WN: Vatican signs first treaty with 'State of Palestine'

[Guest shiloh357]

littleflower,

 

Some of the most vile anti-semites are Jews.  It doesn't make sense, but racism never makes sense.   Actually there is a small group, a very small group of Orthodox Jews who are anti-Israel, but they do not represent the millions of Orthodox who ARE Zionists.   Those that are anti-Zionist, are a drop in the bucket compared to the vast majority who love Israel and desire to live there.

 

Given what Zionism is, to be anti-Zionist is to be racist.  Zionism's ideals for the Jews are the same as other races and if any other race were denied what Zionism wants for Jews, it would be called racism. 

[thereselittleflower]

Littleflower

 

Wikipedia is a user controlled source and as such is not a reliable source as it can be edited by anyone from any computer.   You can find all kinds of anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic rather easily because of that.   That you have to resort to Wikipedia as opposed to legitimate sources only highlights your overall lack of real knowledge of the subject matter and it shows an anti-

Semitic slant in your views.   So far your sources are less than stellar and would never be allowed even in a college research paper.

 

You cannot compare using Wikipedia with using legitimate sources like encyclopedias.   That is just nonsense.   Wikipedia changes and evolves and if someone doesn't like what it says, they can go in and change what they want.   Any user can go in, regardless of age, or education, or even knowledge of the subject matter and infect it with whatever they think, be it right or wrong.

 

if you are going to use Wikipedia, there is no reason on my part to take your arguments seriously.

 

Which is why I qualified what I presented by saying the article is heavily footnoted.  While I approach wikis with caution, I believe they can be useful, and one must use them carefully and only as a jumping off point.  The article I last quoted was heavily footnoted with well over 100 footnotes (maybe 200 I don't remember) and someone who seriously wants to find the original sources should be able to do so.

 

There is a saying -  don't shoot the messenger.    I think that applies here.

 

I have been trying to show what I have found through providing sources.    I have asked a few times now for sources to back up your statements but nothing has been forthcoming.  Personally, I would much rather see a wiki source that I can then corroberate or not on my own, then nothing at all.

[Guest shiloh357]

Yeah, footnotes don't really mean anything in terms of accuracy.  I can present a heavily footnoted 10 page paper claiming that extra-terrestrials are living among us.   That doesn't mean my paper has incredibility.    Using Wikipedia hurts, not helps the credibility of your arguments.

[thereselittleflower]

As for your references to the term, "Palestine."   I guess you didn't close attention to what I said:   I said that there were no Arabs called Palestinians before  1967.   You drudged up a bunch of information about the term , "Palestinian."   

 

I didn't say that the term "Palestinian" didn't exist before 1967.   I said that the Arabs in Israel were never called Palestinians prior to 1967.   That is what Golda Meir said and she was right.  You are again, fact-impaired.

 

Prior to the establishment of Israel, the term "Palestinian"  applied to the Jews living there.   The Jerusalem Post was originally called "The Palestine Post."   The Israeli Philharmonic Orchestra was originally, "The Palestine Philharmonic Orchestra. 

 

In all of the newspaper articles I cited from the 1940s, NONE of them referred to the Arabs in Israel, the west bank or gaza as Palestinians.  They were called Arabs.  You will not find any Arabs called "Palestinians" prior to 1967 in any literature of the time period.   The Arabs living in Israel acutally hated being called "Palestinians."   They were Jordanians, Lebanese, Egyptians, etc.   Yasir Arafat started the "Palestine Liberation Movement"  to end the "occupation" in 1964  and that is the first time the Arabs in the region started being called Palestinians.  The title didn't stick until after 1967.

 

Yasir Arafat wanted to end the "occupation" but most people define the "occupation" as the Jewish presence in the West Bank and Gaza, but in 1964 there were no Jews in either  the West Bank or Gaza.   Arafat was trying to create a historical connection to the land of Israel by calling it by the ancient name Palestine and publishing the lie that the Palestinian people had inhabited the land from time immemorial.  But there was no Palestinian nation or Arab nation called "Palestine" in history.   It was made up, but believed by anti-Semites all over the world.   People still believe the lie as evidenced by your attempt to delegitimize Israel.

 

Well, I may be "fact-imparied" in your mind, but I disagree with your statement.  

 

I think we should bring some clarity as to who is an Arab, or we may find we are like ships passing each other in the night.

 

Arabs are not a race.  It is a collective word used to describe a group of peoples culturally and linguistically.     From the American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee:

 

Who is an Arab?

 

Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; many are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.

What is the Arab World?

The Arab World consists of 22 countries in the Middle East and North Africa: Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros Islands, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Iran and Turkey are not Arab countries and their primary languages are Farsi and Turkish respectively. Arab countries have a rich diversity of ethnic, linguistic, and religious communities. These include Kurds, Armenians, Berbers and others. There are over 300 million Arabs.

 

http://www.adc.org/2009/11/facts-about-arabs-and-the-arab-world/

 

 

If this source is not satisfactory, The New World Encyclopedia says essentially the same thing:

 

The term Arab (Arabic: عربʻarab) generally refers to those persons who speak Arabic as their native tongue. A semitic people, there are estimated to be over 300 million people living in the Arab world. There are 22 nations holding membership in the Arab League, though not all are independent. Arabs form the majority of the populations ofAlgeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar,Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Somalia,Djibouti, Mauritania, Comoros, and the state of Palestine are also included in the Arab League, although Arabs are not necessarily the majority of all their populations.

 

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arab

 

 

Since there are Jewish Arabs  - they are not exclusionary terms - then of course there are Palestinian Jews.  While some Palestinians were and are Jews, not all Palestinians are Jews, and so I find the argument above doesn't really hold water.

 

 

If the Palestinians who were not Jews were also not Arabs, who/what were they?

 

Even the Jewish Virtual Library, in taking the position that it is a myth that land was taken from from the Arabs, acknolwedges that Palestinians and the Arabs who left were one and the same:

 

MYTH

“One million Palestinians were expelled by Israel from 1947–49.”

 

The Palestinians left their homes in 1947–49 for a variety of reasons. Thousands of wealthy Arabs left in anticipation of a war, thousands more responded to Arab leaders’ calls to get out of the way of the advancing armies, a handful were expelled, but most simply fled to avoid being caught in the cross fire of a battle.

Many Arabs claim that 800,000 to 1,000,000 Palestinians became refugees in 1947–49. The last census taken by the British in 1945 found approximately 1.2 million permanent Arab residents in all of Palestine. A 1949 census conducted by the government of Israel counted 160,000 Arabs living in the new state after the war. In 1947, a total of 809,100 Arabs lived in the same area.¹ This meant no more than 650,000 Palestinian Arabs could have become refugees. A report by the UN Mediator on Palestine arrived at an even lower refugee figure—472,000. ²

FACT

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFrefugees.html

 

 

In the next paragraph they clearly distinguish between the Palestinians and the Jews, not referring to the Jews who were displaced as Palestinians at all.

 

The source of this information in the last quote above is from 1948, long before 1967, before which you claimed Arabs were never called Palestinians by anyone.

 

² Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine, Submitted to the Secretary-General for Transmission to the Members of the United Nations, General Assembly Official Records: Third Session, Supplement No. 11 (A/648), Paris, 1948, p. 47 and Supplement No. 11A (A/689 and A/689/Add.1, p. 5; and “Conclusions from Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine,” (September 16, 1948), U.N. doc. A/648 (part 1, p. 29; part 2, p. 23; part 3, p. 11), (September 18, 1948).

 

From the "Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine" listed above we find this reference to Palestinian Arabs from 1948 - this is original source material:

 

The Arab attitude

8. The Arabs, including not only Palestinian Arabs, but those of the seven Arab States, find it extremely difficult to accept even the fact of a Jewish State in Palestine. While recognizing the right of many Jews now in Palestine to be there and to remain there as citizens of a Palestinian State, they bitterly reject Jewish nationalistic aspirations for a separate State. That the Arab States made a tragic mistake in employing force in Palestine cannot be questioned. But the very fact that they resorted to this extreme action and were willing to run the risk of thus offending the international community is in itself a measure of the intensity of their feeling on the question.

 

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/ab14d4aafc4e1bb985256204004f55fa?OpenDocument

 

 

 

 

As you can see, everything I find indicates the exact opposite of what you have claimed.  

Edited July 4, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[thereselittleflower]

Yeah, footnotes don't really mean anything in terms of accuracy.  I can present a heavily footnoted 10 page paper claiming that extra-terrestrials are living among us.   That doesn't mean my paper has incredibility.    Using Wikipedia hurts, not helps the credibility of your arguments.

 

Yet, the footnotes give you something to verify.  They are meaningless if ignored.      Are you suggesting if I provided nothing at all the credibility of my arguments would be higher?

[Guest shiloh357]

Footnotes simply means you didn't plagiarize.  Footnotes don't mean that your argument is true.   Footnotes simply mean that you can find people who believe as you do and you use them as sources for your position.  It doesn't mean that your argument is accurate or true.   

 

Truth is not based on how many people I can find that agree with me. If I can find 100 footnotes to a paper claiming that we are living with extra-terrestrials, does that mean we are in fact, living with extra-terrestrials???   No, it doesn't.  It just means I found 100 sources that agree with me, and they are as wrong as I am.

[Guest shiloh357]

You are fact and history impaired.   Find ONE historical source from 1939-1950  where the Arabs in Israel were called Palestinians.

 

The only reference to Palestinians prior to 1948 were Jews.  That's fact and that's history and I defy you to prove otherwise.   I am not going to engaging meaningless parsing over the meaning of the word, "Arab."

 

This morning, I  provided a huge number of historical sources from the 1940 and 50s and not one them every referred to the Arabs as Palestinians.   So history is not on your side. 

[ayin jade]

Littleflower

 

Wikipedia is a user controlled source and as such is not a reliable source as it can be edited by anyone from any computer.   You can find all kinds of anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic rather easily because of that.   That you have to resort to Wikipedia as opposed to legitimate sources only highlights your overall lack of real knowledge of the subject matter and it shows an anti-

Semitic slant in your views.   So far your sources are less than stellar and would never be allowed even in a college research paper.

 

You cannot compare using Wikipedia with using legitimate sources like encyclopedias.   That is just nonsense.   Wikipedia changes and evolves and if someone doesn't like what it says, they can go in and change what they want.   Any user can go in, regardless of age, or education, or even knowledge of the subject matter and infect it with whatever they think, be it right or wrong.

 

if you are going to use Wikipedia, there is no reason on my part to take your arguments seriously.

 

There is a real problem on wikipedia of folks who go in and deliberately post lies on various entries just for kicks. Thats why you will oftentimes see things on there, labels, that show something on an entry has been disputed. Anyone at all can edit any entry. Go on there and see for yourself. Its why wikipedia is not a reliable source. Its nothing more than anarchy.

[thereselittleflower]

Footnotes simply means you didn't plagiarize.  Footnotes don't mean that your argument is true.   Footnotes simply mean that you can find people who believe as you do and you use them as sources for your position.  It doesn't mean that your argument is accurate or true.   

 

Truth is not based on how many people I can find that agree with me. If I can find 100 footnotes to a paper claiming that we are living with extra-terrestrials, does that mean we are in fact, living with extra-terrestrials???   No, it doesn't.  It just means I found 100 sources that agree with me, and they are as wrong as I am.

 

 

I completely agree with you.  Which is why I use wiki or other encyclopedias cautiously as jumping off points and not solely authoritative.    My concern here is the tendency to immediately dismiss and discredit a source without actually taking time to understand what is being said or to research its validity.

[thereselittleflower]

You are fact and history impaired.   Find ONE historical source from 1939-1950  where the Arabs in Israel were called Palestinians.

 

The only reference to Palestinians prior to 1948 were Jews.  That's fact and that's history and I defy you to prove otherwise.   I am not going to engaging meaningless parsing over the meaning of the word, "Arab."

 

This morning, I  provided a huge number of historical sources from the 1940 and 50s and not one them every referred to the Arabs as Palestinians.   So history is not on your side. 

 

 

I did, in my post above.  I was editing the post adding sources and this may have cross posted.  I'll post it again:

 

From the "Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine" listed above we find this reference to Palestinian Arabs from 1948 - this is original source material:

 

 

UNITED NATIONS

PROGRESS REPORT

OF THE

UNITED NATIONS MEDIATOR

ON PALESTINE

SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

FOR TRANSMISSION TO THE MEMBERS OF

THE UNITED NATIONS

In pursuance of paragraph 2, part II, of resolution 186 (S-2) of the

General Assembly of 14 May 1948

 

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

OFFICIAL RECORDS : THIRD SESSION

SUPPLEMENT No. 11 (A/648)

PARIS, 1948 

 

 

 

The Arab attitude

8. The Arabs, including not only Palestinian Arabs, but those of the seven Arab States, find it extremely difficult to accept even the fact of a Jewish State in Palestine. While recognizing the right of many Jews now in Palestine to be there and to remain there as citizens of a Palestinian State, they bitterly reject Jewish nationalistic aspirations for a separate State. That the Arab States made a tragic mistake in employing force in Palestine cannot be questioned. But the very fact that they resorted to this extreme action and were willing to run the risk of thus offending the international community is in itself a measure of the intensity of their feeling on the question.

 

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/ab14d4aafc4e1bb985256204004f55fa?OpenDocument

Edited July 4, 2015 by thereselittleflower