Israel-Hamas Thread II

[BCP1928]

The vast majority of "Palestinians" do not want a state alongside Israel. They do not want coexistence. They want exactly what the "Palestinians" have always wanted: the end of the Jewish state.

Why should they not?

View attachment 370536

One side wants the other side dead. To put it more conciliatorily: the Jews insist on having their own state in their biblical homeland, and the Arabs, who have called themselves "Palestinians" since the mid-1960s, want to destroy it in order to establish their own state in its place.

Inhabitants of the region have been called "Palestinians" since Roman times.

It is a fundamental constant that continues to this day. 1937, 1947, 1967, 2000, 2005, 2008, 2020: every attempt at a solution has so far come to nothing. Every offer was initially rejected by the Arabs and later by the "Palestinians".

Former Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban once said:



During the Camp David negotiations in 2000/2001, Israel offered the "Palestinians" their own state in Gaza and Judea/Samaria with East Jerusalem as its capital. Instead of seizing the opportunity and negotiating the details afterwards, "Palestinian" leader Arafat rejected the offer and instead launched the Second Intifada, a years-long war of suicide bombings and terror against the Israeli civilian population.

In 2008, Israel presented an even more far-reaching offer (the Olmert Plan), which was also rejected.

In both cases, the "Palestinians" were given the opportunity to establish their own state. However, in both cases, they let the opportunity pass them by. In reality, a state alongside Israel, rather than in place of Israel, was not an option for them.

With Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005, the "Palestinians" were once again given a great opportunity to develop their own viable "Palestinian" state.

Instead, the terrorist organization Hamas, which took power after the first and only elections, transformed Gaza into a highly militarized police state whose population was systematically indoctrinated, ideologized, and radicalized.

This was fueled and made possible by “humanitarian aid” and support for terrorism from abroad, and was particularly productive in the development of a military infrastructure with terror tunnels, weapons depots, booby traps, mines, and rocket launchers in formerly civilian facilities, from where southern Israel was subjected to constant bombardment for years.

If that's not enough to recognize what the "Palestinians" really want and what they don't want, then one should have understood it by Oct 7, 2023, at the latest. They want the destruction of the Jewish homeland. And a "Palestine" in place of Israel.

View attachment 370535

Of course, there are also those who strive for sovereignty alongside Israel rather than in its place. Those who prefer peace to eternal hatred. And those who are self-critical enough to recognize the opportunities that have been missed so far. How destructive the many negative decisions have been so far.

But not many people think that way. This is confirmed not only by numerous surveys, but also by the streamlined conformity and docility of "Palestinian" voices. How comprehensive the failure of the "Palestinian" leadership has been to date, and what dramatic consequences it has when one generation after another is fed myths of victimhood, self-pity, and hatred.

The vast majority of "Palestinians" see themselves primarily as victims of dark, colonialist, imperialist, and above all Zionist powers, and dream unwaveringly of a return to a "Palestine" that never existed (Here's why).



Or, as it says in the original Arabic version:



"Palestine" is to become Arab again. And the Jews will either be murdered, expelled, or subjugated. Israel experienced a glimpse of what it means when these dreams become reality on Oct 7, 2023. The invasion, barbarism, slaughter, torture, and genocidal murder of Jews perpetrated by Hamas and its accomplices show what the “liberation of Palestine” would look like. They reveal what the so-called return, which has been drummed into "Palestinians" since childhood, looks like. They illustrate what awaits the Jews of Israel in the event of an emergency.

The Jews of Israel faced their own destruction. Their own death. And collective annihilation.

But one thing has been clear ever since: Israel will not allow itself to be weak again. That moment will not be repeated. And the specter of death will not haunt Israel again anytime soon. Not from Gaza. Not from Judea and Samaria. And not from any kind of "Palestinian" state.

It is not the Jews who are to blame for the fact that the "Palestinians" still do not have their own state. Not the Zionists. Not the settlers. Not the Israeli right wing. And not Prime Minister Netanyahu either. The "Palestinians" themselves are to blame!

Admittedly, they were abused by their Arab brothers for decades as the spearhead in the fight against Israel. Not only were they kept in a state of permanent dependency by the UN, but they were also supported in their self-deception that they had an eternal right of return. They were stylized as victims, on whose backs Europeans in particular grew into their role as merciful benefactors. And they were instrumentalized by anti-Semites and Israel haters around the world as a weapon against Jews and the Jewish state.

But as badly as they were treated by their supposed allies and benefactors, the "Palestinians", are not just victims. Not just objects. They are subjects. Actors. Decision-makers. And those decisions have consequences. And despite the distractions, they bear responsibility for them.

The Arab-Palestinian path of all or nothing has failed. The attempt to destroy the Jewish state is backfired. And the course set for violence has brought nothing but countless deaths and endless suffering. Except certainty. Israeli certainty.

View attachment 370537

This means that there will be no further terrorist state on Israel's border, neither in Gaza nor in Judea and Samaria. Israel will not commit suicide with the assistance of the Europeans, nor will it accept euthanasia from the UN.

And as long as the "Palestinians" do not abandon their feverish dream of destroying Israel, nothing will change. They have always known this. Israel has learned it in the most brutal way imaginable. And the sooner the Europeans and the rest of the world finally understand this, the better.

That's all very well, but it doesn't answer the question: The indigenous people of the other former Ottoman provinces got their own countries and eventually independence. Why not the indigenous people of the former Ottoman Palestine?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Mexico’s Jewish president calls on Israel to end ‘genocide in Gaza’​

Speaking to journalists at her daily news conference, Sheinbaum said Mexico stands “with the international community to stop this genocide in Gaza.”

Since taking office last year, Sheinbaum has repeatedly called for a cease-fire and reiterated Mexico’s support for a two-state solution in the region, but until Monday she had refrained from categorizing what is unfolding in Gaza as a genocide.

Her comments on Gaza come amid growing global consensus that Israel is committing genocide.

 

[Hentenza]

Inhabitants of the region have been called "Palestinians" since Roman times.

That is not true. The term Palestine comes from Philistine and originally denoted the coastal area north and south of Gaza which was occupied by the Philistines. The term (and derivatives) has been around since the 12yh century BC found in Egyptian and Assyrian tablets as Purusati and Paladtu respectively. In the Hebrew Bible it was rendered as Pereshet.

Hadrian merely renamed the province of Judaea to Syria Palestinia after the Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 CE). He repurposed the term by associating it with the ancient enemies of the Jews, the Philistines, as a political act to erase the connection between the land and its Jewish inhabitants after the destruction of their temple.

No one there called themselves Palestinians, they merely called themselves Arabs or Jews or Christians. etc. , until after the 1967 six day war. Palestinian was used as a geographical term which included all inhabitants of the area including Jews and Christians. After the 1967 six day war the term then became one of Arab identity.

That's all very well, but it doesn't answer the question: The indigenous people of the other former Ottoman provinces got their own countries and eventually independence. Why not the indigenous people of the former Ottoman Palestine?

The Arabs living in the geographical area could have started their own country millennia ago but they were not united and lived primarily in clans and self identified as Arab.

 

[Benaiah468]

Why should they not?

Inhabitants of the region have been called "Palestinians" since Roman times.

That's all very well, but it doesn't answer the question: The indigenous people of the other former Ottoman provinces got their own countries and eventually independence. Why not the indigenous people of the former Ottoman Palestine?

One might wonder why so many refuse to show respect to the "Palestinians" and take them at their word.

To the credit of the "Palestinians", it must be said that for more than a century they have been consistent in word and deed, rejecting any proposal to establish another Arab state on the territory of the defunct Ottoman Empire if that additional Arab state must have a border with the only sovereign state of the Jewish people.

British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin provided the clearest diagnosis of the priorities of the "Palestinian" Arabs in February 1947, when none of today's excuses, settlements, occupation, Netanyahu, existed. He stated

"For the Jews, the essential principle is the creation of a sovereign Jewish state. For the Arabs, the essential principle is to resist to the utmost the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine."

Beavin's words remain as accurate as they are prophetic, even nearly eight decades later.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the so-called refugee issue. Unlike other refugee groups, who were essentially told to move and accept the new borders and sovereignties established after the collapse of empires, the Arab refugees of the 1948 war, which was fought with the stated goal of preventing a Jewish state, were allowed to hijack an organization, UNRWA, to create an ever-growing group of people who call themselves "refugees" and refuse to settle until they achieve their goal of a Jewish state.

Today, UNRWA erroneously counts over six million such "refugees", while "Palestinian" leaders themselves speak of eight to nine million. Their demand is that all of them, children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of the original refugees, have an individual "right of return" to settle in Israel. With eight million Jews and two million Arab citizens, the implementation of this settlement project would make Jews a minority in an Arab state, even though Arab states have a disastrous record of treating their Jewish minorities and launched ethnic cleansing against nearly a million Jews when they dared to consider themselves equal.

The figures on the flight and expulsion of Jews from Arab states are shocking: of the more than 250,000 Moroccan Jews, only about 2,000 remained in the country. Tunisia was home to 100,000 Jews; today there are 1,000. In 1948, there were 75,000 Jews living in Egypt and 135,000 in Iraq; today there are fewer than 20 in each country. In Yemen, there were about 60,000; today their number is estimated at 50. The Syrian Jewish community was decimated from 30,000 to fewer than 15. In 1948, there were still 140,000 Jews living in Algeria and 38,000 in Libya. Today, there are no Jews left in either country.

Unfortunately, the only state of "Palestine" that the "Palestinians" have enthusiastically accepted is one that could best be described as Schrödinger's "Palestine". Is "Palestine" a state that takes responsibility for invading Israel to commit a horrific massacre? Is "Palestine" a state that recognizes that the millions of people already living in this "Palestine" are not, and cannot be, fifth-generation "Palestinian refugees"? Is "Palestine" a state that ends the myth that millions of "Palestinians" have the right to settle not in this state, but in another state, Israel, of which they were never citizens, the so-called "right of return"? Is "Palestine" a state that surrenders and ends the war? No, for all these adult purposes, "Palestine" is not a state. The cat is dead.

But is "Palestine" a state in order to harass Israel in international forums (the entire case before the ICC was based on this idea)? Yes, then "Palestine" is very much a state. The cat is alive.

Why hasn’t Arab representative government ever been established in "Palestine", either in 1948 or during the next 19 years of Arab rule? Adherents to a separate "Palestinian" identity were a mute minority in Judea/Samaria and Gaza during the 19 years of Jordanian and Egyptian rule, until Israel took control from the Jordanians and the Egyptians in 1967. Suddenly a separate "Palestinian" peoplehood appeared and claimed it deserved nationhood and 21 other Arab states went along with it.

Centuries before Muslims and Arabs even existed, the Romans imposed the name "Palestine" on the Jews and ancient Israel. They banned circumcision and restructured and renamed the province of Judea as "Syria Palaestina". For they remembered the Peleset, the Philistines: by giving the region the name of their historically documented enemies, they set an example. A humiliation. And so the name "Palestine" for the region came into being in the first place.

At the time of Jesus, there were no Arabs living in the Holy Land; like the Bedouins, they only migrated there after the Romans expelled most of the Jews, filling the vacuum that was created! Islam did not emerge until around 800 years later.

There is no mention of "Palestine" in the Qur'an. The region is referred to in the Qur'an as the land promised to the sons of Israel (Sura 5:20-26). Sura 26:59 states that the land will be inherited by the Jews

So it was. And We awarded it ˹all˺ to the Children of Israel. Sura 26:59

Furthermore, there are other passages in the Qur'an that confirm Israel as the permanent home of the Jews (e.g. 2:251; 7:137; 10:93; 17:104; 21:70-71; 28:5-6).

How can the "Palestinians" have the right to establish a state on the Jewish land of Israel, which Allah has granted and bequeathed to the Jews?

The Arabs' claim to the land of Israel is false and constitutes an attack on the Quran, on the Jews and their land. The Quran states that this land belongs to the Jews.

Just a few decades after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (70 CE), at the end of the first century CE, flourishing Jewish communities existed once again in Caesarea, Ashkelon, Acco, Beth Shean, and elsewhere. After the suppression of the Jewish revolt under Bar Kochba (132-135 CE), the Romans devastated the Jewish cities and settlements in their province of Judaea and sold many Jews into slavery, but Jewish settlement of the land continued, with Tiberias now becoming the spiritual center. It was there that the Jerusalem Talmud was completed at the end of the 4th century.

 

[Benaiah468]

Why should they not?

Inhabitants of the region have been called "Palestinians" since Roman times.

That's all very well, but it doesn't answer the question: The indigenous people of the other former Ottoman provinces got their own countries and eventually independence. Why not the indigenous people of the former Ottoman Palestine?

The phrase ‘from the river to the sea’, Hamas uses in its charter, encompasses the entire geographical area comprising the State of Israel and the "Palestinian" territories. Where is there still room for a Jewish state?

In the period before the founding of Israel, from 1900 onwards, European Jews and Arabs immigrated to the region in equal numbers. This is evidenced to this day by the "Palestinian" surnames, most of which originate from Egypt, Iraq or Syria. And that is why no genetic test will ever identify someone as "Palestinian".

When the renowned Arab-American historian from Princeton University, Professor Philip Hitti, spoke out in 1946 before the Anglo-American Committee against the partition of "Palestine", he said:

"There has never been anything like Palestine in history."

At that time, fewer people lived in the entire region than live in the greater Jerusalem area today. Until at least 1930, there were fewer than a million in total. The immigration boom was as great among Arabs as it was among Jews.

The British simply separated the part of their mandate territory that lay east of the Jordan River. This later became Jordan, which already accounted for two-thirds of the territory. They wanted to divide the part west of the Jordan River pretty much fifty-fifty. That was the partition plan of 1947. From the British (and UN) point of view, they wanted to give at least one-fifth to the Jews. The Jews said 'thank you' and founded Israel.

The Arabs did not want that. For them, it was their land. They did not accept a Jewish state in their caliphate. That is why Israel was attacked by all the surrounding Arab states on the night of its founding in 1948. And that is why Israel, where one in five people are now Muslim, still feels existentially threatened. This is not about occupation or colonialism. That is what the propaganda wants us to believe, like a magician at a children's birthday party. The fact is that it is deeply ingrained in the "Palestinian" soul that the region of "Palestine", including what is now Israel, is their land.

The idea of a "Palestinian" nation is based, among other things, on Mohammed Amin al-Husseini. The then Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. And member of the SS. He was the mentor of Yasser Arafat, who later became the long-time leader of the PLO, the "Palestinian" Liberation Organisation. Previously, "Palestinians" were all those who lived in the region of "Palestine". This included Druze, Bedouins and Orthodox Christians. It was a name based on origin. In 1967, Arafat and the PLO made it a unique selling point. According to their definition, "Palestinians" were now only those who were Muslim and rejected the State of Israel.

Israeli Muslims, who today make up 20% of the Israeli population, were and are traitors in their eyes. The same applies to Israeli Bedouins and Druze who fight against the "Palestinians". The Arabs who today call themselves "Palestinians" are the remnants. The legacy of immigration from all Arab countries. They had to create their own existence.

The "Palestinians" do not even have a word for "Palestine". Or for themselves. They say filastin. If the Arabic language is indigenous to the region, why does it not have its own word for it? Language is always a fingerprint of society. It reveals a great deal about the ethnicity, people or group that speaks it.

"Palestinians" are not an ethnic group. Today, they can be described as a people, but that is something different by definition. They do not have their own language. They do not have their own history. They do not have a culture that clearly distinguishes them from others. What they might call "Palestinian culture" applies to all religions and ethnic groups living in the region of "Palestine". This includes Jews, Druze, Christians, and Bedouins. What sets them apart is not "Palestinian", but Arab. There is no "Palestinian culture" because "Palestinians" in the modern sense have only existed since 1964.

When "Palestinians" refer to "Palestine" as "Falestine", it is an exonym. However, if they were native to the region, should they not have an endonym? They do not have an internal name, a self-designation, or an endonym for the region. This is because they never possessed, shaped, or influenced the region in a way that would have given rise to an endonym. "Palestine" was not named after the "Palestinians"; rather, the "Palestinians" are Arabs who named themselves after the region. The Arabs immigrated there as a result of Islamic expansion. However, it was always ruled, governed, and owned by others. Ultimately, and for the longest period of time, it was ruled by the Turks, who are not Arabs.

After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the victors decided to give a small part to the Jews. And the Arabs could not accept that.
The Arabs living there had to reinvent themselves, give themselves an identity. And a name. And that is why "Palestinians" call themselves "falestine". They had to resort to an old word, a Roman one, a Latin one, an exonym, like everyone else. They don't have their own word for it. Not even all the letters.

 

[Vanellus]

The people of Italy have worked out that Israel is in the wrong.

Clashes as tens of thousands join pro-Palestinian demos in Italy

In Rome, some 20,000 people gathered in front of the main Termini train station, according to local police, many of them students, shouting "Free Palestine!" and holding up Palestinian flags.
Some had marched via the Colosseum, those at the front holding up a giant banner saying "Against Genocide. Let's block everything."

At Termini station, Michelangelo, 17, told AFP he was there to support "a population that is being exterminated".
Francesca Tecchia, 18, was protesting "for the first time", because "what is happening (in Gaza) is too important", she said.
"Italy must come to a standstill today," said Federica Casino, a 52-year-old worker protesting with the students for Gaza's "dead children and destroyed hospitals".
"Italy talks but does nothing," she said.

 

[Benaiah468]

The people of Italy have worked out that Israel is in the wrong.

Clashes as tens of thousands join pro-Palestinian demos in Italy

The first question that the anti-Israel genocide chorus must answer is: Why aren't the death tolls higher?

If the intentions and actions of the Israeli government really are "genocide", if it is so evil that it seeks to exterminate the inhabitants of Gaza, why has it not been more methodical and far more lethal?

Why, for example, not hundreds of thousands of deaths, as opposed to the nearly 60,000 reported so far in almost two years of war by the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health, which does not distinguish between dead soldiers and civilians?

It is not as if Israel lacks the capacity to cause far greater destruction than it has done so far. It is the leading military power in the region, now stronger since it decimated Hezbollah and humiliated Iran. It could have bombed without warning, instead of routinely warning Gaza's residents to evacuate areas it intended to attack. It could have bombed without putting its own soldiers, hundreds of whom have been killed in combat, at risk.

The Nazis and their partners killed Jews in the Holocaust because they were Jews, and Hutus killed Tutsis in the genocide in Rwanda because they were Tutsis.

When Hamas invaded on 7 Oct and deliberately slaughtered families in their homes and young people at a music festival, they too killed Israelis as such.

In contrast, the fact that over a million German civilians died in WWII, thousands of them in horrific bombings of cities such as Hamburg and Dresden, made them victims of war, but not of genocide. The Allies' goal was to defeat the Nazis because they had led Germany into war, not to exterminate Germans simply because they were Germans.

In response, Israel's bitter critics point to the extent of the destruction in Gaza. They also point to a handful of statements by some Israeli politicians who dehumanise the inhabitants of Gaza and promise brutal retaliation. But angry comments in the wake of Hamas's atrocities on 7 Oct can hardly be compared to the Wannsee Conference, and I know of no evidence that Israel planned to deliberately target and kill civilians in Gaza.

As for the destruction in Gaza, it is truly enormous. There are important questions about the tactics Israel has used, particularly with regard to the food distribution system they have tried to set up to deprive Hamas of control over the food supply. And hardly any army in history has gone to war without at least some of its soldiers committing war crimes. That may true in almost of wars, including WWII, when accidentally bombed schools or cold-bloodedly murdered prisoners of war.

But failed humanitarian efforts, trigger-happy soldiers, attacks that hit the wrong targets, or politicians seeking revenge are not genocide. It is war in its usual tragic dimensions.

What is unusual about Gaza is the cynical and criminal way in which Hamas has waged war. In Ukraine, when Russia attacks with missiles, drones or artillery, civilians go underground, while the Ukrainian military remains above ground to fight. In Gaza, it is the other way around: Hamas hides, supplies and preserves itself in its vast tunnel system, rather than opening it up to protect the civilian population.

These tactics, which are war crimes in themselves, make it difficult for Israel to achieve its war aims: to recover the hostages and eliminate Hamas as a military and political force so that Israel will never again be threatened by another 7 Oct.

These two goals were and remain entirely justified and would end the killings in Gaza if only Hamas would hand over the hostages and surrender. These are demands that are almost never heard from Israel's supposedly impartial accusers.

 

[tampasteve]

The people of Italy have worked out that Israel is in the wrong.

It wouldn't be the first time Italians sided with the wrong side when it comes to Jews.

 

[Benaiah468]

While some experts and academics may sincerely believe in the genocide charge, it is also used by anti-Zionists and anti-Semites to equate modern Israel with Nazi Germany. The effect is to prepare the ground for a new wave of hatred against Jews, arousing hostility not only against the Israeli government but also against all Jews who support Israel as supporters of genocide. It is a tactic that Israel haters have been using for years with exaggerated or false accusations of Israeli massacres or war crimes that, upon closer inspection, have proven to be false. The genocide accusation is more of the same, but with more deadly consequences.

If genocide is to retain its status as a unique and horrific crime, the term must not be applied indiscriminately to every military situation we dislike. Wars are terrible enough. But misusing the term genocide risks blinding us to real genocides when they occur.

The war in Gaza should be ended in such a way that it never happens again. Calling it genocide does nothing to promote that goal, except to dilute the meaning of a word whose value we cannot afford to diminish.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The first question that the anti-Israel genocide chorus must answer is: Why aren't the death tolls higher?

The threat of international condemnation puts a constraint on the pace they can achieve.

 

[BCP1928]

The phrase ‘from the river to the sea’, Hamas uses in its charter, encompasses the entire geographical area comprising the State of Israel and the "Palestinian" territories. Where is there still room for a Jewish state?

The question is, why should there be a Jewish state at all?

 

[Chesterton]

Inhabitants of the region have been called "Palestinians" since Roman times.

Have a citation for that?

 

[BCP1928]

The phrase ‘from the river to the sea’, Hamas uses in its charter, encompasses the entire geographical area comprising the State of Israel and the "Palestinian" territories. Where is there still room for a Jewish state?

In the period before the founding of Israel, from 1900 onwards, European Jews and Arabs immigrated to the region in equal numbers. This is evidenced to this day by the "Palestinian" surnames, most of which originate from Egypt, Iraq or Syria. And that is why no genetic test will ever identify someone as "Palestinian".

When the renowned Arab-American historian from Princeton University, Professor Philip Hitti, spoke out in 1946 before the Anglo-American Committee against the partition of "Palestine", he said:



At that time, fewer people lived in the entire region than live in the greater Jerusalem area today. Until at least 1930, there were fewer than a million in total. The immigration boom was as great among Arabs as it was among Jews.

The British simply separated the part of their mandate territory that lay east of the Jordan River. This later became Jordan, which already accounted for two-thirds of the territory. They wanted to divide the part west of the Jordan River pretty much fifty-fifty. That was the partition plan of 1947. From the British (and UN) point of view, they wanted to give at least one-fifth to the Jews. The Jews said 'thank you' and founded Israel.

The Arabs did not want that. For them, it was their land. They did not accept a Jewish state in their caliphate. That is why Israel was attacked by all the surrounding Arab states on the night of its founding in 1948. And that is why Israel, where one in five people are now Muslim, still feels existentially threatened. This is not about occupation or colonialism. That is what the propaganda wants us to believe, like a magician at a children's birthday party. The fact is that it is deeply ingrained in the "Palestinian" soul that the region of "Palestine", including what is now Israel, is their land.

The idea of a "Palestinian" nation is based, among other things, on Mohammed Amin al-Husseini. The then Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. And member of the SS. He was the mentor of Yasser Arafat, who later became the long-time leader of the PLO, the "Palestinian" Liberation Organisation. Previously, "Palestinians" were all those who lived in the region of "Palestine". This included Druze, Bedouins and Orthodox Christians. It was a name based on origin. In 1967, Arafat and the PLO made it a unique selling point. According to their definition, "Palestinians" were now only those who were Muslim and rejected the State of Israel.

Israeli Muslims, who today make up 20% of the Israeli population, were and are traitors in their eyes. The same applies to Israeli Bedouins and Druze who fight against the "Palestinians". The Arabs who today call themselves "Palestinians" are the remnants. The legacy of immigration from all Arab countries. They had to create their own existence.

The "Palestinians" do not even have a word for "Palestine". Or for themselves. They say filastin. If the Arabic language is indigenous to the region, why does it not have its own word for it? Language is always a fingerprint of society. It reveals a great deal about the ethnicity, people or group that speaks it.

"Palestinians" are not an ethnic group. Today, they can be described as a people, but that is something different by definition. They do not have their own language. They do not have their own history. They do not have a culture that clearly distinguishes them from others. What they might call "Palestinian culture" applies to all religions and ethnic groups living in the region of "Palestine". This includes Jews, Druze, Christians, and Bedouins. What sets them apart is not "Palestinian", but Arab. There is no "Palestinian culture" because "Palestinians" in the modern sense have only existed since 1964.

When "Palestinians" refer to "Palestine" as "Falestine", it is an exonym. However, if they were native to the region, should they not have an endonym? They do not have an internal name, a self-designation, or an endonym for the region. This is because they never possessed, shaped, or influenced the region in a way that would have given rise to an endonym. "Palestine" was not named after the "Palestinians"; rather, the "Palestinians" are Arabs who named themselves after the region. The Arabs immigrated there as a result of Islamic expansion. However, it was always ruled, governed, and owned by others. Ultimately, and for the longest period of time, it was ruled by the Turks, who are not Arabs.

After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the victors decided to give a small part to the Jews. And the Arabs could not accept that.
The Arabs living there had to reinvent themselves, give themselves an identity. And a name. And that is why "Palestinians" call themselves "falestine". They had to resort to an old word, a Roman one, a Latin one, an exonym, like everyone else. They don't have their own word for it. Not even all the letters.

Whatever you want to call them, they were the people who lived there when the Brits took over from the Ottomans, and that is sufficient.

 

[Philip_B]

Whatever you want to call them, they were the people who lived there when the Brits took over from the Ottomans, and that is sufficient.

You miss the point. Calling them Arabs is simply a collective label to allow for cultural blindness not to see them, as having any value or at all.

Golda Meyer argued that as there had never been a Palestinian site the was no such thing as a Palestinian, they were just Arabs. Israel was a sovereign state for the 75 years of the Davidic Kingdom. For the rest of the time since 926 BCE it has been part of a succession of empires, serving at best as a vasal state.

 

[Hentenza]

The question is, why should there be a Jewish state at all?

The ship has sailed. The question was answered in 1948.

 

[Benaiah468]

The question is, why should there be a Jewish state at all?

The State of Israel is no more artificial than other states. All states were founded by people at some point in time. But it is significant that Israel is virtually the only country whose right to exist is so hotly debated. Those who deny Israel's right to exist, who demand that the State of Israel should cease to exist, are denying the real danger that Jews still face today as a result of global anti-Semitism. People who demand a "Palestinian" state instead of Israel, not alongside Israel, are crossing a line: they are glorifying terror against Jews and longing for the destruction of the Jewish sanctuary that has been fighting for its existence since 1948.

Arabs who think this way deny their own faith. In doing so, they contradict their own prophet. G-d gave Israel the land of Canaan to live in, work in, and worship Him. The Qur'an itself accepts the Jewish people's divine title to the land of Israel.

In Genesis 13, G-d promises Abraham the land of Canaan as an eternal possession for his descendants. The entire history of the Jewish people and their connection to the land of Israel begins right there. G-d's promise is proof of Israel's claim to the land as an eternal inheritance. It is passed on to Isaac, who inherits Abraham's legacy. Through Isaac, the promise and blessing pass to his son Jacob, who becomes Israel and whose sons form the twelve tribes of Israel. This promise is central to the Hebrew faith and forms the basis of Israel's national identity. Jesus affirmed to the Samaritan woman the Abrahamic calling of Israel, that through it

shall all families of the earth be blessed. Gen 12:3

Despite their centuries-long existence in the land of Israel, He still considered the Samaritans to be foreigners, even though they certainly felt offended by this. Jesus did not deny their right to live in this land, but affirmed the unique covenant promises that Israel had enjoyed, including the promise of the land.

The Bible describes the land not only as a home for the Jewish people, but also as part of G-d's larger plan to reach and redeem the world through Israel.

What the "Palestinian" Arabs cannot claim is that they are the indigenous population of "Palestine" and that the Jews are settler-colonialists. "Palestine" was never an exclusively Arab country, even though Arabic was the colloquial language under Arab rule since the 7th century. There was also never an independent Arab or "Palestinian" state in "Palestine". Most "Palestinian" Arabs were newcomers to the British Mandate of "Palestine". It was not until the Six-Day War of 1967 that it became expedient for the Arabs to create a "Palestinian" people.

The Qur'an does not mention "Palestine", nor is it referred to anywhere as "the holy land" (al-Arad al-Muqaddash); Israel has therefore never occupied an already existing "Palestinian" state or taken its place.

Arabs certainly have a right to live in this country, but no right to the land itself. G-d's covenant was not made through Ishmael. Ishmael was the father of a great multitude, namely the Arab people. Rather, the "Palestinian" Arabs are called upon to join in the faith in the G-d of Israel.

According to Mahmoud Abbas, if a "Palestinian" state is established, Jews will not be allowed to live in Israel unless they convert to Islam. This is in complete contradiction to what the State of Israel allows. Israel has many Arab citizens, Arabs in government, and grants complete freedom of religion.

 

[Benaiah468]

The ship has sailed. The question was answered in 1948.

Since 1948, the 'key’ has been the central symbol of the "Palestinian" narrative. It is supposed to represent the ‘homeland’ that has been lost. But in reality, it symbolises the political refusal to acknowledge reality. The reality is that Israel exists. And Israel will continue to exist in the future. The 'key' therefore does not stand for remembrance, but for an open threat, for the insistence that the Jewish state has no claim to its land.

"Palestinian" propaganda has cultivated this image for decades. Schoolbooks, posters, marches, the 'key' appears everywhere, not as a sign of reconciliation, but as a constant promise: we will return, we will flood the land, we will eliminate the Jewish state.

The key to destruction: Abbas reveals the true agenda

It is no coincidence that Abbas is now demonstratively displaying this symbol in a UN speech of Sep 22, 2025. It is a deliberate signal to his own people and to the world: our position has not changed.

A small pin can reveal more than a thousand words. When Mahmoud Abbas wore the silver ‘key’ on his lapel during his speech, it was not a harmless detail, but a deliberate political message. It is the symbol of the so-called ‘right of return’, a demand that means nothing less than the end of Israel. Millions of "Palestinians" are supposed to ‘return,’ not to their own state, but to the cities and villages of Israel, which have been the home of the Jewish people since 1948. Anyone who takes this plan seriously knows that it is not a vision of peace, but a roadmap for the dissolution of the Jewish state.

It is scandalous that German observers, speechwriters and commentators overlook or conceal this signal. It is evidence of ignorance or cowardice. While Berlin continues to trott out the same old phrases about a ‘two-state solution,’ "Palestinian" leaders are sending their unambiguous symbols out into the world: no peace, no coexistence, but the dream of a ‘return’ that will plunge Israel into the abyss. Anyone who talks about ‘two states’ without demanding clear recognition of Israel as a Jewish state is pulling the wool over people's eyes and ultimately strengthening precisely those forces that propagate Israel's destruction.

This blindness is particularly intolerable in Germany, given its historical responsibility towards Israel. It is a moral bankruptcy when politicians and the media comment indignantly on every Israeli construction project in Judea and Samaria, but remain silent when Abbas openly symbolises the end of Israel. It shows how deep the double standards run.

As long as the "Palestinian" leadership clings to the dream of ‘return,’ any talk of a two-state solution is a lie. Peace requires that both sides recognise each other's right to exist. Israel has long since done so, in the Oslo Accords, in countless offers of negotiation. The "Palestinian" side has never done so. Instead, it sends symbols of hatred out into the world and finds people in the West who deliberately overlook these signals.

The truth is uncomfortable, but unavoidable: anyone who allows Abbas to continue with his key is supporting Israel's enemies. Anyone who closes their eyes is contributing to the legitimisation of anti-Semitism in a new guise. And anyone who talks about ‘two states’ without defending Israel as a Jewish state is delivering the country to political destruction.

There is no way around this clarity. Peace will only be possible when symbols such as the key disappear, when the right of return is no longer misused as a weapon, and when the Palestinian leadership finally recognises what has long been reality: Israel is the state of the Jewish people and it will remain so.

 

[Benaiah468]

On the Lebanese channel al-Mayadeen, Osama Hamdan, one of Hamas' leading officials, spoke with disarming candour. He presented the recent international steps towards recognition of a Palestinian state not as the result of diplomacy or negotiations, but as a direct consequence of 7 Oct. The day is now, in Hamdan's account, the ‘midwife’ of a political achievement. According to Hamdan, the massacre, called ‘Al-Aqsa Flood’ by Hamas, was one of the main reasons for the recognition.

These words reveal a bitter truth: Hamas sees the recognition as a reward for its violence. Instead of peace negotiations, it is terror that supposedly opens doors. Those who accept this without comment are accepting the logic of blackmail, a message that has repercussions far beyond Gaza.

And finally, his numbers game: Hamdan spoke of ‘65,000 martyrs’ who had already fallen in battle and at the same time declared that victims could not weaken Hamas, but rather strengthened the myth of eternal resistance. Here, every dead person becomes a propaganda tool, every loss fuel for new attacks.

What Hamdan's words reveal is that for Hamas, recognition is not the beginning of peaceful coexistence, but proof that violence pays political dividends. Instead of peace, the logic of terror is thus reinforced. Anyone in Europe or elsewhere who dares to take the step towards recognition without sharply distancing themselves from this interpretation sends a fatal signal: that massacres can be used to make policy.

Peace does not come about when murder and blackmail are rewarded. It only comes about when violence is delegitimised, hostages are released and Israel's right to exist is recognised without restriction.

Hamdan's speech shows that Hamas is as far from all this as it was on 7 Oct.

 

[Benaiah468]

The Global Sumud Flotilla is more style than substance. Under the guise of aid, hundreds of activists from 44 countries are travelling in search of publicity and headlines, not secure supply corridors. Israel offered to allow them to dock in Ashkelon and transport the goods in a controlled manner via established channels, an offer that the organisers rejected.

Why?

Because it is not about effectiveness, but about impact: being directly off the coast of Gaza creates provocative images that serve a simple narrative: Israel as the aggressor, Gaza as the victim.

Since the first major attempt in 2010, patterns have emerged. Even then, the Mavi Marmara delivered one thing above all else: propaganda. Violence, deaths and a wave of global outrage followed, a propaganda victory for those behind the scenes. Today, the same mechanisms are repeating themselves. Night-time claims of ‘drone attacks’, objects being dropped, hacked radio communications with ABBA music, all of this is circulating in press releases, social media posts and appeals. Often, there is no reliable evidence, and subsequent clarifications are either lacking or fade into the background behind the initial headlines.

This repetition strategy is systematic: when accusations are repeated over and over again and loudly publicised, a ‘bright spot’ emerges in the media, a public perception that can have an effect regardless of the facts. This is no coincidence, but rather a tactic. It generates outrage, mobilises supporters, and pushes politicians and the public to make quick judgements. At the same time, links to Islamist networks and Hamas are denied or downplayed, even though Israel and other sources point to financial and organisational ties.

Anyone who truly wants to help must do so in a manner that is verifiable, responsible and transparent from all sides. Those who, on the other hand, stage actions under the pretext of humanity, whose primary effect is media exploitation, are not acting altruistically, but tactically.

 

[Benaiah468]

The day before yesterday, Israel released footage showing armed Hamas fighters firing at IDF troops from Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. This, it said, was further proof that the hospital was being misused as a shield and military base.

The shooting documented on video comes directly from the hospital complex, a clear violation of international norms, according to the IDF.

The use of an active hospital as a command centre is further evidence of Hamas' cynical and systematic modus operandi,

the official statement said.

Back in April 2024, the IDF carried out a two-week operation against a terrorist base in Al-Shifa after receiving information that Hamas was reactivating it. At that time, around 200 fighters were reportedly killed and over 500 members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad were arrested.

The release of these recordings underscores Israel's position: fighting terror even in the midst of civilian structures. The army emphasises that such actions must not serve as a pretext for disproportionate attacks – but given the blurring of the lines between civilians and terrorists, the question arises: how should one respond when the enemy sets up positions in hospitals?

International scrutiny of this issue is growing: it is becoming increasingly important for Israel to ensure that its operations appear transparent and regulated. The challenge remains: combating terrorists while upholding humanitarian standards.