"ZAHIR MUHSEIN"
Strider
member" saying that Palestine does not exist.
This, of course is a lie, not only that Zahir does not exist, has never been
a PLO executive member, and has never said such a thing, but the existence
of Palestine is documented in hundreds of maps documents and most especially
in Ariel Sharon's birth certificate.
Zionist have used this phony quotation hundreds of times. Do a search on
Zahir and see for yourself that he exists only in the sick minds of the
Zionists!
Mickey
news:zM5va.36476$1H.1...@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com...
> Many Zionists have used the supposed quotation of this "PLO executive
> member" saying that Palestine does not exist.
Yup, we learned it from an Arab.
In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau"
(March 31, 1977), PLO executive committee member
Zahir Muhsein said:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of
a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our
struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In
reality today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political
and tactical reasons do we speak today about the
existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national
interests demand that we posit the existence of a
distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism.
[end quote]
AnonMoos
considering that you deliberately and very knowingly use phoney
quotations, from Benjamin Franklin to Ariel Sharon to Julius Caasar
to the Talmud. Why don't you try practicing what you preach for
once, StriderCabal?
--
SAUDIA OMNIS IN PARTES TRES DIVIDENDA EST! Free Arabia by
splitting the Saudi tyranny into its three natural parts:
Hejaz-alHarameyn, Nejd-Wahhabistan, and Gulf-Petrolia.
Murderers are not Martyrs! http://symbolictruth.fateback.com/
Jim F.
Israeli web site:
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/saa26.htm
Mr. Mushein is (was?) a leader of a small
organization called Saiqa -
"The Pioneers of the War of
Popular Liberation" was established in 1967 by the Syrian
Ba'ath party. In the article "Syria and Terrorism"
by Boaz Ganor, it is stated that:
"The organization comprised Palestinian and
Syrian soldiers and officers who had served in the Syrian army.
Salah Jedid was appointed its commander and was later
replaced by Zahir Muhsein and Assam Alkadi. Following the
principle of "Greater Syria," the organization adopted a pan-Arab
ideology, namely: "Palestine must by liberated, but there is no
justification for the establishment of a separate Palestinian state
in the liberated territory." According to the organization, "The
Palestinian people is a meaningless term which serves to attack
Israel politically."
"At its peak, the organization numbered about 2,000 terrorists,
but now numbers no more than a few hundred, organized into
three battalions in Syria and Lebanon which report to the
organization's headquarters in Damascus. Since its establishment,
Saiqa has carried out a number of terrorist attacks against
Israeli targets (both in Israel and abroad), against rival Arab
states, and against rival Palestinian organizations."
In other words these people are basically an arm of
the Syrian military, and are hardly representative
of mainstream Palestinian opinion, since most
Palestinians, as far as I am aware, have no wish
to become a part of Syria, and thus enjoy being governed
by President Assad. And indeed for many
years the PLO and the Syrian government were quite
bitter enemies. To therefore, present Mr. Mushein's
rather idiosyncratic views as being representative
of mainstream Palestinian political opinion,
as is done on innumerable Zionist web sites, is therefore
quite disingenuous, to say the least.
Jim F.
"Mickey" <mic...@comcast.netxx> wrote in message
news:LJKdnZYdbNN...@comcast.com...
Leonard Pulver
You are full of camel dung. Your misspelling of the name leads
one to believe that you have confused two terrorists with similar names.
At the time of that interview Zahir Muhsein was a member of the
PLO's executive committee. He is presently dead.
Strider
"Mickey" <mic...@comcast.netxx> wrote in message
news:LJKdnZYdbNN...@comcast.com...
> news:zM5va.36476$1H.1...@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com...
> > Many Zionists have used the supposed quotation of this "PLO executive
> > member" saying that Palestine does not exist.
Zahir Muhsein never existed, so you must have heard it wrong!
Strider
"Jim F." <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b9k1f0$jopoi$1...@ID-127596.news.dfncis.de...
Thanks for explaining this. I checked all known PLO officials, and there
was no Zahir Musein. So he is Syrian. That explains it! Thanks!
Strider
"Leonard Pulver" <red...@gta.igs.net> wrote in message
news:3EBDA5B2...@gta.igs.net...
There is no such a name listed on any PLO executive comitee. You are full
of dung.
Strider
"AnonMoos" <anon...@io.com> wrote in message
news:3EBD73F4...@io.com...
> You're not one to be accusing others of using phoney quotations,
> considering that you deliberately and very knowingly use phoney
> quotations, from Benjamin Franklin to Ariel Sharon to Julius Caasar
> to the Talmud. Why don't you try practicing what you preach for
> once, StriderCabal?
If I quoted Talmud wrong one of you Jews should have surely corrected me.
Not on did. So I must be right.
As for Franklin,& Sharon I have posted my source. Muhsein never existed as a
PLO member so you Jews are ordinary liars!
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
> considering that you deliberately and very knowingly use phoney
> quotations, from Benjamin Franklin to Ariel Sharon to Julius Caasar
> to the Talmud. Why don't you try practicing what you preach for
> once, StriderCabal?
I have a feeling Strider may actually be right. Comb the internet for
a reference to Zahir Muhsein on a pro-PLO website...and you won't find
it. I myself have yet to find any Arabic material on this man. He
could be made up or be a pseudonym. Anyone care to continue
investigating?
-Yissaskhar
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
I found information on Zahir Muhsein in Arabic.
Run a google search on "زهير
محسن" and you'll find him on all the likely
sites...and he was associated with as-Sa'iqah and fits the description
of his English bios.
Sorry Strider, you lose.
-Yissaskhar
Jim F.
apparently run by Israeli, Arab, and American
peace activists.
http://www.mideastweb.org/index.html
al-Sa'iqa (Storm, Lightning Bolt):
al-Sa'iqa (Storm, Lightning Bolt) is a commando group
formed by (and mostly consisting of) Syrian Ba'thists
officially in Sept1966, but it became operational only
in Dec 68 to rival Fatah and to support Jadid in his
power struggle with Asad for Syrian leadership. The
original leadership consisted of Yusuf Zu'ayyin, Mahmud
al-Ma'ayta (from Nov70); but these were replaced with
Asad loyalists after the Nov 70 coup. The pro-Jadid
branch remained active in Jordan until Jun 71, when
its were leaders arrested and Zuhayr Muhsin was appointed
Secretary General. It was an early supporter of the
'national authority' proposal in 1974, and was a
co-sponsor of the 1974 Palestine National Council
Resolution. It is strictly pan-Arabist, denying a
Palestinian identity except as a tactical maneuver.
Zuhayr Muhsin was assassinated in Cannes, Jul 79. More
recently is has been led by 'Isam al-Qadi (Secretary
General from 1979), with Muhammed Khalifah as deputy
(who sits on the PLO-EC), Sami al-'Atari and Majid Muhsin
(head of operations in Lebanon; Zuhayr's brother).
It is consistently pro-Syria and fought alongside Syrian
forces in Lebanon in 1976 against all other PLO forces.
It was disqualified from the PLO until Syria pressured
for its rehabilitation in Dec 76, with a large number
of defections from Sa'iqa at this point. Thereafter,
it lobbied within PLO mostly against Fatah's links with
conservative regimes, especially with Egypt. It was
against the Madrid conference and Oslo accords, and
is leading member of the "Damascus 10". Nevertheless
it participates in NIF (National Islamic Forces) from 2000.
"Leonard Pulver" <red...@gta.igs.net> wrote in message
news:3EBDA5B2...@gta.igs.net...
>
>
Jim F.
"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
This is what I found about him and his organization
from a web site, which is
apparently run by Israeli, Arab, and American
peace activists
http://www.mideastweb.org/index.html
-------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jim F.
Jim F.
"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
>
> I found information on Zahir Muhsein in Arabic.
>
> Run a google search on "زهير
> محسن" and you'll find him on all the likely
> sites...and he was associated with as-Sa'iqah and fits the description
> of his English bios.
And I have likewise found information on him in English on
sites that are not vociferously pro-Zionist which matches
what I have seen on other sites. His organization
was founded by Syrian Ba'athists, and at least initially
consisted of Palestinians who had served in the Syrian
Army, I have seen little evidence that its viewpoint
concerning Palestinian nationalism is accepted by
mainstream Palestinian opinion. In fact as far as
I can tell, it maintains a presence only in Syria and
Lebanon. While initially a member of the PLO,
it clashed repeatedly with Arafat's Fatah organization,
and was expelled for a number of years from the
PLO. And during the period when Arafat and the
elder President Assad were bitter enemies, it sided
with Assad over Arafat. So I find the constant
citations of Muhsein's views on Zionist web sites,
in order to delegitimatize Palestinian nationalism
to be more than a little disingenuous, since
they provide no evidence that his views enjoy
any wide currency among Palestinians.
Jim F.
Leonard Pulver
> -Yissaskhar
In another thread someone came up with the following:
Jim F.
If you follow this thread you will see that
Mr. Ben-Tzion eventually found material
on him on Arabic web sites. I also found
this summary about Zuhayr Muhsin and
Al-Saiqa on a web site, which is
Jim F.
"Leonard Pulver" <red...@gta.igs.net> wrote in message
news:3EBE3F68...@gta.igs.net...
Mickey
>
> "AnonMoos" <anon...@io.com> wrote in message
> news:3EBD73F4...@io.com...
> > You're not one to be accusing others of using phoney quotations,
> > considering that you deliberately and very knowingly use phoney
> > quotations, from Benjamin Franklin to Ariel Sharon to Julius Caasar
> > to the Talmud. Why don't you try practicing what you preach for
> > once, StriderCabal?
>
> If I quoted Talmud wrong one of you Jews should have surely corrected me.
ROFL... as they have, 100000000 of times
> Not one did.
Right, we ALL did.
Now, answer this, you fucking coward.
Recent "truths", by Alex Seredin (ak.a. Strider, El Paredon, Saleh El Din,
AmigoCabal, et. al.)
WARNING: Do not drink while reading this
"Mossad created Hamas, Hamas created Hezbollah. Saddam is a Mossad employee,
and so is George Bush!"
"Osama is Great"
"Osama is a Mosad agent"
"Saddam is great"
"Saddam is a Jew"
"Saddam is a butcher"
"Saddam is a hero of Israel. He has never ever done anything to harm Jews!
He started two wars on behalf and behest of Jews!"
"The Holocaust never happened"
"You are an arsehole! Dr. Shahak is a jew, a real Holocaust survivor"
"60 million Russians died in German concentration camps."
"Jews killed JFK because he would not allow them to have nukes!"
"Israel was behind the Sept. 11 attacks"
"Is that why several hundred (Muslims) of the died anyway (in the WTC)?
"Israel set off a nuke in Bali"
"Jews killed 19 members of my family in Russia"
"Jews killed 19 members of my family in the Ukraine"
"Jews killed 50 members of my family in Germany"
"Jews have killed 10 million Palestinians "
"Jews killed 100 million in Russia"
"Jews put James Traficant in jail for standing up to them."
"THERE ARE ABOUT 700,000 SLAVES IN ISRAEL"
"You are too stupid to understand that millions of people during WWII
comitted suicide out of desperation and fear!"
"There are 700,000 Thai slaves in Israel."
"Every single day Jews kill at least half a dozen Palestinians, mostly
children."
"I was in WWI"
"I was in the Boer War in South Africa"
"I was in WWII"
"I was in the Autralian RAAF"
"I was in Viet Nam"
"I am part Masai"
"I'm a Serbian"
"I'm Canadian"
"I'm Australian"
"I'm an American"
"I'm a direct descendant of Tamerlame"
"I'm a direct descendant of Kublai Khan"
"I like Jews"
"ANY KILLING IS NOT A JOKE EXCEPT FOR A JEW!"
"On April 20th we celebrate the birth of the greatest man of all time:
Adolf Hitler."
"Human? jews are not humans!"
"99% of the Jews are Russian ex-communist trash. They must be deported"
"Jews came to America as slave traders and slave keepers."
"ISRAEL NEVER REPAID A SINGLE CENT OF ANY LOAN TO UNITED STATES FOR THE PAST
30 YEARS!"
"ACTUALLY SEVERAL AUSCHWITZES EXIST IN ISRAEL, ONLY THEY ARE FAR MORE BRUTAL
THAN THE ORIGINAL AUSCHWITZ EVER WAS!"
"The sole supplier of arms to palestinians are the jews."
"NO JEWS WILL BE ELECTED IN 2004!!"
"THE ONLY TERRORISTS IN PALESTINE ARE ISRAELIS!"
"Adolf Hitler sent Eichman to Palestine, to encourage the establishment of
Israel."
"Arafat and his government have been adamant in opposing all forms of
violence!"
"After the bible, Mein Kampf was the biggest seller in U.S."
"Only one Jew died in the WTC attacks!!!"
"Anthrax cover up! (Jews did it)"
"Mossad Bombs Paradise Hotel in Mombasa"
"The US is commiting war crimes in Iraq!!!!!"
"I do have a Talmud written in the original Yiddish 19th century!"
"There is secret version of the Talmud, made in a place called Cracow, that
is for Jews only. When you call Amazon.com and try to order a Talmud, they
will ask you if you are Jewish. If you aren't they won't send it. If you
say you are, they still won't send it. I was taught about it by a rabbi,
who did so after all the Jews left."
"Albert Einstein was a genius and a thief at the same time. he was married
to Mileva Maric, a Serb, who was far gteater
physicist than he ever was"
"I was educated in Prva Muska Gimnazija in Belgrade, moron! And studied
Serbian history in detail. I also visited the Slavija hill with the person
whom Serbia respects Nikola Pasic!" - Nikola Pasic died in 1926, which would
mean Alex is 100 years old.
But the best I saved for last:
"Every single word I have ever said was the truth!"
Oh, we could go on for days, but you get the picture.
Mickey
AnonMoos
>"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
>>>> In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau" (March 31,
>>>> 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said:
>>>> "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a
>>>> Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
>>>> against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today
>>>> there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians
>>>> and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we
>>>> speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since
>>>> Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a
>>>> distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism.
>>> Many Zionists have used the supposed quotation of this "PLO
>>> executive member" saying that Palestine does not exist. This, of
>>> course is a lie, not only that Zahir does not exist,
>> I found information on Zahir Muhsein in Arabic. Run a google
>> search on "زهير
>> محسن" and you'll find him on all the likely
>> sites...and he was associated with as-Sa'iqah and fits the
>> description of his English bios. Sorry Strider, you lose.
>> -Yissaskhar
> And I have likewise found information on him in English on sites
> that are not vociferously pro-Zionist which matches what I have seen
> on other sites. His organization was founded by Syrian Ba'athists,
> and at least initially consisted of Palestinians who had served in
> the Syrian Army, I have seen little evidence that its viewpoint
> concerning Palestinian nationalism is accepted by mainstream
> Palestinian opinion. In fact as far as I can tell, it maintains a
> presence only in Syria and Lebanon. While initially a member of the
> PLO, it clashed repeatedly with Arafat's Fatah organization, and was
> expelled for a number of years from the PLO. And during the period
> when Arafat and the elder President Assad were bitter enemies, it
> sided with Assad over Arafat. So I find the constant citations of
> Muhsein's views on Zionist web sites, in order to delegitimatize
> Palestinian nationalism to be more than a little disingenuous, since
> they provide no evidence that his views enjoy any wide currency
> among Palestinians.
The quote attributed to Zahir Muhsein is a classic expression of
"Pan-Syrianism", or greater Syrian nationalism, which holds that all
of Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and western Jordan should be united into a
single state of greater Syria, which would resurrect the glories of
the lost Umayyad Caliphate. According to this viewpoint,
nationalistic sentiments based on the current states in the region
(and also specific Palestinian nationalism) are all just backwards
petty parochialisms, which only serve to hinder the realization of the
dream of a Greater Syria. Pan-Syrianism is not something which most
Palestinians speak much about nowadays, but before 1963, broad
Pan-Arabism and its variant Pan-Syrianism had more support among the
vocal and influential elements of the Palestinian Arab population than
a narrow Palestine-specific nationalism did.
--
Some Qur'an quotes: 5:20 qaala muusaa 5:21 "yaa qawmi ´dkhuluu ´l-'arDa
´l-muqaddasata ´llatii kataba ´llaahu lakum" 17:104 waqulnaa ... libanii
'israa'iila "´skunuu ´l-'arDa" || In English: Moses said, "My people,
go into the Holy Land which God has assigned to you!" And we said to the
Children of Israel, "Inhabit the land!" http://symbolictruth.fateback.com/
Jim F.
And of course at one time, Egypt and Syria were unified as
the United Arab Republic under Nasser. But that only
lasted a few years, since lots of Syrians did not want
to be governed by an Egyptian. Likewise, I don't
see much evidence that most Palestinians wish
to be governed by Syria, which is what Muhsein's
position amounted to. This is certainly not the
position of most people in the PLO, nor
of Hamas. Anyway, pan-Arabism has
long been in decline, ever since the 1967 war.
Apparently, there a lot of Zionists around who
think they can delegitimatize Palestinian national
aspirations by quoting from Mr. Muhsein,
who has been dead for almost a quarter-century
and who was from beginning to end a creature
of the Syrian Ba'ath Party.
Jim F.
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
Just for correction sake, his name appears to be more accurately
transliterated as Zuhayr Muhsin or Zuhair Muhsin or Zuheir Muhsin.
You will find more Arab websites searching him under this name.
-Yissaskhar
Jim F.
"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
Accoring to this site:
http://www.al-bab.com/arab/countries/palestine/biogCM.htm#ZuhayrMuhsin
Zuhayr Muhsin:
Sec-Gen of Sa'iqa from 1971 to 1979. b.1936, from Tulkarm.
Trained as a teacher in Amman, but lost his job in Jordan due to
Ba'thist activism; then moved to Qatar, Kuwait and then Syria in 1967.
As an Asad loyalist and Ba'th party member, was appointed to head
Sa'iqa when the pro-Jadid leadership was purged. A member of the
PLO-EC throughout his leadership of Sa'iqa, he served as head of the
military department. Was repeatedly promoted by Syria to become
chairman of the PLO-EC whenever dissatisfied with 'Arafat (esp during
early 76 clashes). Famously declared that the assertion of Palestinian
identity was just a tactical manoeuvre in the struggle (Mar77 interview).
His family's house in Tulkarm was picketed after gave support to Syria
in 1976 Lebanon clashes with Palestinians. Was assassinated in
Cannes on 15 Jul 79.
Jim F.
Strider
"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
are amongst this riffraff
Strider
liar, since he lied about his "Special Forces" bullshit also.
"Jim F." <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b9lgfp$kbocl$1...@ID-127596.news.dfncis.de...
Strider
"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
AnonMoos
>"AnonMoos" <anon...@io.com> wrote in message
>news:3EBE8FF6...@io.com...
>>"Jim F." wrote:
>>>"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
>>>news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
>>>>>> In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau" (March 31,
>>>>>> 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said:
>>>>>> "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a
>>>>>> Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
>>>>>> against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality
>>>>>> today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians,
>>>>>> Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons
>>>>>> do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people,
>>>>>> since Arab national interests demand that we posit the
>>>>>> existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose
>>>>>> Zionism.
>>>> Run a google search on "زهير
>>>> محسن" and you'll find information on
>>>> Zahir Muhsein in Arabic
>>> His organization was founded by Syrian Ba'athists, and at least
For one thing, Pan-Syrianism is not the same thing as wanting to be
ruled over by whoever happens to be in power at the moment, and for
another, I haven't been one of those who is fond of quoting that quote
(a search for "AnonMoos" turns up 4420 hits in Google Groups right
now, while a search for "AnonMoos Muhsein" turns up 2 hits).
During all of the 1950's and the majority of the 1960's, the
allegiances of Palestinians were volatile and up for grabs. If Nasser
had triumphed and created a pan-Arab state, then the Palestinians
would have become happy and patriotic citizens of pan-Arabia (and
wouldn't have even really thought of themselves as "Palestinians").
If the Syrians had swallowed Lebanon and Jordan and defeated Israel,
then the Palestinians would have become loyal citizens of Greater
Syria. It was only because both the Pan-Arab and Pan-Syrian dreams
came to nothing that the Palestinians fell back onto a narrower
specifically "Palestinian" national identity, which started to develop
in the first half of the 1960's, but only really became predominant
and somewhat deep-rooted after 1967.
Muhsein may have never been too influential, and the Muhsein quote
doesn't by itself invalidate a two-state solution -- however, it still
remains true that the Muhsein quote is a reminder of the awkward fact
that Palestinians did not unequivocally commit themselves to a
specifically "Palestinian" national identity before the mid-1960's.
Current-day Palestinians try to forget this inconvienient fact, or
to obscure it with a layer of blatherskite and lying propaganda about
so-called "historic Palestine".
AnonMoos
>"Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion" <tziy...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:9e0bc9b6.03051...@posting.google.com...
>> I found information on Zahir Muhsein in Arabic. Run a google
>> search on "زهير
>> محسن" and you'll find him on all the likely
>> sites...and he was associated with as-Sa'iqah and fits the
>> description of his English bios. Sorry Strider, you lose.
> Not really! he was not even a PLO member let alone "executive"
But you said back in message URL:<zM5va.36476$1H.1...@fe07.atl2.webusenet.com>
that he didn't even exist! Caught in a lie yet again, StriderCabal?
It wouldn't happen so often often if you didn't lie so much!
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
> > "Pan-Syrianism", or greater Syrian nationalism, which holds that all
> > of Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and western Jordan should be united into a
> > single state of greater Syria, which would resurrect the glories of
> > the lost Umayyad Caliphate. According to this viewpoint,
> > nationalistic sentiments based on the current states in the region
> > (and also specific Palestinian nationalism) are all just backwards
> > petty parochialisms, which only serve to hinder the realization of the
> > dream of a Greater Syria. Pan-Syrianism is not something which most
> > Palestinians speak much about nowadays, but before 1963, broad
> > Pan-Arabism and its variant Pan-Syrianism had more support among the
> > vocal and influential elements of the Palestinian Arab population than
> > a narrow Palestine-specific nationalism did.
>
> And of course at one time, Egypt and Syria were unified as
> the United Arab Republic under Nasser. But that only
> lasted a few years, since lots of Syrians did not want
> to be governed by an Egyptian. Likewise, I don't
> see much evidence that most Palestinians wish
> to be governed by Syria, which is what Muhsein's
> position amounted to.
> This (Pan-Syrianism) is certainly not the
> position of most people in the PLO, nor
> of Hamas. Anyway, pan-Arabism has
> long been in decline, ever since the 1967 war.
You do realise of course that the PLO and its ideology were
artificially created by Pan-Arabists in the wake of the rise of Israel
and the failure of the Pan-Jordanianism.
> Apparently, there a lot of Zionists around who
> think they can delegitimatize Palestinian national
> aspirations by quoting from Mr. Muhsein,
I think it is illustrative that non-Israel Palestinian Arab
nationalism is a new phenomenon and indeed an artificial one created
by imperialism, colonialism, and the failure of other responses to
Zionism. Jewish nationalism, on the other hand, dates back thousands
of years and is not new nor artificial.
-Yissaskhar
Jim F.
You can say that about almost form of nationalism.
See Eric Hobsbawm's comments on the nature of
nationalism from his book *Nations and Nationalism Since
1780*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
http://www.nationalismproject.org/what/hobsbawm.htm
There he writes:
"Like most serious students, I do not regard the 'nation' as a
primary nor as an unchanging social entity. It belongs exclusively
to a particular, and historically recent, period. It is a social entity only
insofar as it relates to a certain kind of modern territorial state, the
'nation-state', and it is pointless to discuss nation and nationality except
insofar as both relate to it. Moreover, with Gellner I would stress the
element of artifact, invention and social engineering which enters into the
making of nations. 'Nations as a natural, God-given way of classifying men,
as an inherent ... political destiny, are a myth; nationalism, which
sometimes
takes preexisting cultures and turns them into nations, sometimes invents
them,
and often obliterates preexisting cultures: that is a reality.' In short,
for the
purposes of analysis nationalism comes before nations. Nations do not make
states and nationalisms but the other way round."
>
> > Apparently, there a lot of Zionists around who
> > think they can delegitimatize Palestinian national
> > aspirations by quoting from Mr. Muhsein,
>
> I think it is illustrative that non-Israel Palestinian Arab
> nationalism is a new phenomenon and indeed an artificial one created
> by imperialism, colonialism, and the failure of other responses to
> Zionism. Jewish nationalism, on the other hand, dates back thousands
> of years and is not new nor artificial.
I would agree with your first statement that Palestinian Arab
nationalism is relatively recent phenomena, but I would
disagree with your statement concerning Jewish nationalism.
First of all nationalism as such really isn't much more than
two hundred or two hundred and fifty years old. Its not
something that really became a force in the world until
the time of the French Revolution. Jewish nationalism
in the modern sense is certainly less than two hundred
years old, and didn't really begin to become a significant
force until about 120 years ago. It is certainly true that
people often talked of the Jews as being a nation, but
they meant something rather different than what
modern nationalists mean. Nationalism in the modern
sense means that there is a mass movement that demands
the creation of an independent state with its own flag,
currency, armed forces, recognized borders etc.
I don't see much evidence of this among Jews until
the last two centuries, and not in any great degree
until the late 19th century. Before that most religious
Jews prayed for the coming of the Messiah who
would restore the Jews to their ancient homeland,
but that sort of aspiration had little in common with
modern nationalism, in which people unite and
struggle to create a state of their own by their
own efforts. In fact such a modern nationalism
could not take root among Jews until they
had started becoming more secular in their
outlook. Hobsbawm's comments about the
reliance on nationalist movements upon myths
applies just as much to Zionism as it does to
Palestinian nationalism or to any other nationalist
movement that one can think of.
Jim F.
>
> -Yissaskhar
Jim F.
"Finally, I cannot but add that no serious historian of nations
and nationalism can be a committed political nationalist, except
in the sense in which believers in the literal truth of the Scriptures,
while unable to make contributions to evolutionary theory, are not
precluded from making contributions to archaeology and Semitic
philology. Nationalism requires too much belief in what is patently
not so. As Renan said: 'Getting its history wrong is part of being a
nation.' Historians are professionally obliged not to get it wrong, or
at least to make an effort not to. To be Irish and proudly attached to
Ireland - even to be proudly Catholic-Irish or Ulster Protestant Irish - is
not in itself incompatible with the serious study of Irish history. To
be a Fenian or an Orangeman, I would judge, is not so compatible,
any more than being a Zionist is compatible with writing a genuinely
serious history of the Jews; unless the historian leaves his or her
convictions behind when entering the library or the study. Some
nationalist historians have been unable to do so. Fortunately, i
n setting out to write the present book I have not needed to
leave my non-historical convictions behind."
With all due respect, I think that you are just as enthralled
by myth as any Palestinian nationalist, who talks
about how a Palestinian culture has flourished
for "thousands of years."
Jim F.
"Jim F." <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b9opce$km2bi$1...@ID-127596.news.dfncis.de...
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
To an extent, perhaps.
> > > Apparently, there a lot of Zionists around who
> > > think they can delegitimatize Palestinian national
> > > aspirations by quoting from Mr. Muhsein,
> >
> > I think it is illustrative that non-Israel Palestinian Arab
> > nationalism is a new phenomenon and indeed an artificial one created
> > by imperialism, colonialism, and the failure of other responses to
> > Zionism. Jewish nationalism, on the other hand, dates back thousands
> > of years and is not new nor artificial.
>
> I would agree with your first statement that Palestinian Arab
> nationalism is relatively recent phenomena, but I would
> disagree with your statement concerning Jewish nationalism.
As an atheist, I do not acknowledge the Bible as a reliable historical
record. However, it would behoove you to open the Torah if you doubt
the antiquity of Jewish nationalism. It's all in there.
> First of all nationalism as such really isn't much more than
> two hundred or two hundred and fifty years old.
Modern nationalism as a political theory that is, the actual ideas
contained therein are much older.
> Jewish nationalism in the modern sense is certainly less than two hundred
> years old, and didn't really begin to become a significant force until about > 120 years ago.
Really? I would consider the various Jewish revolts and attempts to
regain Israel over the millennia to be significant.
> It is certainly true that people often talked of the Jews as being a nation, > but they meant something rather different than what modern nationalists > mean.
Less different than you make it out to be.
> Nationalism in the modern sense means that there is a mass movement that > demands the creation of an independent state with its own flag, currency, > armed forces, recognized borders etc.
All of this exists in the Jewish Community all the way back to the
Bible, which deals with borders of the Jewish People, its militaries,
its currencies, and even discusses flags.
> I don't see much evidence of this among Jews until the last two centuries, > and not in any great degree until the late 19th century.
Then you are looking in the wrong places.
> Before that most religious Jews prayed for the coming of the Messiah who
> would restore the Jews to their ancient homeland
That is still pretty nationalistic.
> but that sort of aspiration had little in common with
> modern nationalism, in which people unite and
> struggle to create a state of their own by their
> own efforts.
Even before Zionism, there were numerous attempts by Jews to
reestablish themselves.
> In fact such a modern nationalism could not take root among Jews until they
> had started becoming more secular in their outlook.
Again, also not true. "Modern Zionism" began with the writings of
Rabbi Yehudah Alkalai--a traditional Sephardic rabbi in the very
religious Ottoman Empire.
-Yissaskhar
Jim F.
And the relevance of the Jewish revolts of two millenia ago, to
events of the modern era? That would be like 19th century
Greek nationalists citing say the Greek struggle against the
Persians in antiquity as a precedent for their own struggle.
Greek struggles in antiquity would have no direct relevance
for what was going on in the 19th century except as a
source of myth that could inspire 19th century nationalists.
I would submit that the same applies for the Bible.
>
> > It is certainly true that people often talked of the Jews as being a
nation, > but they meant something rather different than what modern
nationalists > mean.
>
> Less different than you make it out to be.
Also, you may wish to recall that in the 19th century lots
of Jews in western Europe, in any case had forsaken
the idea of the Jews as consitituting a separate nation.
Rather Jews were conceived to be Englishmen, or Frenchmen
or Germans of the "Mosaic persuasion." This idea which
began to take root with the emancipation of the Ashkenazic
Jews in France, by the Convention during the Revolution
underlied many of the efforts in the 19th century at achieving Jewish
emancipation. Remember too, that Jews often played
significant roles in the various nationalist struggles of
19th century Europe, for example in Germany.
Those Jews certainly did not regard themselves to
be a separate nation that happened to be living on
European soil.
>
> > Nationalism in the modern sense means that there is a mass movement that
> demands the creation of an independent state with its own flag, currency,
> armed forces, recognized borders etc.
>
> All of this exists in the Jewish Community all the way back to the
> Bible, which deals with borders of the Jewish People, its militaries,
> its currencies, and even discusses flags.
And the direct relevance of that for the modern era? For two
millenia there was no Jewish national state of any kind in
Palestine, which was in the intervening period rule by
the Romans, the Byzantines, the Arabs, the Turks, the
Mongols, the Turks again until 1917, the British,
then a modern Jewish state.
>
> > I don't see much evidence of this among Jews until the last two
centuries, > and not in any great degree until the late 19th century.
>
> Then you are looking in the wrong places.
>
> > Before that most religious Jews prayed for the coming of the Messiah who
> > would restore the Jews to their ancient homeland
>
> That is still pretty nationalistic.
>
> > but that sort of aspiration had little in common with
> > modern nationalism, in which people unite and
> > struggle to create a state of their own by their
> > own efforts.
>
> Even before Zionism, there were numerous attempts by Jews to
> reestablish themselves.
There were occasional attempts by Jews to settle there,
but I don't see much indication that they were doing
so with the intention of creating an independent national
state there. I think that the closest of anything that resembled
modern nationalism was the Messianic movement
of Shabbatai Zevi in the mid-17th century which
attempted to bring a large number of Jews to settle
in Palestine with the intention of creating some sort
of state, presumably to be ruled by Zevi.
>
> > In fact such a modern nationalism could not take root among Jews until
they
> > had started becoming more secular in their outlook.
>
> Again, also not true. "Modern Zionism" began with the writings of
> Rabbi Yehudah Alkalai--a traditional Sephardic rabbi in the very
> religious Ottoman Empire.
However, as you well know, his views were contrary to those
held by the great majority of rabbis of his time. Most rabbis
back in his day, held that the return of Jews to Zion would
not occur until after the coming of the Messiah, he seems
to have held on the contrary, that Messianic redemption
wouldn't occur until the Jews had already on their own
returned to Palestine, and created their own state there.
His view was considered to be heresy by most rabbis
of his time. And most of the religious Jews of that time
agreed with their rabbis on that point. That certainly makes him a precursor
of
religious Zionism, but Zionism as such didn't make
any great headway until a certain degree of secularization
had occured.
Jim F.
>
> -Yissaskhar
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
> by myth as any Palestinian nationalist, who talks
> about how a Palestinian culture has flourished
> for "thousands of years."
There is a difference here. Whereas Jews have had a distinct culture
and sense of national identity for thousands of years, non-Israeli
Palestinian Arabs have had neither for even a hundred.
-Yissaskhar
Jim F.
Do Jews have a distinct culture? It seems to me that
most American Jews are culturally almost indistiguishable
from most other Americans. Are you telling me that
the average American Jew has more in common culturally
with say a Yemenite Jew than he or she would have with
most other Americans? I don't think so, which is
not to deny that there are things that American Jews
and Yemenite Jews do have in common. Likewise,
in Germany before the Nazis, a good part of the German
Jewish community was culturally indistinguishable from
their so-called "Aryan" breathren. Indeed, the German
Jews to a large extent were the most faithful bearers of
the traditions of German culture at its best (i.e the traditions
of Goethe, Kant, Beethoven etc.). German culture
has never really recovered from the destruction of
the German Jews by the Nazis.
As for national identity. That seems to be something
that varies from time to time, and place to place.
In the 19th century, many European Jews defined
themselves as being respectively Frenchmen,
Germans or Englishmen of the "Mosaic persuasion."
Eastern European Jews on the other hand, living in
countries where Jewish emancipation had never made
much headway, were more likely to define themselves
in national terms, which is no doubt why Zionism
was able to thrive in eastern Europe while for a long
time, making little progress in western Europe.
You have quite correctly pointed out the plasticity
or malleability of Palestinian national identity over
the years, but the same is true for Jewish national
identity, or most other forms of national identity
for that matter.
A diiferent example of the plasticity of national
identities is the example of former Yugoslavia
which was created after WW I as a conglomeration
of Serbia, Croatia, Slovenian, Bosnia, etc. Up
to WW II there was little sense of Yugloslavian
national identity as such. Most people identified
as Serbs, Croats etc. Then after WW II, under
the Communist regime of Marshall Tito, a great
effort was made to promote a Yugloslav national
identity and a national consciousness. And to a large
extent it succeeded, with a great many Yugoslavs
coming to identify themselves as Yugoslavs rather
than as Serbs, Croats, Slovenians etc. Intermarriage
betwee the old ethnic groups became common, since
people now thought themselves as Yugoslavs first,
rather than as Serbs, Croats, Albanians and so forth.
That lasted until the late 1980s when the Yugoslav
economy began to fall apart, and then after the cold
war ended, and the US and NATO lost interest
in maintaining Yugoslavia as a buffer against the
Warsaw Pact. Under those conditions, Yugoslavia
began to disintegrate, and break up into separate
republics which went their own ways. More importantly,
people quickly lost their sense of Yugoslav national
identity, and began instead to identify themselves
as Serbs, Croats and the like. This created among
other things great difficulties for people who were
the children of intermarriages between the ethnic
groups, since people were now pressured to identify
with one group of the other. In the space of a few
years, people's national consciousness changed quite
radically, with often dreadful consequences.
Jim F.
>
> -Yissaskhar
Jim F.
Well, I suspect that any sort of a pan-Syrianism if successful,
would mean governance from Damascus. I am not sure
that would please most Palestinians, now or even back in
Muhsein's day.
>
> During all of the 1950's and the majority of the 1960's, the
> allegiances of Palestinians were volatile and up for grabs. If Nasser
> had triumphed and created a pan-Arab state, then the Palestinians
> would have become happy and patriotic citizens of pan-Arabia (and
> wouldn't have even really thought of themselves as "Palestinians").
> If the Syrians had swallowed Lebanon and Jordan and defeated Israel,
> then the Palestinians would have become loyal citizens of Greater
> Syria. It was only because both the Pan-Arab and Pan-Syrian dreams
> came to nothing that the Palestinians fell back onto a narrower
> specifically "Palestinian" national identity, which started to develop
> in the first half of the 1960's, but only really became predominant
> and somewhat deep-rooted after 1967.
I don't think that Nasser's pan-Arab was really ever more than
a pipedream. If he couldn't hold Egypt and Syria together,
then the idea that he could hold together Iraq, Jordan, Palestine,
Saudi Arabia etc. into one superstate, boggles the imagination.
Pan-Arabism, at best, was a weapon to smash the semifeudal
monarchical regimes, that predominated in the Arab world in
the 1950s, and a means for diminishing the influence of Western
imperialism in the Middle East. But for creating an Arab
superstate, I don't think that was ever really on.
>
> Muhsein may have never been too influential, and the Muhsein quote
> doesn't by itself invalidate a two-state solution -- however, it still
> remains true that the Muhsein quote is a reminder of the awkward fact
> that Palestinians did not unequivocally commit themselves to a
> specifically "Palestinian" national identity before the mid-1960's.
> Current-day Palestinians try to forget this inconvienient fact, or
> to obscure it with a layer of blatherskite and lying propaganda about
> so-called "historic Palestine".
In my replies to Yissaskhar's posts in this thread, I have
been arguing that national identities, in general, tend
to be rather plastic or malleable, more so, than people
are usually willing to admit. Jewish national identity
has been malleable too. After all in the 19th century, it was
rather fashionable for many western European Jews
to assert that they were Frenchmen, Englishmen, Gemans,
etc. of the "Mosaic persuasion." In other words these
Jews denied being separate nation. In central and
eastern Europe where Jewish emancipation never
got very far, Jews were much more inclined to see
themselves as consituting a separate national group.
Jim F.
IlanAvraham
> Many Zionists have used the supposed quotation of this "PLO executive
> member" saying that Palestine does not exist.
>
> a PLO executive member, and has never said such a thing, but the existence
> of Palestine is documented in hundreds of maps documents and most especially
> in Ariel Sharon's birth certificate.
>
Wait Straggler, havent you been shouting that Sharon is a Russin? You
mean he is a Palestinian? Alright so there is already a Palestinian
Prime Minister in charge of the Holy Land and he is fighting internal
dissent, in short a civil war. I say let the Palestinian Sharon and
Palestinian Bibi fight it out with the other Palestinians and may the
most well armed Palestinians win! So what is your problem now
Yashvan?
AnonMoos
>"AnonMoos" <anon...@io.com> wrote in message
>news:3EBF1253...@io.com...
>>"Jim F." <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>"AnonMoos" <anon...@io.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3EBE8FF6...@io.com...
>>>>"Jim F." wrote:
>>>>>>> In an interview with the Dutch newspaper "Trau" (March 31,
>>>>>>> 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said: "The
>>>>>>> Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a
>>>>>>> Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
>>>>>>> against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality
>>>>>>> today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians,
>>>>>>> Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons
>>>>>>> do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people,
>>>>>>> since Arab national interests demand that we posit the
>>>>>>> existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose
>>>>>>> Zionism.
>>>>> Zahir Muhsein's organization was founded by Syrian Ba'athists,
>>>>> and at least initially consisted of Palestinians who had served
>>>>> in the Syrian Army, I have seen little evidence that its
>>>>> viewpoint concerning Palestinian nationalism is accepted by
>>>>> mainstream Palestinian opinion. While initially a member of the
>> Pan-Syrianism is not the same thing as wanting to be ruled over by
>> whoever happens to be in power in Syria at the moment
> Well, I suspect that any sort of a pan-Syrianism if successful,
> would mean governance from Damascus. I am not sure that would
> please most Palestinians, now or even back in Muhsein's day.
It really all depends on how much glorious victory the ruler of a
Greater Syrian state would have managed to accumulate.
>> During all of the 1950's and the majority of the 1960's, the
>> allegiances of Palestinians were volatile and up for grabs. If
>> Nasser had triumphed and created a pan-Arab state, then the
>> Palestinians would have become happy and patriotic citizens of
>> pan-Arabia (and wouldn't have even really thought of themselves as
>> "Palestinians"). If the Syrians had swallowed Lebanon and Jordan
>> and defeated Israel, then the Palestinians would have become loyal
>> citizens of Greater Syria. It was only because both the Pan-Arab
>> and Pan-Syrian dreams came to nothing that the Palestinians fell
>> back onto a narrower specifically "Palestinian" national identity,
>> which started to develop in the first half of the 1960's, but only
>> really became predominant and somewhat deep-rooted after 1967.
> I don't think that Nasser's pan-Arab was really ever more than a
> pipedream. Pan-Arabism, at best, was a weapon to smash the
> semifeudal monarchical regimes, that predominated in the Arab world
> in the 1950s, and a means for diminishing the influence of Western
> imperialism in the Middle East. But for creating an Arab
> superstate, I don't think that was ever really on.
It's nice for you to say that with the advantage of 20/20 hindsight,
but it was by no means so obvious to the screaming millions at the
time -- and if Nasser's army had punched through from the Sinai to the
West Bank, then the West Bank Palestinians would have been more than
happy to declare themselves citizens of Greater Egypt (or whatever
Nasser chose to call it). Basically, during the 50's and 60's, if any
Arab government had destroyed Israel, then the Palestinians would have
been content to declare themselves citizens of that state. It was
only because no Arab army _did_ destroy Israel that the idea of a
narrow Palestine-specific national identity eventually took hold.
>> Muhsein may have never been too influential, and the Muhsein quote
>> doesn't by itself invalidate a two-state solution -- however, it
>> still remains true that the Muhsein quote is a reminder of the
>> awkward fact that Palestinians did not unequivocally commit
>> themselves to a specifically "Palestinian" national identity before
>> the mid-1960's. Current-day Palestinians try to forget this
>> inconvienient fact, or to obscure it with a layer of blatherskite
>> and lying propaganda about so-called "historic Palestine".
> In my replies to Yissaskhar's posts in this thread, I have been
> arguing that national identities, in general, tend to be rather
> plastic or malleable, more so, than people are usually willing to
> admit. Jewish national identity has been malleable too. After all
> in the 19th century, it was rather fashionable for many western
> European Jews to assert that they were Frenchmen, Englishmen,
> Gemans, etc. of the "Mosaic persuasion."
I don't have much problem with Arab national identities being
malleable -- and as I said before, I don't think that the fact that
the idea of a narrow Palestine-specific national identity didn't have
much general support before about 1964 necessarily invalidates the
idea of a two-state solution. But it does very definitely annoy me
when Palestinians and their supporters do such a large amount of lying
about so-called "historic Palestine", and other complete historical
nonsense. Zionists don't pretend that all 19th century European Jews
were fervent Zionists, because they know that that's not the case. So
I would have a lot more respect for "Palestinian" identity if there
didn't always seem to be so much lying and phoney propaganda involved
with it
AnonMoos
> -Yissaskhar
I gotta ask you, why do you include the third "s" in your name? --
that letter is silent and never pronounced in the original Hebrew.
You can transliterate the original consonant letters alone as YShShKR,
or with niqud included you can transcribe as Yissakhar, but
"Yissaskhar" seems to be an awkward hybrid of the two (and anyway,
how do you know it wasn't "Yissashkar", or any other possible
vowelling?).
AnonMoos
European Jews in the 1850-1950 period chose to regard their religious
Jewish identity as being any kind of national identity. But the
underlying basic religious Jewish identity itself was already solidly
defined -- and once some Jews chose to consider their identity as also
being a national identity, then they could revive the numerous
historical traditions of Jewish nationalism (as amply documented in
the Bible and elsewhere). That's why Zionists don't need to lie about
history very much.
By contrast, there never was a Palestinian national identity in
history before the last 50 years. From 135 A.D. to 1099 A.D.,
"Palestine" (Palaestina or Filastiin) was a province or internal
administrative subdivision of the larger Roman, Byzantine, and Arab
Caliphal empires, but was never a "country" or "nation" or sovereign
independent state. Under Turkish rule, there doesn't even seem to
have been an official administrative unit named Palestine (certainly
not in the late 19th century or early 20th century before 1917), so
that "Palestine" was an archaic antiquarian toponym which was actually
used more by Europeans than by natives. From 1919-1948, all
inhabitants of the British Palestine Mandate territory (whether Jews,
Arabs, or others) were referred to as "Palestinians". I don't have
too many problems with Arab national identity being "plastic" and
"malleable", and I don't think we should call off the quest for a
two-state solution on account of a little "malleability". But on the
other hand, it definitely does bother me that the supporters of a
Palestinian Arab national identity feel that they have to tell so many
lies about history.
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
From the second sin.
Check the Bible: Yud-Sin(w/dagesh)-Sin-Kaf-Resh
> that letter is silent and never pronounced in the original Hebrew.
It certainly is.
> You can transliterate the original consonant letters alone as YShShKR,
> or with niqud included you can transcribe as Yissakhar, but
> "Yissaskhar" seems to be an awkward hybrid of the two
I am inclined believe Yissakhar is an Ashkenazic formation while
Yissaskhar is Mizrachi, since Ashkenazim have almost always had
trouble with it.
>(and anyway, how do you know it wasn't "Yissashkar", or any other
possible
> vowelling?).
My parents named me Yissaskhar, not Yissashkar...which is a name I
have never heard.
-Yissaskhar
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
> hundred
> > > years old, and didn't really begin to become a significant force until
> about > 120 years ago.
> >
> > Really? I would consider the various Jewish revolts and attempts to
> > regain Israel over the millennia to be significant.
>
> And the relevance of the Jewish revolts of two millenia ago, to
> events of the modern era?
Quite a lot. The same rhetoric and many of the same ideas.
> > > It is certainly true that people often talked of the Jews as being a
> nation, > but they meant something rather different than what modern
> nationalists > mean.
> >
> > Less different than you make it out to be.
>
> Also, you may wish to recall that in the 19th century lots
> of Jews in western Europe, in any case had forsaken
> the idea of the Jews as consitituting a separate nation.
This was because they wanted to assimilate. However, the experiment
failed.
> This idea which began to take root with the emancipation of the Ashkenazic
> Jews in France, by the Convention during the Revolution underlied many of > the efforts in the 19th century at achieving Jewish emancipation.
Need I remind you of Napoleon's attempt to restore the Jews to Israel
in a Jewish State?
> Those Jews certainly did not regard themselves to be a separate nation that > happened to be living on European soil.
Perhaps, but they were wrong.
> > > Nationalism in the modern sense means that there is a mass movement that
> > demands the creation of an independent state with its own flag, currency,
> > armed forces, recognized borders etc.
> >
> > All of this exists in the Jewish Community all the way back to the
> > Bible, which deals with borders of the Jewish People, its militaries,
> > its currencies, and even discusses flags.
>
> And the direct relevance of that for the modern era?
Quite a lot.
> For two millenia there was no Jewish national state of any kind in
> Palestine
There were many attempts made. For example Julian the Apostate,
Saladin, Shabtai Tzvi, and Napoleon all tried to establish a Jewish
national home in Israel.
> > > but that sort of aspiration had little in common with
> > > modern nationalism, in which people unite and
> > > struggle to create a state of their own by their
> > > own efforts.
> >
> > Even before Zionism, there were numerous attempts by Jews to
> > reestablish themselves.
>
> There were occasional attempts by Jews to settle there,
> but I don't see much indication that they were doing
> so with the intention of creating an independent national
> state there. I think that the closest of anything that resembled
> modern nationalism was the Messianic movement
> of Shabbatai Zevi in the mid-17th century which
> attempted to bring a large number of Jews to settle
> in Palestine with the intention of creating some sort
> of state, presumably to be ruled by Zevi.
An abridged list:
120 Revolt of Rimmon - Emperor promises to give the Jews a degree of
autonomy, when Samaritans torpedo the plan, the Jews threaten a revolt
132 Shimon Bar Koseva leads revolt to reestablish Jewish sovereignty
351 Patrician Uprising in Galilee and Judaea
361 Julian the Apostate attempts to rebuild the Temple
448 Cretan Jews attempt to redeem Israel
614 Persian Jews help Khosroes II conquer Jerusalem attemtping to
redeem their land
750 Abu Isa leads a revolt in Persia to regain Israel
1147 Daud Alroy wages war against Persians and tries to march on
Jerusalem
1250 During Mongol invasion, Mizrachi Jews attempt to conquer Israel
1354 Fearing a Jewish invasion, Muslim Jerusalemites revolt
1453 Jews prepare to redeem Israel following fall of Constantinople
1456 Avraham ben Eliezer Halevi attempts to bring all Jews to Israel
1517 German Jews anticipate redemption with Martin Luther's revolt
1540 David Reuveni goes to Europe to raise an army to fight the Turks
and regain Israel
1665 Shabtai Tzvi and Natan Ashkenazi attempt to reclaim Israel
1700 Yehudah Chasid and Chayim ben Shlomo Malakh lead groups from
Poland to regain Israel
1707 Moshe Chagez attempts to lead Polish, German, and Turkish Jews
back to Israel.
1799 Napoleon offers Jews a state in Israel
1862 Ethiopian Jews, unacquainted with European Jewry, set out to
regain Israel
> > > In fact such a modern nationalism could not take root among Jews until
> they
> > > had started becoming more secular in their outlook.
> >
> > Again, also not true. "Modern Zionism" began with the writings of
> > Rabbi Yehudah Alkalai--a traditional Sephardic rabbi in the very
> > religious Ottoman Empire.
> Most rabbis back in his day, held that the return of Jews to Zion would
> not occur until after the coming of the Messiah
But nevertheless, they advocated a Return to Zion and the formation of
a Jewish Commonwealth.
> That certainly makes him a precursor of religious Zionism
And Zionism in general, considering he was the rabbi of Herzl's
parents' synagogue.
-Yissaskhar
Yissaskhar Ben-Tzion
> > > by myth as any Palestinian nationalist, who talks
> > > about how a Palestinian culture has flourished
> > > for "thousands of years."
> >
> > There is a difference here. Whereas Jews have had a distinct culture
> > and sense of national identity for thousands of years, non-Israeli
> > Palestinian Arabs have had neither for even a hundred.
>
> Do Jews have a distinct culture?
Yes.
> It seems to me that most American Jews are culturally almost indistiguishable
> from most other Americans.
This is due to assimilation. Unassimilated American Jews can easily
fit in (or at least, follow along) in other Jewish environments.
> Likewise, in Germany before the Nazis, a good part of the German
> Jewish community was culturally indistinguishable from
> their so-called "Aryan" breathren.
Again, assimilation
> In the 19th century, many European Jews defined
> themselves as being respectively Frenchmen,
> Germans or Englishmen of the "Mosaic persuasion."
Many did not. This was mostly an attempt to assimilate and avoid
persecution.
> You have quite correctly pointed out the plasticity
> or malleability of Palestinian national identity over
> the years, but the same is true for Jewish national
> identity, or most other forms of national identity
> for that matter.
Palestinian national identity did not exist before the 20th Century
and has been quite malleable since then. Jewish national identity, in
contrast, is thousands of years old. Its plasticity is irrelevant
since it is so much older.
-Yissaskhar
=- Özzama Bin Kenøbi -=
>Wait Straggler, havent you been shouting that Sharon is a Russin?
Charon is a Mongol.