Talk:Palestinians/Archive 7

message: The term "palestinian" is refered to all of those people that nativley lived in the area of palestine, this area was called "Philisteen" or in Arabic : "فلسطين" . see Palestine
it says: 
"The term "Palestine" derives from the word Philistine, the name of a non-Semitic ethnic group, originating from Southern Greece,closely related to early Mycenaean civilization. They inhabited a smaller area on the southern coast, called Philistia"
it says too that they exist before, on and after the 830s BC. 
Another thing, use your logic and your mind, it doesn't make sense at all to call a "Jew" by "Palestinian", it's pretty much the same as calling an "American" by "Indian", or vice versa if you like it...
Arabs did not say that jews did not exist on the holy land of Palestine, I didn't say that either. we recognise that Jews lived in the holy land, but you need to be fair to history and acknoledge the same thing towards Arabs and towards Palestinians, just becuase we are in a conflict doesn't mean we are free to kill facts from our common history...
Majd Mash195.229.242.88 15:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Misunderstanding of the term "Palestinian"

message: The article states:
 According to Sir James Frazer, the majority of Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the ancient Jebusites and Canaanites. In 1902, he wrote in his book The Golden Bough:
 "The Arabic-speaking peasants of Palestine are the progeny of the tribes which settled in the country before the Israelite invasion. They are still adhering to the land. They never left it and were never uprooted from it."  Sir James Frazer, The Golden Bough   
The Golden Bough is a book about mythology and religion. I couldn't find this quote by using the index in the print version, so I downloaded the e-text from Project Gutenberg  and searched for mentions of Palestine. As far as I can tell the quote doesn't exist, so I'll remove the reference - if anyone can find it, please restore it and give a page number this time!
May the Palestinians achieve a stable, peaceful, independent liberal democracy soon. 41.241.197.231 13:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find it either.  I'm also dubious about using Frazer as a source since ancient migrations were not his specialty and also because we should prefer modern sources.  He's clearly way ahead of Twain as a historical source, but we shouldn't have to compromise standards at all when so much has been written by modern experts.  --Zerotalk 23:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks a lot 41.241.197.231. It's a very good step in changing the section to a factual version and not repeating some sources twice etc.  Amoruso 03:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per this, I removed the Frazer quote. The genetic study has been discussed twice in the same section, that's why it was removed. As for the Caananites, see discussion above - it's simply not relevant to the section and it's also false, it's a misunderstanding of what the source says, discussed above and see the discussion at the discussion page of Palestine too. Amoruso 12:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Frazer is not a good source for this at all, but Amoruso, please don't reinsert the dubious material drawing a parallel between the Nakba and Mizrahi immigration to Israel. Palmiro | Talk 12:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Bough reference 

message: The Druze article says they don't consider themelves Palestinian. So why are they listed here? Adding Jews is confusing too I think havinga a definition at the begining that no one uses is a bad idea.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.206.165.57 (talk) 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Druze?

message: The link to reference #25 (The Arnaiz-Villena paper) is broken and does not work.  Can someone please fix it?
64.121.193.126 03:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference has been disabled

message: I hope this doesn't offend anybody, but I'm not sure that Palestinian is not an ethnicity, at least not in the same sense as groups with ethnicity templates (such as Into-Aryans or Greeks).  At best, it is a nationality.  The word "Palestinian," when used to describe the Arabs that once lived in the British Mandate of Palestine and their decendants, is a term that is only about 50 years old.  I noticed that Jordanians and Saudi Arabians do not have their own ethnicity template, even though those nationalities are older than Palestinians.  I propose deleting the Palestinian ethnicity template.  --GHcool 05:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An ethnicity is not racial, but rather a group that has a self-understanding as a group that shares values, traditions, and aspirations.  It is somewhat presumptuous to tell other groups that they are not a true ethnicity.  The fact of the matter it is a vague conception.  Also nationality is often interchanged with ethnicity, because nationality can define a group with a shared set of values, traditions, etc, depending on how well developed the nation is.  It is true that the issue of the Palestinians has been politicized and there have been repeated denunciations by various Israelis and supports of Zionism that there are no Palestinians, just some nomadic Arabs, but again, it is presumptuous to say that another group isn't a real ethnic group.  In fact, it generally agreed that the Palestinians were not a well defined ethnic group prior to their shared experiences with Zionism.  But since then, they now share a very unique and thoroughly defining experience with Zionism, such shared and significant experiences are what create new identity groups, because the Palestinians now have a significantly different historical experience, and thus self identity and values and aspirations, than neighboring Arabs communities.  --64.230.126.5 17:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Hmm, this is a difficult and, often subjective, issue. The Palestinians are, from a larger context, Levantine Arabs related to Syrians, Lebanese and Jordanians moreso than to say Egyptians (who do have an article and rightly so) or Saudis and other peninsular Arabs. The people of the Levant represent a fusion of various Semitic groups (including Jews who were most likely converted to Christianity and Islam over time and adopted an Arab identity or simply mixed with them) and invaders such as the Philistines, Greeks, Persians, Crusaders etc. The best way to go would be to either keep Palestinians as an ethnic group OR create a Levantine Arab category, but that would create other problems such as the view of Maronites who may view themselves as the descendents of the Phoenicians moreso than Arabs etc. Recent genetic studies by Nat'l Geographic support the view that many Lebanese (and some Tunisians who can be linked to Carthage) are related to the Phoenicians. Since the Palestinians are indigenous to the area and show a historical continuity and have a culture (that does mirror that of their neighors not surprisingly), they are a group, but there was always fluidity in the region in that people in the Levant moved around in their area. Today, they are often identified as a type of Arab, often congregate and identify with each other so in that sense they are an ethnic group. Either way it's a difficult issue. Tombseye 18:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My original question remains: If "Palestinian" is an ethnic group, why isn't "Jordanian," "Saudi Arabian," or "Lebanese?" The suggestion of creating an all encompassing Levantine Arab category seems to me to be the most ethnographically neutral thing to do.  --GHcool 20:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with your idea.  The combination that you are pushing for doesn't seem appropriate, but I could see a renaming of this article to something along the lines of "Arab Palestinians" or "Palestinian Arabs" which is a conception similar to the existing useful article entitled "Jewish Americans" (which is also categorized as an ethnic group.)  Britannica says that there are two ethnic groups in Israel, Jews and Palestinian Arabs (which is further broken down into Muslims, Christians and Druze.)  See .  According to the CIA guide to ethnic groups , the West Bank is composed of "Palestinian Arab and other 83%, Jewish 17%".  --64.230.126.5 21:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, there is no reason why we can't create articles for the Jordanians (actually the group known as Bedouins as that is how other references breakdown the Jordanian population as in this case with Palestinians as somewhat distinct and see the Universal Almanac for a rendition on the matter) and Saudis actually. Or just Arabians even in the case of the Arabian peninsula. Ethnic groups that speak the same language can be tricky as views vary. For the context of the Israeli-Palestinian situation (and the status of Palestinians in other countries), the Palestinians ARE an ethnic group, but one that is not necessarily without overlap with their neighbors. The Maronites have an article that is both religious and relates to their ethnic identity already. Also, for much of the 20th century, the Palestinians have increasingly been cohesive as an ethnic group since they are refugees and/or 2nd class citizens (i.e. outsiders) in the countries outside the Occupied Territories (such as Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Jordan etc.). Social dynamics can lead to the creation of an ethnic group and so from that context they are an ethnic group. Clearly, if the Library of Congress is looking at them as a group, then there is some validity to them as a group of sorts. Also, in Lebanon they remain somewhat distinct. Ultimately, the Palestinians are also part of an intricate system of tribal affiliation which in the Arab context means that regional Arabs intermarry and interact and are thus more similar to each other. The Levantines can breakdown into a north-south divide, while in Jordan the Bedouin group (as opposed to the Pals who moved to the area following the Arab-Israeli war in 1948 and some ocnflicts afterwards) is considered more native then the Pals of the East Bank. These are considerations when discussing the issue of whether Pals are an ethnic group or not. I'm not sure this warrants eliminating this article though so much as creating a Levantine article AND articles for other regional Arabs since we already have that with the Maronites and Egyptians. Tombseye 21:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I may have misrepresented myself, and if I have, I sincerely appologize.  My argument does not apply to the title of this article, "Palestinian people," which I believe is an extremely useful and well written article about a group of people that are internationally known as Palestinians (and certainly Wikipedia should reflect this reality).  What I object to is the Template on the right-hand side of the article which describes "Palestinian" as an ethnicity in the same sense as Greeks, Indo-Aryans, Persians, and other undisputed ethnicities that go back hundreds or thousands of years.  I'm not an anthropologist, but my understanding of the term "ethnicity" is that a group of people that has been around for less than 100 years should not be called an ethnic group.  --GHcool 06:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally support GHcool, you cannot call a group that is both Jewish and Arab Palestinains and claim it's an etnicity. you could have done it back at 1900.. but not after 450,000 jews came to the land (USSR and Europe) and another 500,000 arabs came to the land from the nearby Arab lands (there wer'nt that many states at the time)... i'm talking pre-1947, for those who are not aware, more than 400,000 arabs came to the land between 1920-1945 in an arab attempt to keep the entire land islamic by force. Jaakobou 09:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: The definition of therm "ethnicity" is a complicated isue. Nowadays it is usually understood as self-identification. Other definitions ae also possible, but to my knowledge, this is the only workable one. Beit Or 16:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: The American Heritage and Wordnet definitions found by Zero are way too broad for the term as I understand it.  I think the Oxford one is closer to how people actually use the term.  If Palestinian is an ethnicity (and by the Wordnet and American Heritage definitions, it clearly is), then where do we draw the line? Is American an ethnicity? There have been people themselves Americans since 1776 (almost 200 years before people started calling themselves Palestinians).  Certainly Americans share national and cultural ties and observe similar customs, beliefs, and a common language.  We can even go further: are Trekkies an ethniciy? They share common cultural characteristics and even have their own language that they read and speak (Klingon) and one could argue that they even share common customs and beliefs.  There have been people calling themselves Trekkies almost as long as people have been calling themselves Palestinians.  It is not difficult to extend the logic of what is an ethnicity according to the American Heritage Dictionary to Trekkies or even to less distinctive groups (such as the Democratic Party).  --GHcool 18:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your correct GHcool that there is a fuzzy line between ethnic groups and identity groups.  Democrats are clearly an identity group.  On the boarder subject, I recommend reading the ethnogenesis article, it describes the process of how ethnic groups are created.  I find the article on imagined communities to also be fascinating.  --70.51.228.137 23:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting articles.  I still think there are many more groups that don't have ethnicity templates that deserve them more than the Palestinians and a lot of groups that do not deserve ethnicity templates that could argue that they are ethnicities under these broad definitions.  --GHcool 00:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are Palestinians an ethnicity? 

message: I propose to delete the section "Politics" altogether.  There are already countless articles on this topic and we don't need another one here to attract the same old edit wars that happen in all the other places.  More generally, we need to resist the temptation to expand every Palestine-related or Israel-related article until it covers the whole Israeli-Palestinian conflict. --Zerotalk 09:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A very good point - done. TewfikTalk 03:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics section -let's delete it 

message: at 29 January 2007, material regarding the status of jewish palestinians on the Palestinian National charter was removed - see the changed edit. the question asked was: "Does anyone claim all Jews should be called Palestinians?".
i think that's a very important question, i think, from all the materials i've read and the people i encountered that arabs/muslims would like to claim that "there are no jewish palestinians" (unless they are under muslim rule), which in my personal view is wrong from it's base considering that this claim comes from the lack of land definition in muslim lands over the difinitive definition of countries made in europe... interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject and also in regards for inserting this material back into the article. Jaakobou 10:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There should probably be mention of the ideas in article 20 ("Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood"), just as article 11's admission of some Jews is mentioned. TewfikTalk 17:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: since my edits are encountering resistance (pun intended), perhaps you could make the change seing that you agree with me on this point. Jaakobou 04:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does historical recognition have to do with it? 

message: i'm sure that if i'll insert any material on the culture of jihad by arab palestinians that it will be removed since, it would seem, edits are made based on emotions rather than based on encyclopedic value. however, i promote we add an "Arab palestinian culture of jihad" segment to the article since it is such an integral part of the current-day palestinian culture.examples:  your thoughts? Jaakobou 04:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you kidding? Tiamut 03:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arab Palestinian Culture of Jihad