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.

 

Jewish, Not Arab, Roots in Judea and Samaria

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
U.S. Pres. Barack Obama’s demand that Israel not settle Jews in the Biblical areas of Judea and Samaria ignores thoroughly-documented Jewish roots in the Land of Israel, and in Judea/Samaria in particular.

Yoram Ettinger, a former liaison for Congressional affairs in Israel's Washington embassy, lists in the latest of his periodic position papers some of the evidence showing that Judea and Samaria has Jewish, not Arab, roots.

Area Always Known as "Judea and Samaria"
Ettinger negates Obama's claim – enunciated during his June 4, 2009 speech at Cairo University – that "the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in" the Holocaust. For one thing, Ettinger notes, many world-renowned travelers, historians and archeologists of earlier centuries refer to "Judea and Samaria," while the term "West Bank" was coined only 60 years ago.

Jordan gave the region this name when it occupied it after Israel’s War of Independence. No nation on earth other than Britain and Pakistan recognized Jordan’s claim to Judea and Samaria.

Among the travelers, historians and archeologists who referred to Judea and Samaria are H. B. Tristram (The Land of Israel, 1865); Mark Twain (Innocents Abroad, 1867); R.A. MacAlister and Masterman ("Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly"); A.P. Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, 1887); E. Robinson and E. Smith (Biblical Researches in Palestine, 1841); C.W. Van de Velde (Peise durch Syrien und Paletsinea, 1861); and Felix Bovet (Voyage en Taire Sainte, 1864). Even the Encyclopedia Britannica, as well as official British and Ottoman records until 1950, used the term Judea and Samaria, and not the West Bank.

Land Was Named "Palestine" in Order to Erase Jewish Presence
Ettinger goes even further back, and says that the name "Palestine", which had nothing to do with a people as non by that name existed, was given to the Holy Land for the sole purpose of erasing the previous name of the country – Judea – from human memory. The Romans, whose plan this was, similarly sought to extinguish Jewish presence in Jerusalem by renaming it Aelia Capitolina.

Arabs Came in the Last 150 Years
When speaking of “Palestinian national rights,” it must be similarly kept in mind, Ettinger notes, that most Arabs residing today in Israel – anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean - have their origin in a massive 19th-20th century migration from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and other Moslem countries. They adopted the title "Palestinian", which gives the impression of ancient ties to the land.

Town Names Betray Their True History
Finally, Ettinger says that almost all Arab localities in Judea and Samaria have retained Biblical Jewish names, thus reaffirming their Jewish roots. Examples include the following:

* Anata is Biblical (and contemporary) Anatot, the dwelling of the Prophet Jeremiah.
* Batir is Biblical (and contemporary) Beitar, the headquarters of Bar Kochba, the leader of the Great Rebellion against the Roman Empire, which was suppressed in 135CE.
* Beit-Hur is the biblical (and contemporary) Beit Horon, site of Judah the Maccabee's victory over the Assyrians.
* Beitin is biblical (and contemporary) Beit El, a site of the Holy Ark and Prophet Samuel's court.
* Bethlehem is mentioned 44 times in the Bible and is the birth place of King David.
* Beit Jalla is biblical (and contemporary) Gilo, in southern Jerusalem, where Sennacherib set his camp, while besieging Jerusalem.
* El-Jib is biblical (and contemporary) Gibeon, Joshua's battleground known for his command to stop the sun and moon (Joshua 10:12).
* Jaba' is the biblical (and contemporary) Geva, site of King Saul’s son Jonathan’s victory over the Philistines.
* Jenin is the biblical (and contemporary) Ein Ganim, a Levite town within the tribe of Issachar.
* Mukhmas is biblical (and contemporary) Mikhmash, residence of Jonathan the Maccabee and site of King Saul's fortress.
* Seilun is biblical (and contemporary) Shilo, a site of Joshua's tabernacle and the Holy Ark and Samuel's youth.
* Tequa is biblical (and contemporary) Tekoa, hometown of the Prophet Amos.

Arabs Never Wanted Palestinian State
In another of his posts, Ettinger has negated the US government position that a Palestinian state is the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict and that its formation would resolve the situation. He cites proofs from recent history showing that Arab antipathy to Israel not only predates Palestinian concerns, but often sidesteps such interests.

Israel's war for its independence in 1948-9, for instance, was conducted by the Arab countries at the expense of local aspirations. Though Egypt conquered Gaza, and Jordan took Judea and Samaria, and Syria claimed the Golan, in none of these areas was a government of local Arabs allowed.

When Egypt conquered the Gaza Strip, it proceeded to prohibit "Palestinian" national activities and expel its leadership. Not only did Jordan not grant locals independence to Judea and Samaria, it actually annexed these areas to its own country. When Syria occupied and annexed the Hama area in the Golan Heights, the Arab League outlawed a provisional "Palestinian" government there.

In short, it can be concluded that Arab "rights" to a state in Judea and Samaria are historically weak and were long ignored by other Arab countries.

www.israelnationalnews.com...


Is it not proof enough that Arab towns in the "westbank" are basically taken from biblical names? Also, words like jenin - Ganim, and Jeba - Geva are linguistically interchangeable. G and J sounds often change places between Hebrew and Arabic words, and Bs and Vs are labials, being produced by the same organ, the lips.




posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   


When speaking of “Palestinian national rights,” it must be similarly kept in mind, Ettinger notes, that most Arabs residing today in Israel – anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean - have their origin in a massive 19th-20th century migration from Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and other Moslem countries. They adopted the title "Palestinian", which gives the impression of ancient ties to the land.


And what exactly does this say about the "settlers" that migrated to "Israel" after ww2? huh? So if the arabs only occupied the land 150 years ago, what does that say about the Israelis that have been there less than 70 years?

town names are meaningless as Israel renames towns like they are going out of style. As well as the concerted effort to wipe away any previous history of non jewish settlements by planting forests. Who cares who lived where anytime before now? Does that mean the British can start reclaiming land that was once under their domain?

All this nonsense about who "deserves" to live there ignores the fact that both peoples are there now and have to find a solution, rewritting history based on biblical claims is not the answer, for either side.

quite a transparent thread if I might be so bold.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 




rewritting history based on biblical claims is not the answer, for either side.


HUH?

Firstly, this thread is about the Jewish claim to the so-called westbank.

Secondly, Jerusalem has had since Ottoman times a Jewish majority. And Jerusalem (the old city) is in the westbank.

Lastly, those towns with Biblically derived names in the westbank are ARAB towns. Theres no 'rewriting' of history, since these names go back to Biblical times. The names didnt change because after the Roman expulsion of the Jews from these towns in Israel and after the Muslim conquests of Palestine in the 8th Century CE the Arabs simply translated the existing biblical place names into the Arabic language, which is what we have today. Where you get "rewriting" history from is beyond me.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Reply to post by dontreally
 


Just the fcat that the land was called Judea should be enough, IMO.

But haters gonna hate.

Be ready for the crap storm you started, OP. :LOL:


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


First of all, there were several large immigrations into Israel by Jews ever since the early 1800's, and those people moved there due to Pogroms in Europe and out of ideology (they had the idea of starting the socialist dream there, i.e. being farmers, and realizing themselves through manual labor).

When they arrived here (i.e. Israel), they mostly found empty land, which couldn't be farmed (land which they bought from the Turk land owners - as the system in Israel at the time was feudal). And scores died in disease...

Now, Jews have been living in Israel even after the Romans destroyed the second temple in 70AD, they kept living here even after the second big revolt in 135AD where many thousands were butchered by the Romans yet again...

The center of Jewish life moved from Jerusalem which was in ashes, to the northern part of the country (the Galilee area), however, Jerusalem was still settled by Jews... and by all accounts, in some periods in history, Jews were the majority in Jerusalem...

As you will note, I do not relate on biblical sources, but rather accepted historical fact (the colosseum in Rome was built from whatever they stole from the temple when they destroyed it - there is also a map of Jerusalem there, also the Titus gate depicts the "Menorah" being taken), the original poster brought many other examples of sources describing the area.

As for the current predicament, I agree that the problem needs to be solved, but it is my belief (I do not have the facts to support it...) that there are parties that have a vested interest in this state (this is a conspiracy site
)..

I mean, Israel agreed to the partition agreement in 1947 and was denied.

After 1967, it asked to negotiate and received the three "No's" (No negotiations, no recognition, no peace) - look up the Khartum conference in 1967.

Israel agreed to a Palestinian state already several times, in 1999 and in 2005, in both times they disagreed, requiring what they define as the "right of return", which is weird, since I don't think the Germans who lived in the Sudet (sorry in advance in case I mis-spell it) area in Czechoslovakia and were ousted from there after WW-II demand a "right of return" or the Jews that tried to return to their homes in Polland or other places in Europe and were murdered again (there was another Pogrom in Polland after the war...). Plus, there's religion in the mix (Hamas is a religious organization - i.e. the branch of the "Muslim Brotherhood"), and that's never good... even though Israel is predominantly secular, and so is the government...

So, even if the purpose of the thread is transparent, as long as the facts are right...



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
oh please get him off that silly trip, i'm serious.

the closest thing to a real jew is an arab. they are the semitic people, in fact they are the same people but some of them are not jews.

since when did judaism become a race? as far as i knew they were a religion



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
I get it, jews good and chosen, arabs, bad. Only Jews allowed. Our religious book says so, but we aren't religious extremists or anything. lol



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Reply to post by RizeorDie
 


The two are synonymous.

After the capture of Israel by the Babylonians and Assyrians, a majority of Israelites that returned were of the tribe of Judah.

They were the only ones practicing their religion, and Judah was shortened to Jew.

Basic history here.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


Why confuse religion (which is important to some) with historic fact? do you deny the facts? if you do, please bring supporting evidence to your facts.. until you do so, you cannot honestly conduct a civilized discussion...



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


Actually, the distinction of Jews as an ethnic groups stems from their religion... specifically, the fact that they have been singled out by other populations over the years, plus the fact that they were forced to migrate, clearly caused this.

Also, if you look at genetics, you will see that all Jews belong to the same "group", and we are close to the Arabs, but still different enough... The Arabs belong to tribes that roamed the Arabian desert (hence the name)...

Actually, there are genetic diseases that almost affect "Ashkenazi" Jews (like "Tay–Sachs" for example).

eventually, all humans belong to a very small group of individuals, so it's idiotic that we still kill each other
but this is not the discussion now, is it?



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ender_shadow
reply to post by mayabong
 


Why confuse religion (which is important to some) with historic fact? do you deny the facts? if you do, please bring supporting evidence to your facts.. until you do so, you cannot honestly conduct a civilized discussion...


Cause the whole ancestral right to a homeland is retarded. If some native american came to me and he told me he had rights to my land and my family had to leave. I'd say get lost buddy. It is horrible what happened to them, but I didn't do it. Innocent people today are getting kicked off their lands and killed for something they had nothing to do with.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


OK, now replace "Native American" with "Palestinian" and the whole argument of their terror attacks just crumbles into dust - i.e. you fought against Israel, you lost, now shut up and accept what happened...

Now, do you accept the fact that Jews have been living here for more than 2000 years, and have never left? that's an important fact... and needs to be addressed, since the "Palestinians" claim there wasn't even a Jewish temple in Jerusalem, and if you negotiate someone who ignores your history, how much can you trust them to keep a peace agreement with you?!

But they don't, I think that those negotiations are the only ones in the world where the "winning" side, is begging the "losing" side to talk to them... there are so many insane things with what's going on today that you wouldn't believe me if I told you (but I'll try anyway):

1. Israel is transferring money into Gaza, which pays for Hamas's people salaries...
2. Israel is responsible for providing Gaza with power and water, even though Israel left Gaza, Gaza is firing at Israel, and Gaza has a border with Egypt Israel does not control
3. Israel is somehow held responsible for providing supplies into Gaza, even though - (see item 2 above)

Does this seem logical to you? that a territory that clearly calls you an enemy demands you supply them, cry out that you stop because they attack, and still ignore the fact that you have a border with another country?!

If you can explain this to me, I'd be most grateful... I still can't seem to wrap my head around it since 2007...



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Yes they must cling to these pieces of awful land because if they don't their fantasy religious rights will be null and void. No Messiah will come.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ender_shadow
 


I'm all for them working out what they do over there. I don't care either way. I just don't think the US should be funding them. People have been taking over others for centuries, and while I hate war it seems thats the way it is. A level playing field would be nice.

As far as Gaza, I think Israel put that on themselves when they decided to put the place under seige. Unless they want a million + dead people (which the probably do) they need to let some supplies in (a trickle) so the world doesn't come down on them too hard.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Reply to post by mayabong
 


Wrong. Perhaps you should read both religion's holy books before making absurd assumptions.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


Hi Maya,

First of all, in case you were not aware, I am Israeli, I was born in Israel, and therefore I have a unique perspective, as I see things "on the ground" so to speak...

The US doesn't really fund Israel, it is true that the US provides Israel with 3Billion$ in aid every year, but this aid has to be spent on US products and companies (I know since I had to spend those dollars myself while in the army), also, that aid prevents Israel from selling arms to other countries (for example, Israel developed it's own fighter jet in the late 80's but American pressure killed it...)

About Gaza, well, Israel left Gaza in 2005, left, never to return, it was hard, I cried when watching the soldiers taking the people out of their homes. I thought it was a mistake to leave, I thought it would send the wrong signal... but still, it happened, and what Israel got in return was constant attacks... without real reason... think what would happen if Mexico started firing on the US...

Now, it's only logical, and appropriate to put a siege on a territory that attacks you... (Naval blockade on Cuba in missile crisis?) but even though there is a siege, supplies still come in through Israel... however, why didn't you address the fact that the Gaza strip has a border with Egypt that Israel has no control over? how come it's Israel's responsibility? if it left the area?! I mean, you can't demand Israel leave and then demand it takes care of those it left... that's problematic in my view... why should I, as an Israeli, take care of the "Palestinians" in Gaza, that are shooting at me, while they cry "Humanitarian crisis"?!?! (even though there is no crisis in Gaza, I saw a quote by the red cross representative a couple of days ago, can't find it now)

I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of Israelis (myself included) don't want anyone dead, we just want to live in peace, raise our kids and avoid our mother in law (maybe that's just me)...

I would really love it if you let me know what you think about the facts that I brought... otherwise, I don't think you have a valid position... (with all due respect of course)



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
From a rational persons point of view, Palestine should be home to both Jews and Arabs. There's a lot of bickering and I thought I'd share my opinion from the moderate side of the spectrum.

Now you can get back to arguing.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


I have distant roots in many European countries and I'm sure if I go back far enough I'll eventually find my way to the middle east and Africa. Should I be able to settle these places and set up my own government and take the land the belonged to my distant ancestors no matter who lives there now?

Stop dividing humanity into categories, people deserve to live wherever they want without fear of persecution by a government, that goes for both the Jews in Israel and the Arabs in Palestine!



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ender_shadow
 


Nice post. Well I'm not on the ground so maybe I have a looking from the outside view which isn't bad either.

Israel can say terrorist this and terrorist that but the fact is that they have been caught on many occasions creating false flag terror to achieve their goals. I have a very hard time believing them, when Israel tells me terrorist stories.
I'm sure some "attacks" are real, but I believe most are from the government itself.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Their goal is to keep expanding and building "settlements". They can't do this if there was peace or no enemy.

I'm a friend of the jews thats why I hate zionism. The zionists have and will kill everyday jews to accomplish their goals.

Weather your ancestral right to the land or not, you can't expect to go into a place where you haven't been in a couple thousands of years and expect people to just leave happily. There are gonna be some problems. Labeling them terrorists is the easy way out. Realizing why they are pissed and working it out is probably a better option.

Like one poster said, they should both be able to live there.

I think Israel is an interesting experiment but I don't think it will end well for them in the end.

Anyways thats me, I enjoy your posts and don't dislike you anyways.

MIke



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 


Hi there...

Thanks for the compliment, standing out the outside can be good too of course, assuming what you see from the outside covers all angles (which it usually does not...) I tend to look at news from within and from the outside, and you wouldn't believe the bias...

I am sorry, but how does the arrest of a Mossad trainee gives you the ability to make a logic leap into many of the terrorist attacks being false flags?! I mean, of course the Mossad trains in Israel, and I remember that incident, it made us laugh our asses off at the guy... (he shouldn't have made the cut), look, I have served in military intelligence, I know for a fact that there is no such thing as a "false flag", although this is a conspiracy site this one is just a bit too much... And if you believe this claim, I urge you to bring proof, I am sure the Israeli press would love to publish things like that if they were true.

Actually, after the PM's speech, there was a 9 month freeze on settlements, I have a friend who personally had to stop building a home (on an empty land where there were no arab villages nearby) because of that freeze... it is true that the government provided restitution to them. During all those 9 months the Palestinians didn't agree to negotiate... let me know what you think about that?
There are elements within the "Settler" population that are extremem, insane etc, but they are a very small minority... most of them are concentrated in large population chunks (Ariel, Ma'ale Edomim, Gush-Etzion etc)

Your point of not having been here is untrue, there has always been a Jewish presence in Israel, Jews never left, there were just not many of them around... And no one is saying that Arabs don't have a right, Israel agreed to a Palestinian state several times in the past... but still... no palestinian state?

And everybody keeps ignoring a simple question that I've posed several times... why wasn't there a palestinian state between 1949 and 1967?!!? Gaza was under Egyptian occupation and Jordan (which is 70% palestinians BTW...) was occupying the west bank... this whole "occupation" thing is just a ruse I'm afraid, and too many people are falling for it naively...

I'll guess time will tell if we stay here or not... I personally believe that we will still be here for a long time...

My theory is that there is vested interest in the palestinians not having a state, some of it stems from the palestinians themselves (if they have a state it means that they need to start being responsible and actually govern... and they have had self government for years now... doesn't really work), and from other entities (such as UNRA, they get a ton of money, and if there's a palestinian state, they have no more need... money is a powerful incentive...

I appreciate the sentiment, thank you.




top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join