Second, there can be no comparison of the Palestinians’ experience to that of Native Canadians. North American indigenous peoples suffered unprecedented genocide. Our people were obliterated through massacres, disease, starvation and forced assimilation in an attempt to remove us from the pages of history. (This, ironically, was the declared aim of the Arab armies that attacked Israel in 1947.) Sixty-five million people were reduced to less than three. The Palestinians, on the other hand, have grown from a population of approximately one million in 1948 to more than six million today. The average Palestinian under Israeli rule lives in conditions that our people could only have dreamed of and that are often better than those on reservations. Moreover, the Palestinians have received approximately $30 billion in international aid since 1993. This, despite the fact that Palestinian nationalism’s preferred method of expression has been terrorism.

Third, I am offended that my people’s cause appears to serve merely as a prop for Palestinian propaganda. For example, I have seen materials juxtaposing Native-American symbols — the feather, a symbol of peace — to AK-47 assault rifles, a symbol of Arab militantism. And yet, unlike most Palestinian nationalist groups across the board, Native rights movements seek to be peaceful and inclusive. Palestinian groups who are otherwise all too eager to wrap themselves in the indigenous mantle systematically ignore this crucial difference.

Both are tribes that have maintained their seperateness through their religious traditions, neither the Hopi or Jews adopted christianity.

Both use matrilineal succession.

Both have what social scientists call a "connection to place". Just like Judaism connects certain ceremonies and mitzvot to Israel the Hopi have ceremonies and prayers that can only be conducted at specific locations.

Mostly around his perception of how the conquests of the seventh century worked and what they meant in the long run. He appears to believe any number of three things.

1) that the Arabs of the Hejaz somehow wholly replaced the population of an area larger than the zenith of the Roman Empire, in under a century

2) that conversion to or from a religion has an impact on ethnicity and thus indigenous status

3) that mixed heritage annuls indigenous status.

#1 is just ludicrous if you understand anything about population dynamics... or if you've ever read anything about the rise of Islam that isn't authored by Daniel Pipes or some other "THE MUSLIMS ARE COMING!" panic-monger. The whole of 7th-century Arabia,including the Hejaz, its most-populous part, could have fit in modern Chicago and left more than enough room to spare. You can't use that as a founder population for colonization... and further, why would you, when there's plenty of cities already in place, and you can just take those over... which is exactly what the Rashidun conquerers did, they deposed rulers and took over cities. Barring the shuffling caused by conscription, there were no population transfers. Native populations - including those of Palestine - remained intact.

Now if he wants to make an argument of cultural colonization, that's... still not exactly valid, but does carry more weight (language and religion are big parts of culture, after all, and while local populations kept a lot of local custom, the language and religion did change). But even if this is his aim, it doesn't bolster his claim. If Arabic and Islam makes Palestinian non-indigenous, then what's to say about his english-speaking, probably-christian self?

Of course it does not - The natives of Palestine adopted (or had imposed on them, depending on who you ask) the Arabic language and Islamic belief. This did not change their ethnic status, it did not erase their ancestry, it does not strip their history. it just added another conversion / language swap to the pile that started back before the Egyptians discovered spoked wheels. it did not, in other words, make them non-indigenous. If these things erased indigenous status, then the term should be erased for all but the most isolated of groups in Amazonia and Papua New Guinea. I'm sure that if he gave it some thought, Mr. Bellerose would agree that expecting cultural stasis as a prerequisite for indigenous status is not only ludicrous but rather bigoted.

So too with varied heritage. As we all know the Southern Levant is a crossroad for empires; over a dozen have ruled the area within recorded history, to say nothing of intermittent periods without empires, and of course whatever tribal stuff was going on in prehistory. There really is no such thing as "ethnic purity" anyway, but if there were, the southern Levant is about the last goddamned place you'd find it. Certainly the people of Byzantine Palestine swapped genes with the hejazian conquerors... Just as the Roman Palestinians swapped with the new Byzantine Greeks... Just as their ancestors had mingled with the Romans, just as their ancestors had done with the Persians.. .you get the drift. Does swapping genes with Arabs from the Hejaz radically transform a person's indigenous status in a way that mingling with Babylonians or Persians or Romans or Greeks never could? I hope this isn't mr. Bellerose' argument because if it is, then not only is it bizarre, but it really seems to cause personal conflict, seeing as how the Métis people are themselves of mixed heritage in this way.

While I'm not sure if Mr. Bellerose is making an argument regarding mixed ancestry, he certainly does seem to make the argument that choice of religion is a valid concern in determining indigenous status. He focuses on the acknowledged regional history of Judaism, relying on that to make all comers who practice that religion into indigenous Levantines, after all. By mr. Bellerose's argument, I could get a conversion confirmed, and just like that, I'm an indigenous Levantine, nevermind that I'm Irish enough to piss guinness. Does anyone actually buy this? If a Jewish Israeli decides, what the heck, he's converting to christianity today, does he stop being indigenous?

Altogether, this makes part of Shira's bolding into utter nonsense:

Mr. Bellerose's entire argument is an attempt to delegitimatize indigenous people, and the entire crux of his argument for this hinges on whether or not someone has a 100% mutable feature that exists only within their own heads - religion.

he would have us believe that 'the Holy Land™ was largely uninhabited for 6 centuries after the Roman diaspora, depending of course on the designation Arab which in reality is a linguistic designation

...and due to that, they are not indigenous to the area?

Please, no Khazar theory...

and the people whom they most closely resemble, genetically, are the nearby Palestinians in Nablus. Its probably the case that most of those Palestinians were either Jewish or Samaritan, before they became Muslims.

This is the problem for those people who would try and contend that "Jewishness" is a tenable biological or genetic concept, and that therefore today's Jews are the indigenous people of Palestine. Even if you go to some lengths (and many Jews have) to establish some purported genetic link between contemporary Jews and the ancient Hebrews, it is almost inevitable that the Palestinians will show that same link. After all, many of them have been in the area for a very long time.

If Palestinians have "Jewish genes", and perhaps even have them to a greater extent than contemporary Jews, does that not pose a problem for the Zionist argument that "the Jews" have a longer history in the area than "the Arabs" and that therefore Jews were justified in seizing Palestine from the Palestinians?

Both peoples are.

to Palestine, or to at least part of it, than the Palestinians did.

No one else was sovereign there.

100 years back, when people mentioned Palestinians they were talking about Jews.

Go figure.

It was a tributary to the Seleucid empire up until 110 BC, and a client state of the Romans from 63 BC.

.

Bullshit.

The Phoenicians (or Canaanites) independently settled Palestine (then called Canaanum or "Canaan&quot from 3500 BC until becoming a client state of the Egyptian New Kingdom in 1500 BC or so. They developed a writing system that became the basis for Old Hebrew (and also Greek) as well as a religion (called Ugaritic or Canaanite mythology, or the cycle of Baal) that came to provide some of the basis for the later Hebrew religion.

For example, the story of Abraham and Sara giving birth to Isaac comes largely from the story of Daniel and Danatay as related in Canaanite mythology.

The Phoenicians founded Carthage in north Africa, and were able to mount a serious challenge to Roman power through the exploits of the great General Hannibal. After being decisively defeated in the Punic Wars, Phoenician culture was largely destroyed, although it continued in small pockets of the Roman empire such as at Ibiza.

Most of the pre-Arab contemporary population of the Levant are descended from the Canaanites (such as the Maronites) or the Assyrians.

Additionally, the Philistines established Philistia (on the present day Gaza strip, encompassing Ashdod and Ashkelon) for five hundred years until 722 BC, before yielding to the Assyrians. They founded the city of Gaza. Despite being later sacked by Alexander, the city continued a tradition of producing fine, Phoenician style handicrafts. The English word "gauze" (fine fabric, often used for bandages) comes from the word "Gaza".

What's the relevance of all this genetics who-haaa? It has no bearing on modern rights.

Do you even pay attention to yourself? or was I right about you just being someone's random bullshit algorithm?

Both are bullshit claims.

You've been demoted from "troll" to "spambot." Have a nice day

Personally I find the "Khazar theory" to be hilarious. If I were you, I'd be more worried about Mosby's apparent Lost Tribeism upthread.

I try to avoid subtext in my posts so when I say something like "interesting similarities", I'm speaking literally.

So just to clarify I don't think the Hopi or any other NA tribe are "lost tribes of Israel".

I didn't want to think you were crazy!

...I mean, I guess we all already know you ARE crazy.

Just not that "special" kind of crazy, you know?

... or is he " verboten " ?

ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shlomo_Sand

He's someone you admire?

Do you also admire those who deny the Palestinians are a people and say that Palestine is shitty?

=======

I don't see anything to admire from "post-zionists" who are willfully used by anti-zionist 1-staters in their quest to replace Israel with Hamastan.

thats what he is saying shira ?

You obviously have not been paying attention .

I suggest you go read up everything he has written and every public word he has spoken .

He is all about Israel for Israelis ... and not for those like you , a true post zionist in every sense of the word ... just like Shulamit Aloni .

Last night Tel Aviv University history professor Shlomo Sand referred to Israel as a “shitty nation” (clip 1). He called Israel “the most racist society in the world” and said that he has been fighting “Jewish racism all my life” (both clip 2). And he declared that anti-Semitism doesn’t exist in the western world today (clip 3).

http://richardmillett.wordpress.com/2013/02/21/shlomo-sand-at-soas-israel-a-shitty-nation-most-racist-society-in-world/

never heard of him oberliner

must say this " group " has been a learning experience for me ..... so do you agree with shira that Shulamit Aloni is a liar ?

you can twist every word Shlomo Sand has said any which way you want ... the difference between him and you and between shira and I ... is that he and I are Israelis .

and richard millett ... who is he ?

Not to be confused with a French author of the same name who rode to the defense of Anders Breivik.

And yeah, "British Zionist blogger" seems to be the full expanse of his credentials

thought as much

like most Zionist bloggers they dont have a clue .

... of course if they lived here , which most of them seem to avoid

then very quickly they would find out that Shulamit Aloni is not a liar and that Shlomo Sand
represents every thing that is Israeli about us ..... without the religion .

Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:50 PM - Edit history (1)

No words of his are being twisted. And Shulamit Aloni lied about Jew-only roads.

There shouldn't be any debate about whether these things happened.

=============

This is fascinating.

In another thread, folks are arguing about a mythical BDS version of 1-state while you're playing pretend WRT Sand and Aloni.

It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion when your opponents aren't grounded in reality.

More and more I'm seeing no difference b/w the most religious rightwing nutters and their loony leftwing counterparts (always right, never wrong, delusional).

“What the American Indian Movement says is that the American Indians are the Palestinians of the United States, and the Palestinians are the American Indians of the Middle East,” the late great Indian leader Russell Means said many times. So it is no surprise that Palestinian activists are coming out in support of Idle No More.

In little more than two weeks since the December 10 launching of the Idle No More movement by First Nations in Canada oppose a Senate omnibus budget bill that leaves them with no power over their lands and resources, dozens of organizations and hundreds of individuals supporting Palestinian liberation and human rights have endorsed the Palestinians in Solidarity with Idle No More and Indigenous Rights statement of support of the continuing Native protest that has spread across Canada, the U.S., some European countries and into the Middle East. Palestinians in Solidarity with Idle No More and Indigenous Rights calls for justice, dignity, decolonization and protection of the land, waters and resources.


“We recognize the deep connections and similarities between the experiences of our peoples – settler colonialism, destruction and exploitation of our land and resources, denial of our identity and rights, genocide and attempted genocide,” the statement says. “As Palestinians, we stood with the national liberation movement against settler colonialism in South Africa, as we stand with all liberation movements challenging colonialism and imperialism around the world. The struggle of Indigenous and Native peoples in Canada and the United States has long been known to the Palestinian people, reflecting our common history as peoples and nations subject to ethnic cleansing at the hands of the very same forces of European colonization.”

The statement goes on to recognize that the Indigenous resistance movement in Canada “includes struggles against the ongoing theft of indigenous lands, massive resource extraction and environmental devastation (including tar sands and pipelines), the continuing movement of survivors of the genocidal residential school system, and movements to demand an end to the colonial and gendered violence against Indigenous women.”

Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/article/palestinians-endorse-idle-no-more-146631

More: http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/palestinians-and-canadian-natives-join-hands-to-protest-colonization.premium-1.500057

Might I just also note that the Toronto sun is a right-wing tabloid, as are its sister papers, owned by Sun Media?

Here's what Ezra Levant of Sun Media has to say about Idle No More:

Yup, not even a minute in and he's talking about an Indian uprising that amounts to criminals asking for free stuff.

Charming fellow.