Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd May 2013 20:10 UTC
Google "Internet giant Google has changed the tagline on the homepage of its Palestinian edition from 'Palestinian Territories' to 'Palestine'. The change, introduced on 1 May, means google.ps now displays 'Palestine' in Arabic and English under Google's logo. Using the word Palestine is controversial for some. Israeli policy is that the borders of a Palestinian state are yet to be agreed." Good but daring move.
Thread beginning with comment 560608
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Some facts
by adinas on Mon 6th May 2013 07:20 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Some facts"
adinas
Member since:
2005-08-17

I guess I didn't make my point clear. It simply that when determining if a piece of land belongs to this or that people, I would expect reasonable people to understand that a country which existed on said land for thousands of years and protected its rights to that land against overwhelming odds would have more rights to it than a group of people who were invented 100 years ago.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Some facts
by kwan_e on Mon 6th May 2013 07:30 in reply to "RE[6]: Some facts"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

than a group of people who were invented 100 years ago.


The term Palestine was given by the Romans to the province.

Secondly, just because the people didn't have a name doesn't mean they didn't exist, and it certainly doesn't mean that they can be treated as non-existent.

Even in Australia, it took a while, but we discarded the concept of Terra Nullis. The aboriginal population didn't have a name either. It doesn't make the British invasion more right.

You claim Palestinians were a group invented 100 years ago. Well, the concept of the nation-state didn't exist until a few hundred years ago. So by your own argument, there has been no such thing as a state of Israel because you're just hitching on a concept invented a few hundred years ago.

Thus, you have no rights, by your very own argument. Well done.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[8]: Some facts
by adinas on Mon 6th May 2013 08:37 in reply to "RE[7]: Some facts"
adinas Member since:
2005-08-17

Some replies:

The term Palestine was given by the Romans to the province.


Do you know why they changed the name to Palestine? the Roman emperor Hadrian renamed the land of Israel and Judea as Palastina ('Palestine') after the ancient enemies of the Jews - the Philistines. Because of his hatred of the Jews, it was meant to be an insult to dishonor them and remove their history.

Secondly, just because the people didn't have a name doesn't mean they didn't exist, and it certainly doesn't mean that they can be treated as non-existent.

They existed as Arabs. Most Palestinians have as much in common with each other as an Arab in Syria to an Arab in Egypt. I didn't say they didn't exist. The "people" (nation) didn't exist.

Even in Australia, it took a while, but we discarded the concept of Terra Nullis. The aboriginal population didn't have a name either. It doesn't make the British invasion more right.

So Jews who lived in Israel for thousands of years (and others who returned home to Israel after exile) or like the British? and the Arabs who invaded over the course of the past few hundred years are the aboriginal population? Interesting.

You claim Palestinians were a group invented 100 years ago. Well, the concept of the nation-state didn't exist until a few hundred years ago. So by your own argument, there has been no such thing as a state of Israel because you're just hitching on a concept invented a few hundred years ago.

If the concept of the nation-state didn't exist until a few hundred years ago what was the Kingdom of Israel? Israel's claim to the land of Israel has nothing to do with nation-state.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Some facts
by Soulbender on Mon 6th May 2013 08:28 in reply to "RE[6]: Some facts"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I would expect reasonable people to understand that a country which existed on said land for thousands of years and protected its rights to that land against overwhelming odds would have more rights to it than a group of people who were invented 100 years ago.


Oh you mean just like the non-Jewish people that has lived on the land now known as Israel much longer than the current state of Israel has existed?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[8]: Some facts
by adinas on Mon 6th May 2013 08:49 in reply to "RE[7]: Some facts"
adinas Member since:
2005-08-17

And they are welcome to stay. No one is kicking them out. All Arabs citizens have full rights and if the Arabs in Judea and Samaria would demand it I'm sure they would get citizenship too.

But they do not have the right to take away parts of someone elses (very small country) to create yet another Arab country.

Don't confuse national rights with individual rights. I am talking about national.

Edited 2013-05-06 08:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Some facts
by darknexus on Mon 6th May 2013 09:09 in reply to "RE[7]: Some facts"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

"I would expect reasonable people to understand that a country which existed on said land for thousands of years and protected its rights to that land against overwhelming odds would have more rights to it than a group of people who were invented 100 years ago.


Oh you mean just like the non-Jewish people that has lived on the land now known as Israel much longer than the current state of Israel has existed?
"
Might as well save your energy. It's no good trying to have an intelligent debate with someone who refuses to look beyond their own religion.

Reply Parent Score: 4