It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There is no such thing as a Palestinian people

page: 13
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DantesLost
reply to post by Founding
 


The Palestinians are descendants of the Philistines and therefore have an historical claim to the land.




Simply false.





posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   



Simply false.




It's philistines mixed with stone age inhabitants with jews and with other inhabitants of the are at the time giving you modern day palestinians.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Philistines are descedents of the Greeks, not the Arabs.....

The Romans created the term "Palestineans." This was a racial term used against the Jews when they were defiant against the Romans. The reason for this is the Philistines were a sea trading people that were rich in creating iron ore and had strong weaponary at the time. They would monoloplize the Israelities and forced them trade with giving up everything in return for nothing. The Israelities before they came to the land was a group that escape slavery from the South and the East. With the hardships and strengths of working and knowledge of pretty much doing all the work, they were able to create a new civilization. The Israelities fought back and pushed the Philitstines out. Once again Philistines were really a Greek race, not Arab.

This is also like calling a black man the "N" word back in the day. So I doubt you would ever want to call a Jew a Palestinean with being all P.C. now days......



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Netzar
 


Netzar may I refer you to this article, www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov... (Read to the editor)




Our recent findings (Nebel et al. 2000, 2001), however, suggest that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in NW Africa are due to recent gene flow caused by the migration of Arabian tribes in the first millennium of the Common Era (ce).



These documented historical events, together with the finding of a particular Eu10 haplotype in Yemenis, Palestinians, and NW Africans, are suggestive of a recent common origin of these chromosomes. Remarkably, the only non-Arabs in whom this haplotype has been observed to date are the Berbers (Bosch et al. 2001). It appears that the Eu10 chromosome pool in NW Africa is derived not only from early Neolithic dispersions but also from recent expansions from the Arabian peninsula.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   
Essentially, there is no proof, genetic or of any kind that the Arabs of Palestine have any legitimate special claim to the area. Arabs conquerred the area about a thousand years ago. Rome had conquerred the area when it was last controlled by Israel. Jerusalem and the area around it has considerable historical evidence of being the home of the Jewish people.

There are many Arabs nations in the Middle East, Saharan Africa, central Asia, and now moving down throughout the continent of Africa. There is no logical explanation to claim that Israal must be ruled by Muslims, except Muslim claims. As there is no Jewish nation, it is only reasonable that one should be estabished on the ancient homeland claimed by the Jewish people. Those people who live in the area of Palestine who are not Jewish can choose to live in the Jewish state in peace, or they can live in one of the many Muslim nations if that is what they demand.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 



Essentially, there is no proof, genetic or of any kind that the Arabs of Palestine have any legitimate special claim to the area. Arabs conquerred the area about a thousand years ago.


Do some research. Go back to the time of Abraham. Then look up Abraham in the land on Canaan (you'll even find it referenced in the old Testament of the bible). Before it became "Judea" or "Israel". Then look up the genetic composition of the Canaanites and how they relate to the modern day shiite muslims and Lebanese Maronite populations.

And when you're done, edit your response to reflect some historical knowledge of the region.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Obliterated
 


Where did they get the genetic information about the Canaanites? If you have some evidence to support your assertion, then you should post it. I am not going on some wild goose chase for evidence that doesn't exist.

According to the bible, the Canaanites were giants. Sounds pretty mythical to me. Maybe it was just a way of claiming how great Israel warriors were back in the day.

The evidence that has been provided here so far shows that Jews and Arabs are pretty close genetically. Which means the only legitimate claim would be one of historical perspective.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 



"Encyclopedia > Canaanite gene
Genetic research using Y-chromosome haploid analysis has identified a Phoenician genetic marker (a so-to-speak "Canaanite gene") among modern Lebanese populations, including among Maronite Christians and Shi'ite Muslims, especially near the coast.[1]"

This is a Link:
www.nationmaster.com...


[edit on 13-1-2009 by Obliterated]



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 

hey poet! Nice to see you again! Haven't seen you around lately (or maybe I haven't been looking). How you been?


Originally posted by poet1b
Essentially, there is no proof, genetic or of any kind that the Arabs of Palestine have any legitimate special claim to the area.

How about the fact that (as you mentioned) they've been living there for about a 1000 years now? That they actually owned the land?


Originally posted by poet1b
As there is no Jewish nation, it is only reasonable that one should be estabished on the ancient homeland claimed by the Jewish people.

How exactly is it reasonable? Especially considering that the land where it was 'established' belonged to someone else?

It is a pretty sad and racist world where you have to have 'genetic proof' to have a claim to the land. I guess all the American Europeans should move back to Europe, where they have a genetic claim to the land, and allow for the Native Americans freedom over America, as they have THEIR genetic claim to the land. Heck, why stop there? We all have a genetic claim to the lands of Africa, It is reasonable that everyone should move back there and establish ourselves on our ancient homeland.


THREAD TITLE: There is no such thing as a Palestinian People.
Sure, pretend that something is imaginary, and it will stop being a problem.

[edit on 13-1-2009 by babloyi]



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Obliterated
 


Yeah, but your reference goes on to say some pretty biased things. They also don't explain how they determined a Canaanite gene marker, nor do they connect Canaanites with Palestinians. You will have to do far better than that.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 


I guess then, by your reasoning, in a thousand years, Israel will be able to legitimately claim exclusive rights to the territory above all others.

Sorry, I don't buy any of this. The Palestinians who claim exclusive rights have no more legitimate rights than anyone else. They did not own and control all of the territory. At that most of the land was unoccupied.

Where do you live? I live here. Then I will make my home over there. No, I live there as well.

It is clear to see how the argument is made.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


"Points of reference
The reference of the genetic prototype for the Phoenician makeup is based on human remains discovered in Turkey, as well as a human jaw—perhaps up to 4,000 years old—found in a mountain cave at Raskifa, Lebanon."
www.baldati.com...

Now before you post back, do some research and prove with physical evidence that the Jews were there before this.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Originally posted by poet1b
The Palestinians who claim exclusive rights have no more legitimate rights than anyone else.

Is a title to the land not a legitimate right? I'm really not getting your argument. By your logic, then why shouldn't the Native Americans take over America? Since they were there first (Supposed similarity number 1), and their religious texts give them holy right to the land (supposed similarity number 2) and they were oppressed (supposed similarity number 3) and forceably removed from the land (supposed similarity number 4), they should get it back! People who are living there today, now, can be moved up to alaska or somewhere!

While the state of Israel is in existence now, and there are many innocent Israeli families living there now who cannot possibly move away (so this is technically all pointless conjecture), what exactly is 'reasonable' about a genetic (racist if you consider the 'jews' to be a race) or religious claim to a piece of land based on a 2000 year old book of suspect authorship, where even in the book itself it says that the jews took the land from the actual natives?

Or are you taking some other criteria for when you consider it to be reasonable? If so, please explain.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Obliterated
 


The conclusion of your link at the end of the article.


The major conclusion reached that relates to the Lebanese indicates that they belong to the "older" Mediterranean substratum. This means that the Lebanese share the same genetic identifiers like the Macedonians*, Iberians (including Basques), North Africans, Italians, French, Cretans, Jews, Anatolians (aboriginal Turks), Armenians and Iranians.


So where are the Palestinians in this list?

Oh, and the link you provided shows the genetic research puts the Jewish people as among the groups with genetic links to the area. You proved me right and yourself wrong. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Founding
reply to post by masonwatcher
 


A new pathetic low. I'm going to have to report this. If you like you can start your own thread with that subject in mind.


I'm sorry I don't get the objection to this persons post? Am I missing something? I thought it was a very relevant post and can't see what is off topic or offensive. I have heard this stated many times and it always made sense and as its (Jewish are not a race) backed up with I assume serious, work then it’s just as valid a stance and may be the onus is on some one to prove that this is not the case? Seriously, please enlighten me so I might understand your feelings about this?



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Netzar
 


Such a great argument there.
How can I possibly refute such a claim!?



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by bootsnspurs33
 



It is a theory that the Philistines were part of the Sea Fairing People.
Another theory is that they are descendants of the people of Greece.

In Egypt a people known as Peleset have been identified as being the Philistines.They appear on an inscription,as a well established people of the land,dedicated to Ramesses 3rd,which dates it between 1180 to 1150 BC.The tribes of Israel did not even become a united monarchy until 1050 BC.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm going to recommend a book that might help

Arab Reach by Hoag Levine copyright 1983
ISBN #0-385-18057-8



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
What a lot of croaks. The people in the Holy Land are people. Jews and Muslims just religions like the Christians. The people are people, very different too. This place is the meeting point of three continents, it is a crossroads of peoples making it very diverse. There is no Israeli really like there is no Palestinian, they are people of the Eastern Mediteranean mix.



posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 


Hello Babloyi

Sorry I didn't return your greeting earlier, but I was rushed.

I would say we are not really in disagreement on this point.

The people of Israel have connections to the the land of Israel, as do the Palestinians, both have the right to live there. The question becomes, how do they divide up the land. To claim that Palestinians owned all the land before Jews began arriving is false. They owned an occupied part of the area, but not all. There should be enough land for all, but one group decided to push the other group into the sea, and so here we are.

There were several migrations into the Americas, long before the Europeans arrived, so who was first? Should the first in line get everything? Doesn't seem like a reasonable proposition does it.



new topics




 
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join