Background to the current Israel Palestine conflict.

[Gideon300]

It seems that some posters have little idea of the history of Israel. There never were Palestinians. This link is to one of the better summaries of the history of the conflict. Even if you do not believe Israel is God's territory, if you care, you should watch and listen.

 

[Niki7]

well you can't actually grasp thousands of years of history in 11 minutes

Here is an article that some might find interesting but it will take time to read and it is part 1 of 2

sample: Having an accurate understanding of who the Palestinians really are is critical to having a correct view of Israel today. Unfortunately, historical revisionism has ruled the day on this issue for the past generation—for at least the past five decades in fact. The truth from a popular perspective is distorted, and smothered, beneath layers of false, deep-seated narratives perpetrated by Israel’s enemies, including the mainstream media, to a degree that is difficult to override. But this two-part article will give it a shot.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Having an accurate understanding of who the Palestinians really are is critical to having a correct view of Israel today.

You seem to be another one duped by the so-called "Palestinians".

Gideon is correct. There were never any "Palestinians" after the Jews were scattered abroad. The land belonged to Israel since about 1500 B.C. and the Bible stands behind that. The Ottomans eventually occupied Palestine, but were also driven out. However, there were Arabs and Jews in that land until Israel was established as a nation-state in 1948. Then the HATRED against Jews and a Jewish homeland began. But the governments of Israel have made many foolish mistakes and decisions along the way, and now is Israel is paying for the latest blunder.

 

[Niki7]

You seem to be another one duped by the so-called "Palestinians".

Gideon is correct. There were never any "Palestinians" after the Jews were scattered abroad. The land belonged to Israel since about 1500 B.C. and the Bible stands behind that. The Ottomans eventually occupied Palestine, but were also driven out. However, there were Arabs and Jews in that land until Israel was established as a nation-state in 1948. Then the HATRED against Jews and a Jewish homeland began. But the governments of Israel have made many foolish mistakes and decisions along the way, and now is Israel is paying for the latest blunder.

Well you just unloaded without reading the article. It is a biblical/historical article that reveals who the Palestinians actually are.

The hatred is thousands of years old and began when the Jews were released from Egypt.

I think a good number of people in this forum, need to calm down and actually read and try to understand what others post rather than attack and think they have done their good Christian deed for the day.

You have just self identified.

That's ok. I don't expect an apology. Apologies are rarer in this forum than palm trees in Alaska

 

[Niki7]

The truth from a popular perspective is distorted, and smothered, beneath layers of false, deep-seated narratives perpetrated by Israel’s enemies, including the mainstream media, to a degree that is difficult to override. But this two-part article will give it a shot.

now please someone tell me how a person can read the above from my post and then declare I am following the media reports

I am honestly beginning to think some people come here to correct everyone else while failing to look in the mirror

 

[Nehemiah6]

...try to understand what others post rather than attack...

That was NOT an attack. You have obviously been misinformed. Arabs from the surrounding regions came into Palestine while the Ottoman Turks ruled. They were simply migrants. But a small number of Jews always remained in Palestine.

The Origins of the Palestinian Arabs
by Daniel Pipes

No “Palestinian Arab people” existed at the start of 1920, but, by December, it took shape in a form recognizably similar to today’s.

Until the late nineteenth century, residents living in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean identified themselves primarily in terms of religion: Muslims felt far stronger bonds with remote co-religionists than with nearby Christians and Jews. Living in that area did not imply any sense of common political purpose.

Then came the ideology of nationalism from Europe; its ideal of a government that embodies the spirit of its people was alien but appealing to Middle Easterners. How to apply this ideal, though? Who constitutes a nation and where must the boundaries be? These questions stimulated huge debates.

Some said the residents of the Levant are a nation; others said Eastern Arabic speakers; or all Arabic speakers; or all Muslims.

But no one suggested “Palestinians,” and for good reason. Palestine, then a secular way of saying Eretz Yisrael or Terra Sancta, embodied a purely Jewish and Christian concept, one utterly foreign to Muslims, even repugnant to them.

This distaste was confirmed in April 1920, when the British occupying force carved out a “Palestine.” Muslims reacted very suspiciously, rightly seeing this designation as a victory for Zionism. Less accurately, they worried about it signaling a revival in the Crusader impulse. No prominent Muslim voices endorsed the delineation of Palestine in 1920; all protested it.

Instead, Muslims west of the Jordan River directed their allegiance to Damascus, where the great-great-uncle of Jordan’s King Abdullah II was then ruling; they identified themselves as Southern Syrians.

Interestingly, no one advocated this affiliation more emphatically than a young man named Amin Husseini. In July 1920, however, the French overthrew this Hashemite king, in the process killing the notion of a Southern Syria.

Isolated by the events of April and July, the Muslims of Palestine made the best of a bad situation. One prominent Jerusalemite commented, just days following the fall of the Hashemite kingdom: “After the recent events in Damascus, we have to effect a complete change in our plans here. Southern Syria no longer exists. We must defend Palestine.”

Following this advice, the leadership in December 1920 adopted the goal of establishing an independent Palestinian state. Within a few years, this effort was led by Husseini.

Other identities – Syrian, Arab, and Muslim – continued to compete for decades afterward with the Palestinian one, but the latter has by now mostly swept the others aside and reigns nearly supreme.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-origins-of-the-palestinian-arabs

 

[Niki7]

That was NOT an attack. You have obviously been misinformed. Arabs from the surrounding regions came into Palestine while the Ottoman Turks ruled. They were simply migrants. But a small number of Jews always remained in Palestine.

The Origins of the Palestinian Arabs
by Daniel Pipes

No “Palestinian Arab people” existed at the start of 1920, but, by December, it took shape in a form recognizably similar to today’s.

Until the late nineteenth century, residents living in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean identified themselves primarily in terms of religion: Muslims felt far stronger bonds with remote co-religionists than with nearby Christians and Jews. Living in that area did not imply any sense of common political purpose.

Then came the ideology of nationalism from Europe; its ideal of a government that embodies the spirit of its people was alien but appealing to Middle Easterners. How to apply this ideal, though? Who constitutes a nation and where must the boundaries be? These questions stimulated huge debates.

Some said the residents of the Levant are a nation; others said Eastern Arabic speakers; or all Arabic speakers; or all Muslims.

But no one suggested “Palestinians,” and for good reason. Palestine, then a secular way of saying Eretz Yisrael or Terra Sancta, embodied a purely Jewish and Christian concept, one utterly foreign to Muslims, even repugnant to them.

This distaste was confirmed in April 1920, when the British occupying force carved out a “Palestine.” Muslims reacted very suspiciously, rightly seeing this designation as a victory for Zionism. Less accurately, they worried about it signaling a revival in the Crusader impulse. No prominent Muslim voices endorsed the delineation of Palestine in 1920; all protested it.

Instead, Muslims west of the Jordan River directed their allegiance to Damascus, where the great-great-uncle of Jordan’s King Abdullah II was then ruling; they identified themselves as Southern Syrians.

Interestingly, no one advocated this affiliation more emphatically than a young man named Amin Husseini. In July 1920, however, the French overthrew this Hashemite king, in the process killing the notion of a Southern Syria.

Isolated by the events of April and July, the Muslims of Palestine made the best of a bad situation. One prominent Jerusalemite commented, just days following the fall of the Hashemite kingdom: “After the recent events in Damascus, we have to effect a complete change in our plans here. Southern Syria no longer exists. We must defend Palestine.”

Following this advice, the leadership in December 1920 adopted the goal of establishing an independent Palestinian state. Within a few years, this effort was led by Husseini.

Other identities – Syrian, Arab, and Muslim – continued to compete for decades afterward with the Palestinian one, but the latter has by now mostly swept the others aside and reigns nearly supreme.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-origins-of-the-palestinian-arabs

My post was directed at the fact that you ASSUMED I was not literate regarding the biblical account. Nice gloss over of what I actually tried to get across to you. Pretend someone did not say what they actually said and then you are not in error.

Now, you compound the error by dismissing the article I linked to and have come up with one of your own

I am sorry you do not seem able to see that I am not anti-Israel, but rather for them

I understand that you have to be right all the time even when you totally get wrong what someone else posted.
You are not correcting the narrative, since the article I linked to is actually a far better understanding of the conflict.

You have again demonstrated that you cannot tolerate the fact you misunderstood which makes it impossible for any sort of actual conversation. I know you have been here a long time but that does not mean you are ok with berating others when it is YOU that misunderstood.

Thank you for the meaningless address to my post; I'm done with your attitude

sleep well