15 February 2016

Historical Opinion Piece on the Filistin People VS The Deed to the Promised Land

I find this interesting that after so many years of debating with these Arabs that occupy Gaza and the Shomron and Yehuda Villages, they now want to become another Arab Tribe called "Palestinians". There was never a Palestine government, and neither an indigenous people separate from the *Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese, or Egyptians. Even Jordan was invented [on the land that was to be for the Jewish People]. Doesn't anyone remember the Sykes Pico Agreement?

The Agreement is considered to have shaped the region, defining the borders of Iraq and Syria and leading to the current conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. The Middle East still rocking from first world war pacts made 100 years ago that shaped the region may be forgotten in the west, but in the Middle East their significance still looms large. The Guardian.

"Recent events have proved as troublesome as past ones. Summer 2016 will see the long-overdue Chilcot report into Britain’s role in the 2003 invasion of Iraq – a prime factor behind the current mayhem in the region. As Toby Dodge of the LSE has expressed it: the advances of Isis were “not caused by a century-old legacy of Anglo-French colonialism” but by “the contemporary flaws within the political system” set up after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein."


I invite you to comment please on this Historical Opinion Piece on the Filistin People
Do you think this piece is valid, correct, relative to the State of Israel, or worthy of validating?


So says a YNet Opinion Piece by Ben-Dror Yemini:  The New Palestinian People.

There is no Palestinian people
said MK Anat Berko, creating a minor uproar.
The late Golda Meir said the same thing before her.


Historically, Berko is correct. There was no Palestinian people. The name "Palestina” with a P was bestowed by Roman conquerors. It was named after the Philistines, who were not even Semitic, to annoy the Jews. The name was adopted later by the Christians, but not by the Jews. With the Muslim conquest, the "Jund Filastin" district was established, with Ramle being the district capital, not Jerusalem. Starting in the 11th century, this was no longer the case, either.

The name "Filistin" or" Filastin" was thrown around on occasion, but it did not connote a national identity. The whole area was considered part of A-Sham, or Greater Syria. In 1911, two Christian family members created the newspaper "Filistin," which supported the annexation of the area into Greater Syria.

In Mandatory Palestine, only Jewish institutions used the term Palestine-E.I. The Anglo-Palestine Bank became Bank Leumi and the Palestine postal service became the Israeli postal service.

**Mandatory Palestine 
was a geopolitical entity 
under British administration, 
carved out of Ottoman Southern Syria 
after World War I

But what about the Biblical historical mandate given
to Avraham Avinu by G–D
for Yitzchak and Yaakov and his descendants, 
i.e. today's Jewish Nation?

In contrast, the Arabs did not call themselves Palestinians during the Mandate, and no Arab Institution called itself Palestinian. The outstanding representatives were called the Arab Higher Committee rather than the Palestinian Higher Committee. At the head of the struggle against Zionism were Arabs, not necessarily from Mandatory Palestine. The identity that developed, insofar that it did develop, was an Arab one.

The mufti felt like a regional leader, not a local leader. Fawzi Kaukji, who was prominent in the uprising against the British and against Israel, was actually born in Tripoli. Ahmad Shukeiri, the first PLO chairman, was born to a Lebanese family who immigrated to Mandatory Palestine and he even served as the Saudi ambassador to the United Nations. He and his friends fought against Zionism and for the liberation of Palestine, but even they did not define themselves as Palestinians.

This continued for decades after the establishment of Israel. From 1949 to 1967, there was no British or Israeli rule over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In these two decades, not ancient history but utterly contemporary, a separate Palestinian identity was not created. The more established Palestinian institutions were sponsored by the Arab states, as part of the struggles among themselves. 

Needless to say, a Palestinian state was not established. Why? There was no occupation. King Hussein of Jordan made it clear during those years that “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan," and that “Jordan in its two parts is the homeland of all the Palestinians." 

Actually, the Six Day War and the Israeli conquest were the biggest catalysts for the development of a separate Palestinian national identity. The fact that there was no Palestinian people in the past does not mean that there is no Palestinian people today. Indeed, *it is not clear what the difference is between Jordanians, Palestinians and the Syrians themselves. They have same language, religion, culture, and often shared tribal or familial kinship. But identity is a flexible matter sometimes. In any case, it is self-defined. 

Logic says there is no need for a separate Palestinian state. Jordan already exists. And the one-state solution is unworthy of Jews and Palestinians. It is worthy of both banks of the Jordan River, east and west. Palestinian leaders, even the last two decades, have made every effort to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. So Berko is right about the past. At present there is no need to deny Palestinian nationalism, because whoever denies it now will find themselves in a binational state in the future.


This is one gigantic myopic oversight 
by the Israelis that believe 
the State of Israel is the beginning of Jewish History.



–––––––––––––––––––––––––––

**Wikipedia on Mandatory Palestine

The Promised Land by Rabbi Pinchas Winston Shlit"a:

"The Torah tells us that when God promised Eretz Yisroel to Avraham Avinu, he asked God, ìHow can I know that I will inherit it? (Bereishis 15:8). Well, Avraham Avinu, a person might ask, didn't God just promise you the land? However, the Talmud quickly points out, that Avraham's questioning of God's promise had little to do with him, but everything to do with his descendants (Megillah 31b). Parshas Shlach."

"Deed to the Promised Land" Vintage Rabbi Lazer Brody Shlit"a

"The danger of our lack of faith in ourselves and in our beloved homeland is terrible, and just as bad as the threat from our enemies on the other side of our borders...We live in the Land of Israel by virtue of the Torah. It’s therefore easy to understand that without Torah, one has no justification or motivation for living in Hashem’s promised land. King David says emphatically (Psalm 105:44-45), “And He gave them the lands of the nations, and they inherited the peoples’ acquisitions; So that they would keep His statutes, and observe His laws.” King David, King of Israel, Hashem’s anointed, and great grandfather of Moshiach is revealing to us that Hashem gave us the Land of Israel for the sole purpose of living by His Torah and observing His commandments. One can easily understand how those among us that don’t live by the Torah can so readily destroy Jewish settlements in the Land of Israel and offer to make concessions to the hostile neighbors that encircle us. Breslev


You may also find it interesting to listen to Walter Bingham as he lunges into his diatribe on, "Why Arabs have no right to this land – Arab claims to our land are fabricated, falsified, fallacious and frivolous."


Another perspective on the Sykes Pico Agreement, here is a link to Glenn Beck, "The 100-Year-Old Agreement You Need to Know About to Understand What’s Driving the Islamic State." The Blaze

No comments: