@primordialfish@Ancomraven2 Based on what evidence? He dated a chick who was a week or two away from being 18 (hardly a "kid"), and did so 33 years ago.
@repsac3@johncusack It is likewise refreshing to encounter a rare individual on this platform who engages in good faith. Godspeed in finding the truth, wherever it may lie.
@repsac3@johncusack What does any of this have to do with the original point that Palestine doesn't exist? Everything you're saying can be true (i.e. that they are an indigenous population), but it has nothing to do with the existence of this so-called nation or of the fact that it was manufactured.
@repsac3@johncusack But that's where you're confused. It never was "their land" - i.e. to the exclusion of the Jews, the Druze, Samaritans and other indigenous peoples.
@repsac3@johncusack Yes, and the Arabs could have agreed to live in a unified state without British custodianship if they would allow the other indigenous population the right to return. They didn't. That's why the partition was proposed, which they rejected. They could have had Palestine then.
@repsac3@johncusack They weren't "cleansed" from "Palestine". Prior to the allies (WWI), there was no Palestine. Period. The last time Palestine was referenced in terms of a sovereign territory was during the crusades. And no one moved them out. They're still there. 4M in Gaza/WB; 2.1M in Israel.
@repsac3@johncusack No. That's not the right analogy. Palestine is a region like "New England" or "the Appalachians" or, in your case, the "Mid-Atlantic". It's like claiming yourself as a "Mid-Atlanticer". It's ahistorical, since there never has been a Mid-Atlanticer people.
@repsac3@johncusack I've heard that argument too, and I would disagree that it justifies colonialism. The emigration of Jews to Israel/Palestine is not colonialism in the traditional sense: it's the repatriation of an exiled, indigenous people to their ancestral homeland.
@repsac3@johncusack Of course. I'm not denying that in the least. Just the notion that there exists a historic, sovereign state that is presently occupied is at best disputed and otherwise simply false. The fact that 80% of the residents of the WB became Jordanian citizens after 1949 says something
@repsac3@johncusack https://t.co/I0UTi81wmv
I doubt you'll read it, but the article explains the evolution of Palestinian nationalism as a reaction to Zionism in the 1920s.
@repsac3@johncusack There was a British administrative area following WWI that *the British* named "Palestine". That word was used by the Romans and the Church for millennia to refer to the holy land. Nothing to do with Arabs. Prior to WWI, it was the Ottoman Vilayet (province) of Southern Syria.
@Iran_TVv The time period in the film is dated to 1936, when the British administered the Mandate of Palestine (which has nothing to do with today's "Palestinians"). Prior to 1920, there was no "Palestine" on a map. It was the Ottoman vilayet of Southern Syria. Nice try.