Israel resumes assassination of Palestinians

Arabs Stone Jews on Jerusalem's Temple Mount - Etgar Lefkovits

Several hundred Arab teens pelted police and Jewish visitors with stones on the Temple Mount Monday, lightly injuring two Jewish visitors, police said. The clashes came as Israel marked Jerusalem Day, and 38 years since the reunification of the capital. (Jerusalem Post)

Israel Works to Prevent PA Execution of 50 Collaborators - Yuval Yoaz

Israel has gone to great lengths to prevent the PA from executing approximately 50 Palestinians convicted of collaborating with Israel. Israel approached U.S. Ambassador Dan Kurtzer on the matter, and went ahead with the release of Palestinian security prisoners last Thursday only after the PA said it did not intend to carry out the sentences. (Ha'aretz)

Soldier Loses Eye in Anti-Fence Riot
An Israel Defense Forces soldier lost an eye after being hit by a stone during a demonstration by hundreds of Palestinians against the separation fence on Friday in the West Bank village of Bil'in, near Ramallah. Attending the protest were PA minister Ahmad Majdalani and Israeli MK Ahmed Tibi. (Ha'aretz)

Friends,

On Friday, the morning news reported that two terrorists from Islamic Jihad working out of Beit Hanina had planned a double suicide attack against the Jerusalem suburb of
Ramot. They had planned to walk into a synagogue on Shabbat when it was full of worshippers and/or
take a bus, or walk into the local shopping center and blow themselves up.

I felt my hands begin to shake.

Ramot is where I live, and Beit Hanina is a fifteen minute walk across the hills.

What makes this especially horrible, is that it is happening all over the country daily since Mr. Abbas took over. There have been hundreds of attacks against Israeli civilians. And those are the ones that are successful. You won't even
hear about those prevented, like the one in my neighborhood, if not for the alertness of our soldiers at the much-maligned checkpoints.

The fact is, things are quiet because our fence is working and our soldiers are successful. But most of the world (Jewish community included) doesn't understand that. They
think there has been a slow down in terror because the Palestinian Authority is doing something. And
they think that this deserves to be rewarded, otherwise we will go back to the days when buses were blowing up
everyday. We are already "back" in those days, except we have been fortunate enough to catch these people. But all our success has done is to shore up the reputation
of a disreputable man and his despicable regime. Below, two web sites where you can read incident by
incident the terror attacks that have been launched against our people in the last few months
alone. You won't find any mention of attacks that didn't take place, like the one that nearly blew up a synagogue in my
little Jerusalem suburb.

http://tinyurl.com/dopn3
http://www.jr.co.il/terror/israel/

Every blessing,

Naomi

Five Palestinians and a Chinese labourer were killed on Tuesday in the West Bank and Gaza Strip on the deadliest day of violence in the occupied Palestinian territories since the start of a de facto truce by resistance groups and Israel in January.



Following the fatal shooting of three Palestinians by Israeli forces, Palestinian fighters launched a series of attacks on Jewish settlements in southern Gaza.

" Palestinian fighters launched a series of attacks on Jewish settlements in southern Gaza. "

Same Shiite, different day

Following the fatal shooting of three Palestinians by Israeli forces...
You're right--that's not a truce....

The Deaths were caused by Hamas mortars- not by Israel!!!!
Note also that Palestinians were working in the israeli greenhouse- that must mean they are collaborators! Then maybe its justified anyway....



"The IAF strike comes a day after a barrage of shells fired by Hamas at a hothouse on a Gaza settlement killed two Palestinian workers and another laborer from China.

The three workers were killed when a Qassam rocket hit a packing shed near the hothouses belonging to Ganei Tal. Five other Palestinian workers were also injured. Hamas and Islamic Jihad gunners also shelled the Negev town of Sderot on Tuesday, damaging several homes but causing no casualties.

The three militants all escaped unharmed from the missile strike in Khan Yunis in the southern Strip, witnesses said.

Some IDF and Shin Bet officials believe that Israel will be forced to land a "crushing blow" on Hamas prior to the disengagement, following repeated the shelling attacks and other terror-related operations by the militant group, Army Radio reported Wednesday.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the heads of the defense establishment have repeatedly vowed that there would be "no disengagement under fire." Senior officials have added that they believed Hamas - which has claimed the pullout as a victory for its campaign of attacks - would hold its fire in order to assure tht the evacuation took place.

Likud cabinet minister Danny Naveh said Wednesday that "At the moment, the most correct response to terrorism is an Israeli decision to suspend the preparations for the withdrawal.

"If they fire on Sderot before Israel pulls out of Gaza, this only lends weight to the assessment on the terrorism expected to stem friom Gaza if Israel withdraws from there," Naveh told Israel Radio. "Even those who support the disengagement cannot continue to support a situation in which [terrorists] fire on Israelis and receive a prize for it."

Israel Defense Forces officials said late Tuesday that Israel will refrain from responding to rocket and mortar attacks in Gush Katif and Sderot, adding that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas needs to be given time to restore calm in the Gaza Strip.

On Wednesday, Army Radio said that unnamed officials were lobbying for "a crushing blow" in the light of continuing attacks.

Labor cabinet minister Matan Vilnai gave cautious backing to the concept, saying that a broad military offensive may be necessary in order to avoid disengagement under fire. "If there is firing, there should be a wide operation to prevent this fire ... the army knows how to carry this out. This will neither prevent or postpone the disengagement in any way."

Vice Premier Shimon Peres disagreed, turning aside the report. "If it were possible to deliver one blow like this and be done with it, we would have done so long ago," Peres said. "There is no such thing."

IDF: Give Abbas time to restore calm
Peres praised new IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz for counseling restraint.
Halutz visited Sderot Tuesday evening, saying "we will do whatever is necessary when we decide to do so. There is no doubt that at a certain point our patience will run out."

IDF officials explained that Israel would refrain from responding at this time, in order to allow Abbas to handle the crisis himself. An Israeli operation, they said, could provide the PA with an excuse not to act against Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Abbas is scheduled to visit the Gaza Strip on Wednesday to talk to Hamas leaders about enforcing calm. Palestinian sources said Abbas telephoned Khaled Meshal, the head of Hamas' Syrian-based political bureau, and demanded that he end the fire and infractions of the calm.

Predawn on Wednesday, IDF troops were combing the area around the southern kibbutz of Nahal Oz, after hearing explosions, Army Radio said.

Late Tuesday, IDF fire in Rafah killed a civilian, apparently an Egyptian, who was attempting to cross the border in the direction of the PA.

In another incident, two armed Palestinians were killed in an exchange of fire with soldiers from the IDF's Duvdevan unit during an operation to arrest wanted operatives in Qabatiya, near Jenin. One was a wanted Islamic Jihad operative and the other was reportedly a policeman. An IDF officer was also lightly wounded.

Hamas, which carried out the first barrage on Sderot Tuesday morning, announced that it was acting in response to the clash Monday between Palestinian worshipers and Jews who wanted to enter the Temple Mount. However, the defense establishment believes the context for the attack was Abbas' decision to postpone parliamentary elections.

Islamic Jihad was behind the second volley on Sderot, apparently in retaliation for the IDF operation in Qabatiya.

Halutz said the attacks had been carried out by "unrestrained organizations that conduct an internal dialogue [with the PA], partly through launching rockets and mortar shells."

"I suggest that as a country, we not behave like terrorists. I have no intention of getting all worked up. I want to do everything with due contemplation. Getting worked up is not a work plan," Halutz said.

IDF sources said one reason for not taking any offensive action in the Strip is a desire to prevent a situation in which Israel is blamed for Abbas' failure to calm matters down. However, the air force is maintaining an increased presence in the skies over the Gaza Strip, to hit cells attempting further rocket or mortar launches."

we are all human even the Palestinians and even the Israelis.
all of us think that in order to live in security on our land we need to defend ourselves from 'them'.
we think we were fighting evil not our equals and that gives us leeway to behave noncivilly.

Naomi,

I know it must be nearly impossible to contemplate the existance of the Palistinians and why they are so desperate, being where you are in the midst of things. I have empathy for you and your situation, you ae surrounded by hostile forces, yes, but a thinking and caring individual which clearly you are must ask yourself why are they hostile, why would people be so desperate as to kill themselves and others? These are the more difficult questions and the ones that must ask you to look beyond a simpler few of history, namely "us and them." The reality is you are on occupied land, land that has been stolen and not shared, land that continously is seized and houses of the "former" occupants leveled. The world sees the Isrealis as aggressors and unfortuneatly this is often the case. I urge you to read Noam Chomsky's "Post 9-11" to truly understand the history of Isreal and how the dream has be taken from you and used as a tool of colonial oppression, most to benefit Western interests, and frankly not even your own. It's hard to look outside ones' own sense of what is real and right, but we must if the world is ever going to be in a place of compassion and peace.

Blessings,
Julian

"It's hard to look outside ones' own sense of what is real and right,"

Probably what causes the palestinians to strap bombs to their kids and blow them up...(That plus the money they used to get when Saddam was around)

Israel has been attacked every year before 1967.

Israel has been attacked every single year since 1967.

Palestinians have never stopped attacking Israel, no matter what Israel did or did not do.

And stop exaggerating how "desperate" the Palestinians are. Almost every single country on the entire continent of Africa is worse off. A billion people in India are worse off. Millions of people across the middle east are worse off. Millions of people across south america are worse off. Hundreds of thousands of homeless in america are worse off. But the Palestinians have resorted to terrorism every single year for decades now, and never given Israel any reason to trust them.

Stop support islamic radicals and terrorism.

Israel has no idea what they can do to get their neighbors to stop attacking them. That's why now they're trying a separation barrier, which seems to be working pretty well.

It's insane how anti-israel you people are. It's one thing to be mad at israel for various stuff they do, but it's another to just be insane and exaggerate and whitewash the palestinian terrorist groups and stuff like that. Have a sense of balance. keep some damn perspective

Israeli terror or Palestinian terror---murder is murder

COPY AND PASTE THIS and send it to everyone you know.

Influx of compensation requests expected in light of court ruling
Settler land thieves to be compensated in U.S. dollar$.
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent, and Agencies

The Disengagement Administration is expecting to receive an influx of compensation requests from Gaza settlers, in the wake of Thursday's High Court of Justice decision upholding the legality of the disengagement plan and increasing possible benefits for evacuees.

An expanded High Court panel on Thursday removed a major legal obstacle to the government's plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and part of the northern West Bank.

The 11-judge panel, headed by Chief Justice Aharon Barak, also determined that "Judea and Samaria [West Bank] and the Gaza area are lands seized during warfare, and are not part of Israel."

The court also increased the compensation benefits to which Gaza evacuees are entitled.

The panel rejected 12 petitions by opponents to the withdrawal from all Gaza Strip and four northern West Bank settlements, ruling the pullout can go ahead as planned and does not violate the settlers' human rights.

The justices ruled that the disengagement plan as presently envisaged is legal and that its implementation poses no constitutional problems.

Justice Edmund Levy cast the sole dissenting vote in the 10-1 decision, calling for the plan to be cancelled.

The judges ruled that the evacuation of settlements do affect human rights, including "the right to property, freedom of occupation and proper respect for the evacuees," but determined that it was a measured violation, which was not excessive and was aimed at achieving political and security goals.

The justice system was closely studying the ruling, since some of the petitions demanding the retraction of the law, which was passed by the Knesset in February, deal with constitutional issues.

One such issue was the disengagement's perceived infringement of human rights, which are protected by the Basic Laws.

Court orders technical changes
The court rescinded four financial arrangements relating to compensation for the future evacuees.

The court rejected a clause which would have barred recipients of compensation from filing a standard lawsuit for damages.


The court, rejecting a deadline specified by the law, allowed settlers 30 days to choose the nature of the compensation plan they preferred.


The court ruled that settlers under 21 may receive compensation. The law had set 21 as the minimum age for receipt of compensation funds.


The court ruled that the day of actual evacuation will be used as the date used for determination of the elements of the compensation package for each family, rather than June 4, 2004, as stated by the law.

Settlers: Ruling is irrelevant
Yoram Sheftel, an attorney for the settlers, said his expectations were low because the Supreme Court has a tendency of ruling against settlers.

"We didn't expect anything from this court since the petitioners are Jews and patriots," Sheftel said. "This was fully expected. There's no surprise. I'm not disappointed because we didn't have any expectations."

Other settler leaders dismissed the ruling as irrelevant, and vowed to resist the evacuation.

Justice Minister Tzipi Livni praised the court's decision, and expressed hope the ruling would defuse potentially violent settler resistance to the evacuation.

"I hope this ruling sends a message to the lone settler that the plan is going ahead," she told Army Radio.

Hints at intervention
The first sign that the High Court might intervene in the law's complicated compensation arrangements was given about two weeks ago in an interim injunction issued by Barak in response to a petition by 136 settlers from Nisanit, Homesh and Sa-Nur to freeze the limitation on the amount of time evacuees can submit a new demand for compensation.

The court ruled that the 30 days the law gives would begin not with the submission of the demand to the Disengagement Administration, but rather from the day the final ruling on their petition was handed down.

The Forum of Jurists for the Land of Israel, representing the Gaza Coast Regional Council, asked the High Court to come to Gush Katif, but the justices declined the request.

The court also rejected the settlers' request to have former military chief of staff Moshe Ya'alon explain to the court the security reasoning behind the disengagement plan, which they said the state had not presented to the settlers.

Here is a list of the groups that have controlled what is now Israel from the beginning of recorded history. Each past government had the land stolen from them and stole the land from previous groups. In many cases new rulership didnt mean a new population although there were many migrations of people into and out of the area as well as conversions between religions, shifts in language and changes in ethnic identities.
3200 - 1850 B.C Egyptians
1850 - 1500 B.C Amorites
1500 - 1200 B.C. Egyptians II
1200 - 1020 B.C. Philistines
1020 - 923 B.C. Israelites
923 - 732 B.C.Israel/Judah
732 - 609 B.C. Assyrians
609 - 605 B.C. Egyptians III
605 - 538 B.C. Babylonians
538 - 334 B.C. Persians
334 - 140 B.C. Greeks
140 - 63 B.C. Hasmoneans
63 B.C. - 330 A.D. Romans
330 - 636 A.D.Byzantines
636 - 661 A.D. Caliphates
661 - 749 A.D. Umayyads
749 - 877 A.D. Abbasids
877 - 935 A.D. Tulunids
935 - 969 A.D. Ikhshadids
970 - 1079 A.D. Fatimids
1079 - 1098 A.D. Seljuks
1098 - 1187 A.D. Crusaders
1187 - 1260 A.D. Ayyubids
1260 - 1517 A.D. Mamluks
1517 - 1918 A.D. Ottomans
1920 - 1921 British Mandate
1921 - 1947 British Mandate
1947 - 1948 U.N. Partition & War
1949 - 1956 Israel, Egypt & Jordan
1956 - 1957 Suez Crisis
1957 - 1967 Israel, Egypt & Jordan
1967 - 1973 War of 1967
1973 - 1978 War of 1973
1978 - 1978 Operation Litani
1978 - 1982 UNIFIL
1982 - 1982 Sinai Withdrawal
1982 - 1985 Lebanon War

Changing borders, changing groups controlling different portions of what are now Israel, Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza and changing religions by the people in each group. Who stole the land, who has the right to it? Does "right" mean anything? Did the Philistines have a "right" to exist, how about the Mamluks? People are where they are now and one can't allow people to create new facts on the ground to justify the stealing of land from the poor (Palestinians) and giving to the relatively rich (the settlers) but any group claiming "we were here first" is lying. Modern racists can look back 1000 years to one of hundreds of different conflicts and blame the "Arabs" for stealing land from the Byzantines but one could just as easilly blame the Romans for stealing the land or even blame the historic Israelites for stealing the land from previous groups (afterall the several hundred years of the ancient Israeli rule of portions of the area doesnt stand out as any special sort of starting point) If you could travel in time back to 10,000 BC and take a DNA test of someone living where Jerusalem is now, would you find more ancestors among modern Israelis or Palestinians? Who knows, with migrations happening at all points in history and massacres by many groups you never know where the most ancestors are now but with constant mixings and changing group identities throughout history its likely one would find ancestry almost equally spread across Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia.

"It is no exaggeration to claim that the movement of the Sea Peoples...changed the face of the ancient world more than any other single event before the time of Alexander the Great. In the history of the Near East the movement marks the end of -- indeed brought to an end -- one era and began another, with no continuum between the two. In Egypt...the effect proved negligible when compared with what the movement of these migrants wrought in Palestine and Syria...

No one could stand before these raiders. Hattusas was destroyed, and the Hittite empire [present day Turkey] swept away in one stroke. Tarsus [present day southern Turkey] was laid waste, as was Enkomi on Cyprus. Alalakh and Ugarit [present day western Syria] were razed to the ground, never to be rebuilt. The Late Bronze Age [1550 - 1200 B.C.] of the Levant vanished in an instant: archaeology gives a graphic dimension to the terror conveyed by the written record."

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/History/catastrophe.html

"The Hebrew-Philistine rivalry for the possession of the land provided the occasion for the creation of the Hebrew monarchy... Saul's anointment (c. 1020 B.C.) as the first king was tantamount to a challenge to Philistine suzerainty."
Philip K. Hitti, The Near East in History, p. 96, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1961
http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/1020bc.html

"Palestine was not a country that encouraged the creation of larger political unites... David's kingdom represents an exception, a parenthesis in the history of the ancient Near East. The achievements of David were possible because there was a power vacuum at this time. The Hittite kingdom went out of existence around 1200 B.C. Egypt's rule over Palestine ended sometime in the mid-twelfth century B.C. and was itself split into two kingdoms... Their 'successors' in Palestine, the Philistines, had filled the power gap for a short time, until David put an end to their political and economic hegemony... David's kingdom, was, however, short-lived. It dissolved naturally when Solomon died."

Gosta W. Ahlstrom, The History of Ancient Palestine, p. 487-488, Sheffield Academic Press, 1993
http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/1020bc.html

Background: "The year 745 B.C. marks one of those major turning points in history the significance of which is often lost on layman and scholar alike…For it was in 745 that a civil war in Assyria unseated the royal family and catapulted a general named 'Pul' known to history as Tiglath-pileser III, to the throne of the empire. This usurper proved to be an organizational genius and a master strategist, worthy of comparison with Hannibal or Scipio. By relentless campaigning and indiscriminate use of mass deportation, he encompassed the destruction of Damascus and Israel and by 732 B.C."
Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times, p. 340-341, Princeton University Press, 1992
http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/732bc.html

Wow, talk about over-analysis.

Israel gets put under an incredible MICROSCOPE. It's insane.

It's year 2005 now. Israel exists. It's a jewish state.

Deal with reality and go from there.

"In 70 A.D., the Romans captured Jerusalem and destroyed the second Temple, which had been built [1515 B.C.] by the exiles returning from Babylon. Even this did not end Jewish resistance. After the revolt of Bar-Kokhba in 135 A.D., the Romans...like the Babylonians before them, sent a large part of the Jewish population into captivity and exile...Even the historic nomenclature of the Jews was to be obliterated. Jerusalem was renamed Aelia Capitolina, and a temple to Jupiter built on the site of the destroyed Jewish Temple. The names Judea and Samaria were abolished, and the country renamed Palestine, after the long-forgotten Philistines."

Bernard Lewis, The Middle East, p. 31, Scribner, 1995

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/63bc.html

---
while a clearly artifical boundary name, it existed for centuries giving the name a long term resonance


In the first century you also saw a huge demographic shift making the current claims of Islamophobes that the "Arabs stole Israel from the Jews" clearly a myth.

---
"The adoption of Christianity as the dominant religion of the empire changed the status of Palestine radically. No longer just a tiny province, it became the Holy Land, on which emperors and believers lavished untold wealth; the former claimants to it, the Jews, were powerless to establish their right and were quickly relegated to second-class citizenship.

The principal aim of Byzantium was to make Jerusalem Christian. Pilgrimages were encouraged by the provision of hospices and infirmaries, churches rose on every spot connected in one way or another with Christian traditions. The building activity that ensued was one of the causes of the country's uprising prosperity at that time, which is evident from archaeological surveys. There were three to five times as many inhabited places in the fifth-sixth centuries A.D. as in any of the preceding periods."

Michael Avi-Yonah, "Jews, Romans and Byzantines (70-633)," A History of Israel and the Holy Land, p. 179-180, The Continuum Publishing Group Inc., 2001

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/330.html

"On a hot day of August 636, the two opposing armies faced each other on the banks of the Yarmuk, a Jordan tributary. The Arabians, 25,000 strong, were commanded by Khalid; the Byzantine army, twice as numerous and composed mosly Armenian and other mercenaries, was led by a brother of Empereor Heraclius. The day was an excessively hot one clouded by wind-blown dust and presumably purposely chosen for the encounter by the Arabian generalship. The Byzantine fighters were cleverly maneuvered into a position where the dust storm struck them in the face. Only a few managed to escape with their lives. The fate of Syria, on the fairest of the Eastern Roman provinces, was decided. 'Farewell, O Syria,' were Heraclius' parting words, 'and what an excellent country this is for the enemy!'"

Philip K. Hitti, The Near East in History, p. 209, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1961

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/636.html

"Throughout the Umayyad period Palestine played no significant political role. Its population was partly composed of Jews and Christians, whose families had always lived there and towards whom the caliphs adopted a tolerant and lenient attitude. It is true that special taxes were imposed upon both Jews and Christians, but they were moderately light at the beginning. The government recognized the religious communities as socio-political entities and the rabbis and priests were responsible to the authorities for the members of their communities."

Moshe Sharon, "The History of Palestine from the Arab Conquest until the Crusades (633-1099)," A History of Israel and the Holy Land, p. 222, The Continuum Publishing Group Inc., 2001

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/661-350.html

"In 868 an officer called Ahmad ibn-Tulun, the son of a freed Turkish slave, was sent to Egypt to serve as lieutenant to the governor of the province. A year later he himself became the governor of the province, declared its independence [from the Abbasids] and put a stop to the remittance of annual taxes to the Baghdad treasury. In 877, exploiting the deaths of the governors of Syria and Palestine, he was able, without difficulty, to extend his authority over these provinces as well...

With the rule of ibn-Tulun a period of renewed political, social and cultural activity began in Palestine, after the long period of neglect that marked the hundred years of direct Abbasid rule..."

Moshe Sharon, "The History of Palestine from the Arab Conquest until the Crusades (633-1099)," A History of Israel and the Holy Land, p. 226, The Continuum Publishing Group Inc., 2001

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/877-350.html

Not for long it wont.

See:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/06/1746036_comment.php#1746527



>it's a Jewish state

That's the problem. To allocate state power on the basis of ethnicity is racist. A human is a human is a human. Jews have no more rights than the rest of us do. We are all equal.

"A Kurdish officer called Salah al-Din -- better known in the West as Saladin -- launched a jihad against the Crusaders in 1187. By his death in 1193, he had recaptured Jerusalem and expelled the Crusaders from all but a narrow coastal strip. It was only the break-up of Saladin's Syro-Egyptian empire into a host of small states under his successors which permitted the Crusading states to drag out an attenuated existence for another century, until the reconstitution of a Syro-Egyptian state under the Mamluks in the thirteenth century brought about their final extinction."

Bernard Lewis, The Middle East p. 91 Scribner paperback, 1995
http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps2/1187-350.html

When the first high commissioner for Palestine arrived in Jerusalem, he was met with a seventeen-gun salute and endless words of welcome. Sir Herbert Samuel made the journey in June 1920, and served as high commissioner for a period of five years.

...

Samuel first presented the idea of a British protectorate in 1915. In a memorandum to Prime Minister Asquith, he proposed that a British protectorate be established which would allow for increased Jewish settlement. In time, the future Jewish majority would enjoy a considerable degree of autonomy. Herbert believed that the creation of a Jewish center would flourish spiritually and intellectually, resulting in the character improvement of Jews all over the world. At that time, however, Prime Minister Asquith was not interested in pursuing such an option, and no action was taken. Yet significant groundwork had been accomplished, and it was on the basis of Samuel's work that the Balfour Declaration was later written.

It was therefore no surprise that Samuel was appointed first high commissioner of Palestine. His appointment made him the first Jew to govern in the Land of Israel in 2,000 years. Anxious to serve his country well, Samuel made it clear that his policy was to unite all dissenting groups under the British flag. Attempting to appease the Arabs in Palestine, Samuel made several significant concessions. It was he who appointed Hajj Amin al-Husseini, a noted Arab nationalist extremist, to be Mufti of Jerusalem. In addition, he slowed the pace of Jewish immigration to Palestine, much to the distress of the Zionists.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/samuel.html

The ancestry of the Palestinians

It is still a matter of some debate to what extent Arabs replaced previous populations in the Middle East, and to what extent those populations merely adopted the Arabic language. However, the prevailing view of historians is that most of the population remained the same; the significant number of loanwords from earlier languages (Aramaic in the Fertile Crescent, Coptic in Egypt, Berber in the Maghreb), the retention of earlier cultural customs (especially well-documented for Egypt among the fellahin , but notably including sizable Christian communities throughout the area), and the relatively small population of Arabia all point to a continuity with the earlier population. The medieval North African sociologist Ibn Khaldun strongly argued for continuity, considering the Arabization of these populations to be a result of their imitating their rulers. Interestingly, in his time, the word "Arab" referred only to Bedouin and their direct descendants, and was not applied to city dwellers and farmers even if they had come to speak Arabic.

The Palestinian Bedouin, however, are much more securely known to be Arab by ancestry as well as by culture; their distinctively conservative dialects and pronunciation of qaaf as gaaf group them with other Bedouin across the Arab world and confirm their separate history. Their arrival in the Negev predates Islam by a considerable period; specifically Arabic onomastic elements began to appear in Edomite inscriptions starting in the 6th century BC, and are nearly universal in the inscriptions of the Nabataeans, who arrived there in the 4th-3rd centuries BC[3]. A few Bedouin are found as far north as Galilee; however, these seem to be much later arrivals (although Sargon II settled Arabs in Samaria as early as 720 BC.)

As genetic techniques have advanced, it has become possible to look directly into the question of the ancestry of the Palestinians. In recent years, many genetic surveys have suggested that Jews and Palestinians (and in some cases other Levantines) are genetically closer to each other than either is to the Arabs of Arabia or to Europeans [4] [5] [6] [7]. (this collection contains more links to genetic studies of Jewish and middle eastern populations.) These studies look at the prevalence of specific inherited genetic differences (polymorphism) among populations, which then allow the relatedness of these populations to be determined, and their ancestry to be traced back (see population genetics). These differences can be the cause of genetic disease or be completely neutral (see Single nucleotide polymorphism) ; they can be inherited maternally (mitochondrial DNA), paternally (Y chromosome), or as a mixture from both parents ; the results obtained may vary from polymorphism to polymorphism. One study [8]on congenital deafness identified an allele only found in Palestinian and Ashkenazi communities, suggesting a common origin ; an investigation [9] of a Y-chromosome polymorphism found Lebanese, Palestinian, and Sephardic populations to be particularly closely related ; a third study [10], looking at Human leukocyte antigen differences among a broad range of populations, found Palestinians to be particularly closely related to Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi Jews, as well as Middle-Eastern and Mediterranean populations. (The latter study by Antonio Arnaiz-Villena has been the subject of intense controversy, it was retracted by the journal and removed from its website, leading to further controversy; the main accusations made were that the authors used their scientific findings to justify making one-sided political proclamations in the paper; that the retraction followed lobbyist pressure because the results contradicted certain political beliefs; some suggested that the broad scientific interpretation was based on too narrow data [11], whereas others support the scientific content as valid - for more information on the controversy : [12], [13], [14], [15].) If this close relatedness is true, it would confirm both Jews' and Palestinians' historical claims, suggesting a common Northwest Semitic ancestry. However, the results are complex, much work remains to be carried out, and partial results can be interpreted to suit diverse political agendas.

One point in which the two populations appear to contrast is in the proportion of sub-Saharan African genes which have entered their gene pools. One study found that Middle Eastern Arabs (specifically Palestinians, Jordanians, Syrians, Iraqis, and Bedouin), unlike other Middle Eastern populations (specifically Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Azeris, Georgians, and Near Eastern Jews), had what appears to be a substantial gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa (amounting to 10-15% of lineages) within the past three millennia, possibly due to the slave trade[16].

http://www.biologydaily.com/biology/Palestinian

A human is a human is a human. No one's ancestry entitles them to more rights, privileges or power that people of different ancestry. To believe otherwise is racist.

In the last few years genetic studies have shown that the Jewish groups in Europe were not the result of conversions and now it has also shown that Palestinians are largely a people who lived in the area before the Arab invasions. History shouldnt give anyone any special rights or be used to condemn current groups. But is still interesting to be able to look back in time to see things like these since history is almost always written from the standpoint of those in power and its not always clear what was happening among the general public. Apparently the "Arab invasions" really just changed the rulling class in Palestine and didnt result in a huge change in the population itself.

Frank---**Wow, talk about over-analysis.

Israel gets put under an incredible MICROSCOPE. It's insane.

It's year 2005 now. Israel exists. It's a jewish state.

Deal with reality and go from there. ***

When in doubt, dismiss something beyond your scope of knowledge by categorizing it as "over-analysis". Then revert to default, time-tested tradition of saying "Israel exists". How very simple.

Frank isn't always right, but in this case he is.

Nessie-obsessie spent who knows how much time putting that list of stuff together _specifically_ because it targets, not the idea of nationhood, but _specifically_ the idea of Jewish nationhood.

Something about the existence of a Jewish state drives him mad in the way that the existence of dozens of Islamic states does not.

Nessie's obsessive bias is, in this case, literally insane.

@%<

Nessie didnt put togethr the list of rulers of the area that is now Israel, I copied it from http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org I dont really know the politics of that site but their maps are great and while they focus on Israel if you zoom out you can one of the more detailed timelines of history in maps of the entire Middle East (I found it looking for a map of the preOttoman Iraq but unfortunately the maps from that period leave out the names of states to the East of the Mamluks)

I used to be much more interested in just generic ancient history to try to understand how cultures evolved. While I dont think its that relevent to the current conflict I have always been a little curious about the history of ancient Israel after reading Greek Historians like Horoditus and not seeing any mention of Jews or Israel (even though he does mention the freeing of the slaves of Babylon without mentioning who they are and also mentions Gaza once). Tactitus does mention a strong Jewish state (although it sounds more like a city state around Jerusalem) but that was much later. It seems like ancient Israel existed for a little over 300 years before the Persian invasions (and thus before the time Greek historians would have known about) and then again briefly before the Romans invaded. The orginal Zionists like Herzl didnt base the justification for Israel off any claim to ownership of the land based off history but one does hear a lot of racist talk these days (for example in comments on this site) about "Arabs" stealing the land. Its sounds like the idea that the population of Ottoman Palestine was mainly immigrants and not a continuation of the more ancient populations has been seen as a myth by historicans even before genetic testing made it possible to prove that Palestinians are in fact closest in relation to Middle Eastern Jews and then European Jews.
Most ethnic groups have a myth of some ancient time period locked in as time immemorial (usually the high point of the groups rule over other groups like Uzbekistan under Tamerlane) but in reality the ancient world has mainly composed of rapidly changing rulers with identities tied to familly, and even fairly rapidly mutating religions (especially before writing became common). Modern identities that people claim to be fundamental are often tied to events that gave definition to a group that settled and was able to give itself common myths that by spreading through one side of a familly gave birth to much larger modern groups; for example the Kurds are "descendants of the Carduchi, who opposed the retreat of the Ten Thousand through the mountains in the 4th century BC." Palestinian "Arabs" (although as is now proven they are not related much to the Arabs of Arabia) could be a majority the Jews who were not forced out of the region by the Romans, or they could be Jews who converted to Christianity before Islam or they could be Jews who converted to Islam.

Not that any of this should really matter (questions about whether the Aryan invasions from S Perisa displaced the Indus Valley Civilization, fully enslaved them as untouchables or merged with them seems more interesting to me since one can see modern echos of those invasions in the caste system) But when Israel is being argued about one hears way too often about how the Palestinians dont have a right to the land they have been living on because they either 1. immigrated recently from other countries. 2. were part of some horrific Arab Invasion that makes all Muslims and Arabs guilty in the modern world or 3. because Israel was a great Jewish state for thousands of years until the Romans destroyed it and while this doesnt have anything to do with Palestinians restoring ancient Israel has a justice of its own. Many early Zionists (especially Labor Zionists) made little mention of ancient Israel as a justfication and it was all about finding a safe place for E European Jews as a result of pogroms. Even as late as 1900s there was little conflict between Palestinians and Jews in the area and the idea that the Zionist vision of a Jewish state was a danger to nonJews didnt exist (many early Zionists are clear that there would be a large nonJeiwsh population in he future state) I cant find any record of preWWI Zionists demonizing Arabs or Muslims in the way that has become quite popular in recent years. The conflicts of modern Israel have nothing to do with the ancient world and everything to do with European antiSemitism, antiColonial movements and "Arab" nationalism in the mid 20th century and the current Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (which by not being an annexation and not being temporary does have a unique character) Aside form historical interest the main reason to give the details of the ancient history is to make it so modern hatred myths againt Arabs cant take hold because aside from being an application of historical guilt, the myths about Palestinian origins one sees posted by proIsrael types all the time is actually wrong.

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/
actually seems a little biased towards the proIsrael side in that when they list the pros and cons of Fatah's views of Israel right to exist they leave out the letters from Arafat that efectively ammended its views (and they leave out statements by Fatah leaders in recent years recognizingh Israel)

Still
http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org/Maps/introduction.html
is one of the best histories in maps that Ive ever seen.I would love to see that done with other countries and regions.

The person with the nickname "Let's see here" two posts up is intelligent.

Intelligence is not respected here on indymedia or in "we are peace activists who support the destruction of israel" circles.

"The person with the nickname "Let's see here" two posts up is intelligent. "

I also reposted all the history before that and usually post as um. I am curious to know if I convinced you that for the most part modern Palestinians didnt immigrate to the region (and are in fact likely to have ancestors who were converted Jews) and thus all talk of the Arab invasion and rights to land based off ancient history are irrelevent. I guess that doesnt stop Islamophoibia and taking quotes from the Koran out of context but if you think Judaism and Christainity are any better just read all of Leviticus. I'm an athiest and think the world would be better without religion but hatred of Islam is just as bad as antiSemitism and there seems to be a growing danger of almost pogrom like attacks on Muslism in both the US and Europe so one has to fight against Islamophobia even if one doesnt like the idea of religion in general. Consumer culture may ultimately get rid of religion, and thus religious hatreds too (afterall the version of Christmas celebrated in the US was partly a creation of Coca Cola; with red and white becoming the color of the holiday BECAUSE of the colors of the brand) but for all that I dislike religion I dont really think a world with a common religion focused around times one should go on shopping sprees is a very positive vision of the future,

In the words of Sheikh Ibrahim Mudairis who delivered a sermon on Palestinian television, for which he was subsequently condemned by Palestinian Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, "The Jews are the cancer spreading all over the world…Jews are responsible for all wars and conflicts…Do not ask what Germany did to the Jews but what the Jews did to Germany…"

is that hate or politics?

To "or is there a difference" above,

People truly interetsed in peace and a better world would be angered by that particular palestinian religious leader consider that it's hard for Israel to entrust groups who speak and feel that way, to put it lightly.

Antisemites who pretend to "only" be antizionist would ignore or, defend it, or somehow twist it into something anti-israel, instead of just outright condemning it with no conditions/disclaimers attached.

"People truly interetsed in peace and a better world would be angered by that particular palestinian religious leader"

There is some pretty nasty antiSemitic stuff that one hears from a small minority of Palestinians. Its good that Abbas spoke out.

The question I would have for Israelis who see antiSemitism among some Palestinians as a reason to continue the occupation is how they really think denying Palestinians a state makes things any safer for anyone in Israel. Collective punishment is an evil in its own right (especially when a whole people are punished for the actions of a few) but just out of shear self-interest the occupation and settlements makes little sense and gives real cause for nonAntiSemitic Palestinians to resent Israel giving a psychological motive for the creation of new antiSemites.

So the Jewish people forming a homeland for themselves is the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham 3,000 years ago. That's why we Jews have come back after 2,000 years to take it back. And although we have never lived in Palestine continuously, if you were Jewish you do the same thing. We can steadily drive the Palestinians off the land or we can do what Hitler finally did to us in the last few years of the 13 years of the Nazi reign from 1942-1945. Which would you prefer? In fact, if you don't let us keep all of Palestine, we might just implement our own final solution for the Palestinians once and for all.

WOuld you prefer that?

It's true that other people have suffered just as bad, sometimes worse, some are still suffering, and sometimes suffered even millions far more deaths in their oppression than we Jews did in the Holocaust, but so what?

Israel is ours.