination towards repressive tyranny, as always happens when slave rules." 'Ahad Ha'Am warned: "We are used to thinking of the Arabs as primitive men of the desert, as a donkey-like nation that neither sees nor understands what is going around it. But this is a GREAT ERROR. The Arab, like all sons of Sham, has sharp and crafty mind . . . Should time come when life of our people in Palestine imposes to a smaller or greater extent on the natives, they WILL NOT easily step aside."

HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA!HA! That's funny! The only culture the Palestians have is how to blow themselves up! That, and how to wear a Holiday Inn towel on their head!

It is sentences like these that make people think of
Americans as possibly the dumbest nation on earth. Trust me, as much as you like to believe otherwise, people in Europe and everywhere look down on you. Among the industrialized nations you are the lowest of the low. What is there to look up to anyway? George W.Bush,Brittney Spears and Halliburton? A nation, where a large portion doesnt know the capital of their own country and then lobby for throwing bombs overseas?

A nation build on genocide by half crazed fanatics and illiterate settlers,the scum of Europe,and perscribing morals to other nations, when they themselves have none?

Ah the true Seacher comes out, it didn't take long. It usually doesn't, but what do I know i'm just a stupid American. How dare I question the academics and the politicians who all "know" everything about the Palestinians. How dare I question their "ancient" culture and look at disgust at mothers who dress their children up as suicide bombers. I've watched Mickey Mouse cartoons as a kid, therefore I can't question their claims to the country.

So we should all listen to Searcher? Quiet you children of the "scum of Europe" and listen to the wisdom of your "betters."

Why arent you disgusted when Provoslavni calls for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Palestine, on the ridiculous ground that they are Muslim Arab invaders? Why arent you disgusted when Israelis force Palestiniands into a life of misery with their occupation or when they drop bombs on residential quaters, knowing civillians, women and children will die, when Israeli children sign rockets that are meant to mean kill Lebanese children?Dont come with that sceptical moralistic attitude. You are neither sceptical nor moral.

What am I saying is basically this, not that America has no achievements, but that people who come from a dubious culture themselves should not decide the fate of another people,saying these people have no right to exist. Dont throw with rocks when your own house is made of glass.

Searcher, its obvious you have nothing, because you make straw man arguments. No one said that Arab Muslims cannot live in "Palestine." If you look at a map, you will see that Jordan constitutes the majority of what was called 'Palestine' under British, Turkish, and previous control. What we are saying is that Muslims have no right to create another Muslim state (they already have 50, more than 20 of which are 'Arab' states) at the expense of the only Jewish one. If Muslim Arabs do not want to live in a Jewish state, they are free to go to any one of the wonderful muslim states already in existence. My solution to the problem would be to give back the non-Jewish portions of the west bank as well as Gaza to Jordan and Egypt respectively. The problem is that they don't even want them any more because they are shitholes and are full of 'Palestinians,' and we all know how well 'Palestinian' refugees have been treated by their fellow Arab neighbors, don't we?

Where did Provoslani call for "ethnic cleansing"? Since when is Islam an ethnicity? How can the "occupation" (didn't the Israelis pull out of Gaza?) make Palestinians miserable. Is it the Israeli's fault that when they left the Palestinians looted and destroyed valuable things like the greenhouses, making themselves poorer? Are the Israeli's responsible for the misery "honor killings" and beatings that are inflicted on Palestinian women and girls? How are Israelis responsible when "civilians, women and children" become willing human shields after being told all their lives they'll be happy martyrs in heaven? Or when when misery is caused by the current Hamas/ Fatah feud?

Look you've been on this site long enough to realize this is an anti-Islamic site. Where not sitting around discussing whether Islam really is a "religion of peace" we're far beyond that. This is a blog where Muslim atrocities, based very specifically on their holy texts are presented to us the bloggers for review and discussion, and you seem outraged that we basically don't take their side in the whole Holy Land dispute. Especially in a post whose TITLE is derived from a Palestinian quote expressing self-disgust about the gratuitous amount of violence they commit!

What’s with the whole culture thing? Because I live in a country with Brittney Spears I can’t look questioningly at people who scream “Death to Jews” on a regular basis? I’ll be the first to comment on trashy American pop culture can be, but if I suicide bombed a pizzeria full of Israelis my friends and family are not going to dance and sing at my funeral, calling me a martyr.

Searcher,
I find it funny that you are accusing me of calling for the "ethnic cleansing" of Palestinians, when I'm usually taken to task on this site for my very strident criticisms of Israeli policy.

However, in response to my statement that "only the Christians, Jews, and Samaritans have a right to be called Palestinian. The Muslims are not real Palestinians but simply Arab invaders"

...you wrote, "You have to be kidding! Tell me, is it really an American trait to be an ignorant,self satisfied,triggerhappy slob or are just doing your best to cement the stereotype? Muslims in Palestine are Arab Invaders? Thats almost verging on borderline stupidity, dividing religious groups into ethnic enclaves. I will tell you something else. The Palestinians, you so detest, have real roots in a real country"...

Why do you assume I'm American? Although I'm in the US, I actually live and worship with Palestinians (REAL ONES) and could rightfully be called a Palestinian nationalist.

These are the facts: A mere on generation ago, Bethlehem and Ramallah were completely Christian cities and Nazareth was 75% Christian. In the 1930s the combined populations of Jews and Christians outnumbered Muslims even in Jericho.

So how did the term "Palestinian" get co-opted by Muslims? Because on Hitler's advice, the Grand Mufti of Al Quds, Haj Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, determined that nationalism would have a better chance of gaining him support in the League of Nations than his longstanding advocacy of jihad. Incidently, his family had moved to Jerusalem from the Hijaz under Turkish sponsorship.

So are the Muslims non-Palestinian invaders? Of course not all of them but the overwhelming majority. In the late Ottoman period, Muslim Arabs (from Transjordan, Arabia etc.) began to move to Palestine to work for the better educated and more prosperous Christians. This is especially true of Ramallah, where the Muslim day-laborers worked while living nearby in Al-Bireh. This pattern accelerated during the British Mandate and under the Hashemites.

So yes the majority of Muslims have no historic roots in the land while indigenous Christians and many Jews can trace their roots back to ancient times. Incidently, this massive influx of Muslims combined with Islamic rule also forced these indigenous Christians to adopt Arabic. Until just a few hundred years ago, Palestinian Christians spoke Aramaic. Some maintained it as a home language until our grandparent's time.

As for ethnic cleansing? What do you call what the Muslims did to the Christians of Ramallah or are doing to the Palestinian Christians in Bethlehem or Nazareth? It meets every definition of cultural genocide and ethnic cleansing. But I suppose you don't think an ancient community like the Palestinian Christians have a right to survive!

So are the Muslims non-Palestinian invaders? Of course not all of them but the overwhelming majority. In the late Ottoman period, Muslim Arabs (from Transjordan, Arabia etc.) began to move to Palestine to work for the better educated and more prosperous Christians. This is especially true of Ramallah, where the Muslim day-laborers worked while living nearby in Al-Bireh. This pattern accelerated during the British Mandate and under the Hashemites.

Absolute nonsense. That is typical Zionist drivel, made immortal by 1984 book called from time immemorial. It has been refuted and not a single scholar would dare could quote it. As a matter of fact Israeli academia actually refer to it as "the academic equivalent of dried cow dung". See Myth and Reality of the Israel Palestine conflict by Norman Finkelstein. You even misquote her ideas, which state that Muslims came to work for Jews and not Christians.The christians were better educated but the majority were still farmers.Case of a bad copycat. The massive Arab immigration never took place, neither during the Arab rule, nor the Ottoman and not with the British. Because if it die we also have to say same for Egypt,Lebanon and Syria.From 1892 to 1948 the Palestinian population grew fout times, but that was because of the better health standards introduced by the British. You completely misquote what serious historians and what is today believed on the process of Arabization. It had little to with immigration and everything to do with a changing cultural landscape, that is the replacing of Aramaic by Arabic.It was similar to Hellenism and also to the process of Aramaic becoming the lingua france in the Middle East and replacing Hebrew in Palestine.This cultural process has happened before. The massive immigration that supposedly took place never happened, millions of Bedouins must have been available to replace the people of North Africa and the Levant. Its ridiculous. The Palestinians are not Arabs and this has been proven genetically. They are a typical Meditarenean population, even their dialect has many loan words from Aramaic. I challenge yout to quote one serious Historian, one Historian, who claims that the native population of the Levant was replaced by Arabs and that the Arabization was mainly a process of immigration. The fact that you cite discredited figures and ideas is illuminating. Why on earth is it so unconvenient that the Palestinian Muslim are inidgenous, same as the Egyptians to Egypt and the Lebanese to Lebanon? What makes you so squirm?

Just an example of the definiton of Arabization from Wikipedia

Arabization is the gradual transformation of an area into one that speaks Arabic and is part of the Arab culture. It can also mean the replacement or displacement of a native population with Arabs, although this rarely happened in ancient times, as there weren't nearly sufficient numbers of original Arabs to replace or displace existing populations.

Arabization in history

There were significant pre-Islamic Arab migrations out of the Arabian Peninsula (see: Ghassanids, Nabataeans); however, full Arabization of the Middle East took place after the coming of Islam. It should be noted that the Arabs were not the first Semitic peoples who migrated out of the peninsula (see: Aramaeans, Canaanites, Akkadians). After the rise of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula, Arab culture and language spread through trade with African states, conquest, and intermarriage of the local population with the Arabs.

Countries and territories that are traditionally thought to have gone through Arabization include Spain and Portugal (until 1492), Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Palestine (region) and the Sudan. Also, though Yemen is traditionally held to be the homeland of Arabs, most[1] of the population did not speak Arabic (but instead South Semitic languages) prior to the spread of Islam. The peninsular Arabic language became common among these areas; dialects also formed. Today, an Arab from the Levant finds the Arabic of a North African almost incomprehensible. Modern Standard Arabic functions as something of a dachsprache, allowing speakers of disparate dialects to communicate.

The influence of Arabic has also been profound in many other countries whose cultures have been influenced by Islam. Arabic is a major source of vocabulary for languages as diverse as Spanish, Berber, Kurdish, Persian, Swahili, Urdu, spoken Hindi, Turkish, Malay, and Indonesian, as well as other languages in countries where these languages are spoken. For example the Arabic word for book /kita:b/ is used in all the languages listed, apart from Malay and Indonesian (where it specifically means "religious book")and Spanish (which uses the Latin-derived "libro").

So how did the term "Palestinian" get co-opted by Muslims? Because on Hitler's advice, the Grand Mufti of Al Quds, Haj Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, determined that nationalism would have a better chance of gaining him support in the League of Nations than his longstanding advocacy of jihad. Incidently, his family had moved to Jerusalem from the Hijaz under Turkish sponsorship.

Do you listen to yourself? Now the term Palestinian is an idea of Hitler and not a product of Arab nationalism, at the beginning of the 20ths century. That is how bullshit comes to smear the pages of history books. It is sad.

I study Islamic History in University and I read standard books on Islamic history and I assure you that the process of Arabic becoming a language was a cultural process, which in some countries like Egypt took hundreths of years. You claim that many Christians still spoke Aramaic a few hundreth years ago, any proove and if they did, what exactly would that show? Some Muslims in Syria still speak Aramaic.Your support for Israel doesnt fall with the argument of whether Palestinians are genuine Arabs or not. Why is it so important, except as a tool to discredit any Muslims connection to the land? It smells like a bad case of demagogy.

"A nation build on genocide by half crazed fanatics and illiterate settlers,the scum of Europe..."

Oh boy.
Speaking of literacy.... the past participle of "build" is "built," so your phrase should have been "nation built on genocide..."

"half crazed" should have been "half-crazed."

Besides that and since you think so highly of academia, any academic historian worth his tenure and dignity would hold you up for ridicule for the notion of "illiterate settlers."

Puritans, the first settlers of America, and other Protestant communities, in early America and in Europe, are distinctive, among other things, precisely for their belief in education, at least in minimal literacy for every child, as opposed to Catholicism. Protestants thought every single individual should be able to read the Bible, since they believed the way to salvation.
Literacy is one of the cornerstones of Reformation. It's a truly revolutionary development off which the rest of the modern world feeds, up to this day, including the Palestinians.

Please read:
"since they believed that was the way to salvation."

I hope to god that no genuine Palestinian Christian
prays with you. You are a disgrace to their cause.
The Israeli snipers and bulldozers make no difference between Palestinian Christians and Muslims. I do remember one Palestinian Lady telling
us how Israeli soldiers used to way infront of the
girl school in Jerusalem, to hit them between their legs with their rifle butts when they came out.
Criticism?Come on, get serious. You are just as much an Enemy to the Christians of Betlehem as you are to the Muslims. We dont need your fake compassion.Thank you very much.

I never said that I meant Puritans with the settlers, rather the people who took part in
the gold rush. Although the Puritans were a bunch
of hypocritical loons.

Searcher,
Re: "That is typical Zionist drivel, made immortal by 1984 book called from time immemorial. It has been refuted and not a single scholar would dare could quote it. As a matter of fact Israeli academia actually refer to it as "the academic equivalent of dried cow dung". See Myth and Reality of the Israel Palestine conflict by Norman Finkelstein. You even misquote her ideas, which state that Muslims came to work for Jews and not Christians."

First, I've never read the book you mention. My source are family members from Ramallah. The older ones remember the Muslims working in the family owned groves or small businesses. As for Aramaic, there are still some elderly Christian who speak it.

You wrote: "Do you listen to yourself? Now the term Palestinian is an idea of Hitler and not a product of Arab nationalism, at the beginning of the 20ths century. That is how bullshit comes to smear the pages of history books. It is sad"

Do you read? I didn't say the term "Palestinian" was Hitler's idea. I said the Grand Mufti adopted it on Hitler's advice. Before that, "Palestinian" was used by Christians, and some Jews, to describe themselves (and to st themselves apart from their Muslim overlords. Haj Amin and his fellow Muslims simply called themselves Arabs.

And you wrote: "You claim that many Christians still spoke Aramaic a few hundreth years ago, any proove and if they did, what exactly would that show? Some Muslims in Syria still speak Aramaic"

DEAD WRONG! The villiages in Syria that still speak Aramaic are exclusively Christian, being Melkite or Syrian Orthodox. Aramaic (aka Syriac) is also the language of the Assyrians who are also a Christian people.

As for the fact that some of the Muslims have the same ancestral bloodlines as Christians, actually reinforces my position. Those that gave up Christianity or Judaism to adopt Islam abandoned their specific nationality to become part of the Ummah. Therefore they no longer have the right to be considered Palestinians.

Searcher:

Read what you wrote again, carefully and to the best of your ability:

"I never said that I meant Puritans with the settlers, rather the people who took part in
the gold rush. Although the Puritans were a bunch
of hypocritical loons."

Parse every word and the entire sentence. Read again. You say you didn't mean the Puritans when you made the judgment about the settlers yet you think the "Puritans were a bunch of hypocritical loons."
You seem to be claiming that what you meant is about the "people who took part in the gold rush."

Unbelievable.

Hello Searcher, I never post before and sorry my Eglish not too good. I think your heart is for Palestinians but I agree for Povoslavni about Christians in Palestine. My family is from Ramallah and before it was total Christian. My Grandmother say there no such thing as Muslim from Ramallah. They come from Jordan but take over from Christian. They no real from Palestine. It true the Jews not good for Christian. They discrimate against all same and act like all us just Arab but dont see difference between Christian and Muslim. But difference very real. Muslim not have moral like Christian and Jew. When I see Israel soldier I get nervous but when I see Muslim I scare for my life. I Christian and no wear hijab so Muslim think ok to rape Christian girl. Jews may not like us but they no rape our girls. Under Jews, it not good for Christian but still very better than under Muslim. We Christian can live with Jews but impossible to live with Muslim. Thats why my family leave and come to America. In Palestine no Christian talk free for fear the Muslim. Since Hamas no even worse. Povoslavni is right. Us Christian need our own homeland in West Bank. Muslim should go back to Jordan.

Ingratitude is an inherent trait of all muslims. A kuwaiti (editor of a newspaper) laments that palestinians are fighting among themselves and exhorts them with no mincing of words to not forget that Israel is the (sic) "enemy". The "custodian" of whatever in Saudi is also "working" on them to this effect.

Powell's "you break it and then take it" makes a lot of sense. Indisputably.

Palestinian_Student l find it ironic how these "Christian can live better among Jews, and still hate them so much. It seems that too many Christian arabs have sided with the muslim arabs, and now it has come home to roost. my brother has a friend who is Lebanese Christian, his hatred for muslims is from living among them, but then he also blames the Jews for all the problems. Just look at it logicaly
the muslims want to both control and destroy Jews and Christians, perhaps if these "Christian Arabs" would side more with Israelis you would have your homeland. You as a "Christian" have to see how you have more in common with the Jewish religion, and have shared Old Testament, Ten Commandments etc.
That is why even Mohaummud could see that both Jews and Christians are more alike and could not be trusted to be friends, that is why in the koran he
commands all muslims not to have anything to do with Jews and Christians and seek out their death or conversion. You as a "Christian" would be more powerful and successful if you would get rid of this irrational hatred towards Jews, and combine forces. until then it would be difficult for Israeli to trust you. The reason why Israeli soldier do not rape your women as they are civilized and have rule of law, and they follow a more humane religion. the muslim behaviour reflects their koran, and that is why any country run by them are in shambles, sharia robs people of their morality. and that is what you see in the Gaza, pure islam at its best, killing machines.

The villages in Syria that still speak Aramaic are exclusively Christian, being Melkite or Syrian Orthodox. Aramaic (aka Syriac) is also the language of the Assyrians who are also a Christian people.

No, you are wrong. There are three villages in Syria whose inhabitants are the remaining people
in the world who speak the type of Aramaic that
Jesus spoke,West-Aramaic. The Christian village is famously Malula, the other two are Muslim,
Bax'a und Jubb'adin respectively. Their dialect, if different from Malula is actually even closer to the actual dialect of Jesus. Palestinians actually have a unique dialect, where they pronounce the qaaf as k, which is a remnant of Aramaic. The Palestinian Bedouin on the other hand pronounce qaaf as gaaf, which is a typical Arab Bedouin pronounciation. So keep on making your strange pronouncements on the origin of Palestinian Muslims. The historical, lingustic and genetic facts tell a whole different story.

you as a "Christian" would be more powerful and successful if you would get rid of this irrational hatred towards Jews, and combine forces. until then it would be difficult for Israeli to trust you

Oh right, and Israelis would make them into citizens
and even offer them their home, instead of bulldozing it like they do now. Go on living in your fantasy world of good and evil. To the Israeli Zionist Jews, they are all just Arabs.

Searcher says " To the Israeli Zionist Jews, they are all just Arabs."
When Christians take the side of the Jews, and stand up to these islamist, the Jews will trust them and take them in, such as should of happened in Bethleham. See how much destruction the arabs have done to this most holy Christian Holy site, it would be different under Jewish control. and Searcher you are living in the fantasy world, you think these arab palis want any type of freedom and their own seperate country? they want to the total destruction of Israel and kill every Jew and Christian that stands in their way. The Israeli have been very very restrainted with a people who want to kill them. Searcher you put the shoe on the other foot, see how restraint arabs would be, so far with their new guns they love to kill even their own. a sick society perpeturated by their koran. it must go in a civilized world.

Ingratitude is an inherent trait of all muslims.

Ofcourse, lets return to the much beloved European notion of civilized world contra savage world

Add this to a long list

Asians are inherently deceitful

Black are inherently lusty(and lazy)

Jews are inherently treacherous(and greedy)

and on and on

Dont you people sometimes realize that you insult your own god given intelligence by making such ridiculous statements? How many of you actually talked to a Muslim in person,or been to a mosque or actually read the Koran?

I am actually one of those(partially) Arab Palis and yes I know Palestinians want to live in peace and yes when people come to occupy their land and the land of their ancestors, they will fight for their dignity. Resistance is not always pretty. The Native Americans were pretty savage in their resistance, but it was resistance and dont act as if you carry kid gloves in your wars. 3 million dead Viatnamese and Guantanamo speak a clear language. How does it look to Muslims when they know that the 400 people in Guantanamo dont have the most elementary human rights, without being found guilty of anything? Is that so difficult to comprehend?Arab know very well
that human rights dont really scratch you. As Mark Twain said: There are many humorus things in the world,among them white mans notion that he is somehow less savage then the other savages.

I find it quite hypocritical that Searcher harps on the west for colonization and alleged genocide of the past, when muslims conquered, exterminated, and colonized all over north Africa and the middle east, and as far away as Europe and India. You like to talk about the "Red Indians?" At least they still exist. What ever happened to the Amazighs and Berbers, and a plethora of other groups? Muslims carried out the most horrific genocide of all time, killing between 60 and 70 million indigenous Hindus in the Indian sub-continent.

What happened to the Berbers?The Algerians,Tunisians and Morrocans are the arabized descendants of the Berbers. There was no extermination.Start getting the idea out of your head that people who call themselves Arab today are not the indigenous population. People change identities in history.It is a constant process.
Otherwise you will keep on searching for massacres which never took place. Second, stop calling the European genocide alledged.Its not alleged.
150 million dead Indios in South America,17 million dead Natives in North America and a whole continent forced to convert to the loving God of Christianity are not alledged, 11 million Congolese killed at the hand of King Leopold of Beligum and one million dead Algerians at the hand of oh so enlightened french, including 300 000 Lybians dying miserably in Italian concentration camps are not alleged. Can you cite me believable sources for the 70 million figure dead hindus, because number seems a little strange considering that Muslims are still a minority in India and that Hiduism has never stopped being the official religion, compared to South America where the Indios have been reduced to a minority by the Spanish and Portugese invaders.Compared to European crimes, Islamic brutality in history is marginal.

Searcher,
While it's true that Bakh'a and Jubb'adin are now Muslims, there is a historical reason for this. Until the 1880s they were also Christian but the Ottomans massacred over 2/3 of their populations during the genocide against the Assyrians and Armenians. The remainder survived by "adopting" Islam.

In fact the "Islam" of these two villiages is definitely not orthodox Sunni. They still celebrate the Virgin Mary and, like the Alevis of Turkey, appear to have much Christian syncronism remaining in their practices.

Until the 1880s they were also Christian but the Ottomans massacred over 2/3 of their populations during the genocide against the Assyrians and Armenians. The remainder survived by "adopting" Islam.

I think you have got something wrong.It is true, that especially in the last years of the Ottoman Empire, the persecution of minorities was very brutal, especially against the Armenians. But these three are small villages in Syria and I dont think that they had any real contact with Ottoman officials. Second,I believe you mistook Armenians with Arameans. The people in Malula,Bakh'a and Jubb'adin are not Armenians but Arameans.

I believe you came up with the massacre of Bakh'a and Jubb'adin yourself because you considered the persecution of Assyrians in Iraq. It is much more likely that they kept their Aramaic intact for centuries, because the villages were safe enclaves from the outside world. Otherwise had they been forcibly converted to Islam, isnt it much more likely that Malula would also be Muslim, since villages are practically next to each other and that
would be speaking arabic?

they would be speaking arabic?

Searcher, 17 million dead in North America? 150 Million dead in central and South America? There were only a total of several million inhabitants in North and South America combined at the arrival of the Conquistadors. Everyone knows that atrocities were carried out by some Europeans. But that is the difference between the West and you. Westerners are capable of admitting and learning from their past sins. Furthermore, it is also known that the main cause for the population decrease in the indiginous inhabitants of the Americas was the fact that they had absolutely no resistance to infectious diseases from the old world. Another distinction between the crimes that were carried out in the New World and those that were carried out by Islamic Imperialists, that you would like to go unnoticed, is the fact that most of the crimes in the new world were carried by some individuals with individual agendas, for selfish purposes. On the other hand, the conquest, colonization, and genocide carried out by muslims was done so collectively under the authority of the supreme islamic dictator, the caliph, and furthermore is praised and celebrated to this very day, whereas the West repudiates much of the behavior of the conquistadors and others which resulted in the death and displacement of the indigenous population. But of course, we could always use your logic regarding the Berbers and Amazighs and say, oh, the red indians were never killed or displaced, they just became Anglo-Americans. 'People change identities in history.It is a constant process.'

"But these three are small villages in Syria and I dont think that they had any real contact with Ottoman officials. Second,I believe you mistook Armenians with Arameans. The people in Malula,Bakh'a and Jubb'adin are not Armenians but Arameans."

No mistake. The whole Levant was under Ottoman rule and the Ottomans were targeting all the Christian minorities: Armenians, Greeks, and Assyrians. The people of these villiages would have been considered Assyrians.

While the Armenians, and to a lesser extent the Greeks, have publicized the genocides they suffered, very few know about the similtaneous genocide of the Assyrians. Under the Ottomans, there were even massacres of Maronite villiages in Lebanon.

"Otherwise had they been forcibly converted to Islam, isnt it much more likely that Malula would also be Muslim, since villages are practically next to each other and that
would be speaking arabic?"

That they are right next to each other is the reason. Malula is also home to several Christian holy sites, including the fourth-century St. Sergius' Church, so it makes sense that the Christian survivors from the other two villages would also congregate there.

17 million dead in North America and 150 million dead in South America. The numbers of Natives in North America was much less because they never had the advanced cities, cultures and infracture then the civilizations in the South. The Natives of North America were actually quite nomadic. The genocide is very true,but it happened over 300 to 400 years and was a process of gradual genocide,with forced conversions,disease and the deliberate destruction of their culture.

"On the other hand, the conquest, colonization, and genocide carried out by muslims was done so collectively under the authority of the supreme islamic dictator, the caliph, and furthermore is praised and celebrated to this very day, whereas the West repudiates much of the behavior of the conquistadors and others which resulted in the death and displacement of the indigenous population"

Boy, you seem to know little about Islamic history. You speak as if there was one Caliphate
on which all Muslims agreed, making it look like an islamic church.First, the calpihate never had the divine function of the church, it was always a goverment, sometimes good, most of the time bad, second there was rarely in Islamic history only one Caliphate. The Islamic history is a fine example of disunity and the Caliphate proved to be nothing but an obsolete system for an absolute monarch.The closest Muslims ever came to unity was the Ottoman Empire. Second, everyone knows the terrible role the church played in the genocide
of the native population, sanctioning every single killing of heathen, a symbol of corruption and greed. When I say North Africans today are the descendants of Berbers, then I say that because the acculturation of nonarabs was completely different then the case of South America, yes it was often violent, there was Arab immigration ofcourse, yes there was and is discrimination of real arabs and those who became arabs against Berbers. But the whole process was similar to what happened to almost every country in the Middle East, with the adoption of Islam by the majority, came the adoption of Arabic. It is just a language and religion. Historically one can say that the people who call themselves Arabs are accultured Berbers.

Malula is also home to several Christian holy sites, including the fourth-century St. Sergius' Church, so it makes sense that the Christian survivors from the other two villages would also congregate there.

But Assyrians are not Arameans. Assyrians are mainly located in Iraq, with also people living in Turkey
and Syria. Assyrians speak a different kind of Aramaic, Neo-Aramaic and have a different culture then Arameans. The Arameans are Syrians and their Aramaic is refered to as Syriac. But since there is no record or trace or evidence of a massacre in Malula and the neighbouring villages, is is just speculation. Much more likely is that these peoples language just remained intact and that is a good thing.

"17 million dead in North America? 150 Million dead in central and South America?"

There is a clear distinction between English and US Policy in North America and Spanish policy in central and South America. The Protestant English tried to exterminate all Indians. The Spanish never did. Millions died of diseases brought by Europeans but, unlike the Protestants, the Catholics were forbidden to kill off Indians. Of course many Spaniards ignored the teachings of the Church but at least Latin America had great fighters for the Indians like Bl. Bartolomeo de las Casas. To this day, the majority of people in Mexico, central and South America are of Indian or Mestizo ancestry.

"But Assyrians are not Arameans. Assyrians are mainly located in Iraq, with also people living in Turkey"

The Ottomans made no such distinctions.

The Spanish did not try to exterminate the Indios? What happened to the Incas, to Tenochtitlan and the Aztek Empire? As I just said the Indios were in 400 years reduced about 150 million people, the native religion almost wiped out completely. That is one hell of a lot for not wanting to exterminate.

The catholic church and the Spanish monarchy was very active in the enslavement and conversion of the native population. That is undeniable.

were very active.

"The catholic church and the Spanish monarchy was very active in the enslavement and conversion of the native population. That is undeniable."

Actually, the Popes condemned and forbad slavery repeatedly from the 14th Century onward. Slavery had been eliminated in Christendom starting with Constantine until its complete abolition under Theodosius. However countless thousands of Europeans were enslaved by Muslim raiders.

Under the influence of Islamic trading partners, Portugal and Spain "accepted" the slavery of Blacks in thier African outposts in the late 1300s. Over the objection of the Church, this evil institution spread throughout the colonies. Early Protestantism had no objection to slavery at all.

As for conversions, the overwhelming majority occurred under the influence of friars who protected and educated the Indians. Yes this could be considered "cultural genocide" by the politically correct but that's a red herring. The largest single conversion of Indians occurred after the Virgin Mary appeared in Aztec form as Our Lady of Guadalupe. Within 10 years, virtually the entire Azted and Mayan nations had abandoned human sacrifice and accepted Christianity. These conversions were "forced" only by their consciences and the Holy Spirit.

Racially, Latin America is still overwhelmingly Indigenous, even though it is highly Hispanicized culturally. If the Spanish intention was to exterminate, they failed miserably. Compare this to Islam, which practices slavery to this day in Darfur, South Sudan, Chechnya, etc. and is engaged in such a full-scale ethnic cleansing of Christians in Palestine by Muslim leaders so extreme that they would make the late "Rabbi" Kahane look like a Peace Now activist.

I dont know which ridiculous christian propaganda you read of a beningn churhc, here is a little demographic infro from Wikipedia

Demographics

Latin America has a very diverse population, with many ethnic groups of different ancestries, the majority of which are European, Amerindian, or African in origin, or a mix of any of these.

Only in three countries do the Amerindians make up the largest segment of the population: in Guatemala and Bolivia they represent a majority of over 50%, and in Peru they constitute a plurality of just under 50%. In the rest of the Region, most people with a Native American lineage are admixed with one or more other ethnic lineages.

S

Sorry for the typos.

Yes, I can only laugh when muslims bring up the entire slavery issue. muslims should first at least abolish slavery in their own lands before trying to use the issue to smear the west.

Searcher,
If you ever live in Latin America, you'll find that the definition of an "Indio" is much different than in English or French speaking cultures. For instance, In Guatemala the over 50% is persons who speak an indigenous language. If one were to use Anglo definitions and even just count all persons of at least 1/2 "Indian blood" then Guatemala would be over 80% Indian. Bolivia and Peru count as Indians those who speak Aymara or Quechua. In Mexico, the overwhelming majority of people are of indigenous or Mestizo origin but are not considerd Indians.

In other words, being an "Indio" in Latin America is culturally defined not racially defined. If you use this definition, 150 million Indians were eliminated because they adopted a new culture. Not because they were killed off. There is no doubt that colonialism led to genocide almost everywhere but there is a distinction of what kind of genocide (racial, ethnic, or cultural) and whether it was an intentional policy. Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity have consistently opposed genocide even if their faithful didn't always follow the teachings. This sets them clearly apart from Islam where the killing or enslavement of infidels and percieved cultural inferiors is mandated.

And don't worry about typos. In that regard, I'm the worst offender on this site.

Ingratitude is an inherent trait of all muslims.

Ofcourse, lets return to the much beloved European notion of civilized world contra savage world

Add this to a long list

Asians are inherently deceitful

Black are inherently lusty(and lazy)

Jews are inherently treacherous(and greedy)

and on and on
Searcher these are your words, and they disgust me to no end.
you want to know why l do not have anything to do with muslims, and yes l have talked to a few but when they spew out their hatred for all things Jewish, this turns me off, and l cannot stand people who blame all others but fail to look in the mirror at who to blame.
first of all l am a woman, and most arab men would not consider me an equal, l would not dare to walk into a mosque, where women are 2nd class citizens. and with mohammuds's teachings, my business l have nothing in common with any muslim. as my family work with dogs, some were used in police work, most are trained for home protection and companions. so you see my having anything to do with a muslim is totally out of the question.
and lastly Searcher you do not have to go back far in history to see how Arafat first started using the word of Palestinians in reference for arabs under Jewish control. you are totally ignoring this fact, and all your other arguments are baseless and off track.
Your hatred for all things Jewish and attacks on the West and not seeing that muslims cannot take any any blame for their miseries is quite evident in all your posts. But then how can one remain sane when you follow the koran, it drives honest people mad. leave islam and become humuan again.

Oh, I shouldn't forget to give credit to searcher for at least acknowledging some of the atrocities carried out under islamic imperialism. This is certainly more than I am used to from the typical islamist/apologist. I had (apparently) mistaken you for one of those islamist fools who thinks that bringing back the caliphate will solve all of the problems in the world.

But the fact of the matter is that there is really no use trying to argue as to which group carried out the worst atrocities, and how collectively responsible that society as a whole was, although I know what my opinion is. The fact is that I would certainly not want to live in pre-enlightenment Europe or North/South America, nor under Jewish rule 2500 years ago. I reject theocratic society, and see it as antiquated and barbaric, and I think most christians, jews and others who share the post enlightenment world view would agree. On the other hand most muslims don't seem to have that disconnect when it comes to the days of islamic imperialism and expansionism, and actually hold a sort of fond nostalgia, and desire to return to those days, and to me it is all to easy to see that distinction in places like Israel and the 'Palestinian Territories', as well as in Iraq, afghanistan, the Sudan, Southern Thailand, Southern Filipines, Chechnya, Kashmir, and the whole host of other places where muslims seem completely incapable of living in a peaceful and pluralistic and equal situation with their non-muslim neighbors.

Searcher these are your words, and they disgust me to no end.

Didnt you understand me? I am writing against racial stereotypes. Trust me, I am not an Anti-Semite. That is one thing I know for sure.I never said Muslims arent to blame for their miseries, but what good is it if I supported the occupation and theft of Palestinian land, simply by inserting clever wordplays on the definition of an Arab and tell the people to change themselves, while denying their history and denying them basic humanity on their own land? Why should Palestinians care if the God of the old testament promised Canaan to the children of Abraham? Would you accept that argument if someone wanted your house because it written in their ancient text? Despite what you say the majority of Palestinian Christians have good relations with Muslims, and the clash of civilizations is often used as a a smokescreen to cover for their commen enemy, the Israeli occupation. Before the foundation of Israel 10 percent of Palestinians were Christians, that is a lot considering a Muslim rule of 1350 years. If by your definition Muslims seeth to kill Christians, then they sure as hell missed out on the "job".

Israel and the 'Palestinian Territories', as well as in Iraq, afghanistan, the Sudan, Southern Thailand, Southern Filipines, Chechnya, Kashmir

Where do you get the idea that most Muslims want the caliphate back? If some do, and I dont doubt it, it has little do with extremism and more do for the yearning to a perfect past that never existed, same as many evangelical christians in America want the secular goverment removed or changed. Utopia is a very human desire.Most modern Muslims organizations dont want the Caliphate, but a rather a state that stresses the more social aspects of Islam.It is interesting that in all the places you mention there is more or less also severe repressions against Muslims, sometimes ofcourse by Muslims. But lets not deny the repression of Palestinians and the savagery against the Chechnian population. I never support the cowardly killing of school children. But if you look at it from the other point of view, it become less about the religion and more about how war turns humans into animals,wether they be Muslims,christian or jews.There was a story on the news of a Muslim tunisian who overhead Nazi officers wanting to rape a local Jewish woman and he saved her and several Jewish families by hiding them on his farm. He has been nominated by Yad Vashem as one among the righteous. See, not everything is black and white.

I also agree that Muslims who cause sedition in their host country, when they are not citizens and calling for the overthrow of the state or killing of civillians, should either be warned or fined immediately and if they continue their behaviour have no business in this country and should be deported. Enough said.

Provoslavni, that is an excellent point. According to some official data that I've seen states that Puerto Rico (which is where my family is from) is 85% white (which would be a higher percentage than the US at large), and that less than 1% of the population is Taíno. Anyone who has been there (or even to an east coast city with a large population of Boricuas) knows that people who could pass for 'white' europeans make up a relatively small minority of the populace and that most people at least look part Taíno.

Abu Allah, Thanks for your kind words.

Re: "But the fact of the matter is that there is really no use trying to argue as to which group carried out the worst atrocities,"

You are correct of course.

Searcher,

Back on topic. I'm accused of advocating ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Since when is Muslim an ethnic group? I oppose the ideological aspect of Islam. I have no problems with those who peacefully want to live the five pillars, as long as they reject jihad in all its forms. Denazification was NOT genocide!

So,the 300 000 Muslims killed by Serbs is by your definition not ethnic cleansing, because the Muslims were killed on part of their religion only? So when you harm someone unjustly because of his religion it is not racism or violence or injustice, simply because the dispute doesnt resolve around ethnicity? But you yourself said that Muslims, unlike Palestinian Christian and Jews, are only Arabs and should therefore be transfered. If that isnt advocating ethnic cleansing I dont know what is.I wonder what we should do with Russian Jews, who by no stretch of the imagination are indigenous. You want Muslims to rencounce violence.Fine.But why should they if you yourself dont renounce your intention of attacking their countries in preemptive strikes, supporting dictators, giving money for Israel to build settlements, deporting and torturing them in secret locations. Dont you think that is hypocricy.If you ask Muslims to renounce violence, you must also ask the American public to stop supporting their Armies in wars that are clearly illegal. Because right now it is your Army that has military bases in almost every Muslim country, not the other way around.

Searcher, I don't think there are very many people on this side of the coin that are calling for forced population transfers. What is being advocated is that if Muslims or Arabs for that matter do not wish to live peacefully in a Jewish country, they should go to one of the many Arab muslim countries in the region that have the vast majority of the land. If the Jews wanted to force the muslim/Arab population out, they could have easily done so after the 48 war, or in 67 or 73 for that matter. And why not? forced population transfers happened to ethnic Germans in Poland and several other surrounding countries after WW2, and I don't hear anyone crying about genocide because of it. After the formation of Israel, attacks on Jews in Arab countries forced all but a handful of the Jews to leave Iraq, Yemen, Jordan, and others (they had already been dispossessed from Saudi Arabia a long time earlier.) Yet you never hear any crying in the media, or anywhere else for their or the German's "right of return." Why is this? Maybe something to do with the huge influence of Muslim Arab oil money in the media?

the interview with Zuheir Muhsein quoted above was published in English about the same time as it was published in Dutch in Trouw, but for some reason, the English language original is almost always overlooked. The interview was published in a short-lived "leftist" weekly called Seven Days in early 1977. The interviewer was James Dorsey, who seems to be an English-speaking person, from his name. It was Muhsein who very clearly stated in the interview [which I read in Seven Days] that "Palestinians," Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese were "all Arabs." Your criticism of Hugh is misplaced. Furthermore, Article One of the PLO covenant states specifically that "palestine" is a part of the great Arab fatherland [watan] and the Palestinian Arab people is part of the Arab nation [qawm or ummah]. So it's not mean Zionists who are calling these people Arabs. They do so themselves in their own basic charter, that is, if the PLO charter truly represents them rather than, let us say, the Hamas charter which is more blood-curdling than even the PLO charter.

Searcher, on another point, you contradict yourself. You say that Askhenazi Jews are genetically closer to Arabs than they are to Europeans. Then, in another place you say that "European Jews" are alien to the Middle East. Why are the Ashkenazim alien if genetically they are more closely related to the Arabs [yes, it is embarassing] than to the Europeans?? To be precise, many Sefardim too lived in Europe.

Now, if Muslims, Christians, and Jews in the Middle East are genetically related, then what explains the unique moral and cultural values of the Muslims, the very problematic cultural and moral values of the Muslims? It must be their religion that is the source of the problem. How can we help them change? What is your suggestion, Searcher?

Eliyahu,

If the PLO calls itself part of the arab nationa
then that it is because it is a nationalistic secular organization. But the arab nation is more metaphoric, seeing that it stretches from Egypt to Yemen. It is a crude attempt at Nationalism.Noone
would argue that these people all share a common ethnicity, but rather the language and similar culture. Such is the case with Palestinians. They are not ethnic arabs and this is validated by scientific and historic research, they are accultured arabs. Being indigenous to the Middle East has nothing to do with your genes, but your culture. European Jews are genetically(to a large part)and culturally part of Europe. There is no arguing that.But where did I say they dont belong in the Middle East? I find it quite racist of you the way of speak about arab culture. Why dont you feel ashamed at Israel being an international pariah state, isolated and shunned because of its horrendous human right record? You dont feel ashamed at covering the South of Lebanon in cluster bombs 24 hours before the ceasefire, of being a nation that has nothing to with international law and human rights except when it comes to its own Jewish population? Dont be so self satisfied. It makes you look silly.

Searcher, if you looked into the information on DNA of Jews, they are share similiar DNA with Jews from all over the world, that is a fact. you need to get tapes by Michael Medved on these facts.
you keep going around circles, now stick to the main points, how would any so called Arab Palestinian contain themselves in any state appointed to them, when they follow the koran? every muslim country is in shambles, and it you can trace it to the koran. there is no separations of State and Religion.
Look at Muhammud's words at how to treat non muslims? can any peace be ahcieved by non muslims living next to a muslim country? if muslims truly wanted to join the 21 first century, they would do some serious reforms, or just easier drop islam by the wayside or gutter where it belongs. You cannot have sharia law alongside Democracy and have Human Rights. Can you be honest about this? stop blaming everyone, look in the mirror Searcher, look at how islamist terrorist get their cues from the koran! its an evil book that has brain washed millions of people. Can you explain how Democracy and Human Rights can be ahieved under islam? the answer is NO!

The question is, how can any Jewish state contain itself when itself the Torah? The Old Testament is much more evil and meaner then the Quran. Why dont you have a problem with that? What does this have to do with Sharia anyway? Why would Palestinians want a theocracy?

follows the torah

Searcher you are avoiding again, answer my question now how can a Democracy and Human rights thrive with a Muslim country especially under Sharia law?
btw the Old Testament is more like a Histroy book, it does not state to kill all non Jews for all time as does the Koran say about killing all non muslims.
You cannot answer the question as it must just keep your mind twisted and in a rage, at how can any sane person explain Mohummad's teachings? he was nevera prophet or holy man, such as Budda or Jesus Christ.
He was a sick demented man who used Satanic messages to twist people;s minds. The Koran is evil, has no place in Modern Times.. you need to re evaluate yoursel and honestly look at this koran. if you want to be sane, leave Islam, its a death trap to insanity. Love life and chose life by leaving islam.

More like a history book? There are quite a lot of jews in Israel who dont think of it as a history book.

Searcher answer my question, how can any Democracy with Human Rights surive alongside a muslim country especilly with sharia law?