Monthly Archives: April 2019

Twitter strikes again…

In case any of u were wondering, @jack has now suspended me on Twitter.

No reason was given, and no appeal by me was possible.

I have no idea WHY i was banned or what it is I tweeted.

Dems the breaks.

To all those who followed my tweets since May 2014 and engaged with me, thank you.

I had fun, and many of you helped make it so.

All the best and keep keeping the bastards honest.

Love yous!!


The Moral Case For Israel Annexing The West Bank—And Beyond – by Jason Hill

The Moral Case For Israel Annexing The West Bank—And Beyond

–   Jason Hill, The Federalist, April, 2019

If I was able to string words, sentences and thoughts on the Arab-Israeli conflict as effectively as Jason Hill, this is an article I would have been pleased to have written.

For me, the crux of the article is what Hill terms Israel’s “altruism”.

This is absolutely accurate, for, never in world history, has a nation behaved with such forbearance against an enemy sworn to effect its demise.

Of equal importance in this article is Hill’s contention that the purpose of war is to vanquish the enemy.

America and Europe have worked assiduously to prevent this from happening and thus kept alive a conflict which should have ended unequivocally in 1967.

Read and consider…..


The April 2019 election victory for Benjamin Netanyahu will see him serve a record fifth term as Israeli prime minister and form a new right-wing coalition government. It also brings the promise of a commitment Netanyahu made to the nation during his campaign: That he would annex Jewish settlements in occupied Palestinian territories.

Vowing to extend sovereignty without distinguishing between settlement blocks and the isolated settlements, Netanyahu promised not to transfer any sovereignty to the Palestinians. His victory in the elections will, hopefully, see the enactment of Netanyahu’s promise.

Israel has the moral right to annex all of the West Bank (even Area C) for a plethora of reasons.

Israel’s Mistake Was Allowing the Palestinian Pretense

Israel made an altruistic mistake toward the Palestinian people after the 1967 defensive war with Jordan. Rather than regard them as “war settlers” or refugees or, after legally occupying conquered territory, as “illegal occupants,” they made the Palestinian people their political and moral problem.

After victory, the “war settlers” could have been seen as enemies of the state: supporters of the Fatah (Palestine Liberation Organization) Charter, which basically calls for the end of Jewry in the region. Under a malevolent and illiberal regime, they would have been regarded and treated as such, not as Israel did treat them: as human beings with specific, inalienable rights.

Under a different set of political sensibilities, the Palestinian people would have been militarily removed from the area because, morally speaking, after the 1967 war, they never belonged there. The proper response from Israel should have been to immediately annex the land and make the people there the responsibility of their original political homeland: Jordan.

There can be no such thing as legitimate “Palestinian Territory” in a geographic region legally seized in a defensive war instigated by a foreign aggressor. The purpose of war is always to vanquish the enemy. The losers of the war cannot make demands on the victors that the victors themselves would not have been put in the position of meeting had the adversary or enemy not forced the victors into making it in the first place.

Israel was forced into a war, which it won. It was then expected to renounce and repudiate the consequences of its fairly won war by capitulating to the conditions of its vanquished enemy, which included, among other self-sacrificially undertaken goals, granting statehood, autonomy, right of return, and the ultimate elimination of Jewry from the region.

The Palestinian Authority Is a Terrible Government

Since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994, Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) have enjoyed joint rule by Israeli military government and the Palestinian Authority with around 98 percent of the Palestinians living in areas under jurisdiction of the PA. In such areas, the PA has destroyed the freedom Palestinians enjoyed under Israeli rule and their economy through kleptocracy, corruption, nepotism, and authoritarian forms of governance subject to none of the checks and balances that characterize Israel’s Knesset.

Jewish exceptionalism and the exceptionalist nature of Jewish civilization require an unconditional space for the continued evolution of their civilization. What’s good for Jewish civilization is good for humanity at large. Jewish civilization is an international treasure trove that must be protected.

Not all cultures are indeed equal. Some are abysmally inferior and regressive based on their comprehensive philosophy and fundamental principles—or lack thereof—that guide or fail to protect the inalienable rights of their citizens.

Given the voting patterns of Palestinians—towards Islamicism and terrorist organizations for the most part—that openly advocate and work for Israeli and Jewish destruction and annihilation, a strong argument can and ought to be made to strip Palestinians of their right to vote—period. The regional hostilities towards Israel in the Middle East are such that Israel must take those threats seriously. It must work for a coalition of forces to neutralize them.

Israel Has Every Right to Defeat Terrorists

The Israeli left should abandon its agonistic handwringing over so-called Palestinian occupation and realize that applying Israeli law in Judea and Samaria, meaning the wholesale destruction of Hamas in Gaza—Hamas being a terrorist organization that can claim no rights as a group and no right to any square inch of land in the region—is an application of democratic law protecting the rights of the individuals who rightfully belong there.

Speaking of Gaza, although the strip was unilaterally relinquished, when one considers the reign of terror executed by the Hamas terrorists and the unadulterated illiberality of the movement itself, Israel has every moral right to wage a ruthless and unrelenting war against Hamas and to re-settle the land if it ever so desires.

America must also admit that it owes Israel political and financial reparations for America’s many decades of support of the PLO and the PA, which have pledged destruction to Israel, and have rejected all plausible peace offerings from Israel, preferring instead war and destruction.

This political and economic reparation would see the United States supplying Israel even more advanced military capabilities, and funding Israel’s military defense in any manner Israel deems necessary for its survival and unrivaled military status in the Middle East. Some may ask why this is necessary. The answer is two-fold.

Should a regional conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbors emerge, Israel will need to demonstrate extraordinary, excessive, and unprecedented military might in a manner that can act as a deterrent and, if necessary, to irrevocably destroy her offensive enemies.

Additional U.S. militarization of Israel is also moral in its execution. It sends a univocally clear message to the world that in any conflict between Israel and her adversaries, the United States stands willing and ready—along with her ally—to destroy any political agent that attacks the sovereignty of Israel. This is because Israel’s right to exist is non-negotiable and it has a right to unilaterally apply Israeli law over its nation-state.

Why Palestinians Have No Moral Authority

Continued militarization of Israel comprises protracted support of our political and moral alter-ego in the Middle East. The decline of the Palestinian people is narrated by their willful ideological malfeasance. They have never come into their own as a people largely because they have never explicitly held a philosophy that can support freedom, the basic liberal principles of individual rights, and a free market economy.

Given Fatah and Hamas’s genocidal aspirations toward Israel and universal Jewry and, in the case of Hamas, of a global caliphate, a moral goal would be to reverse the potential sovereignty of every Palestinian movement in the region. It ought to force Jordan to re-revoke its citizenship status of the Palestinian majority in Jordan.

A people that overwhelmingly approves of their terrorist leaders cannot be made to become citizens of any civilized country such as Israel.

The Palestinian terror war Fatah launched after the 2000 Camp David Peace Summit and unilaterally accepted by the Palestinian people places them in a precarious position. Whatever actions Israel or any of her allies take against them in a war against terror are their responsibility, and are moral. A people that overwhelmingly approves of their terrorist leaders cannot be made to become citizens of any civilized country such as Israel. No moral or political distinctions must be made between Fatah, Hamas, and the people who elect and or support them. No constituted people responsible for the election and appointment of terrorist actors can or should be entrusted with the responsibility of voting.

They constitute a national security threat to Israel because a core feature of their identity is a commitment to destroying Israel as a Jewish state. Therefore, only a policy of radical containment or expulsion remains a viable option. No state can obstruct the case for the achievement of its own justice and territorial safety by aiding and abetting its own destroyers. By making strategic alliances with ISIS, Hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations—should political expediency dictate such a move—we will witness the destruction of Jewish secularism in the region and religious militarization of the entire region.

One cannot admit anti-Semitics devoted to the destruction of Israel into the domain of Jewish civilization. There has to be some semblance of re-shaping the political sensibilities of those outside the historic process. If this is not possible, then we have to admit to their intrinsic humanity, but also, nevertheless, confess to their tragic status as political ballasts.


“Palestine” Revealed


[This is the third and final instalment of a series of articles showing the myth, false historicity and deception of a group of migratory Arabs calling themselves “palestinians”]

It is variously claimed by the Arab Moslem Palestinians (Erekat, 2014) that their indigeneity and culture and history in the currently occupied territories goes back thousands of years to the times of the Canaanites (over 5,500 years allegedly) and that they thus precede the arrival of the Abraham and the Hebrews.

Indeed, in their published paper  “The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict” (2001), Jews for Justice in the Middle East states that “Between 3000 and 1100 B.C., Canaanite civilization covered what is today Israel, the West Bank, Lebanon and much of Syria and Jordan…Those who remained in the Jerusalem hills after the Romans expelled the Jews [in the second century A.D.] were a potpourri of farmers and vineyard growers, pagans and converts to Christianity, descendants of the Arabs, Persians, Samaritans, Greeks and old Canaanite tribes” But no Jews, it would appear.

Illene Beatty in her paper (1957) “Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan” states that “The Arab invaders (of Canaan) of the 7th century A.D. made Moslem converts of the natives, settled down as residents, and intermarried with them, with the result that all are now so completely Arabized that we cannot tell where the Canaanites leave off and the Arabs begin.”  Again, as this historiography goes, the area apparently remained devoid of Jews as inhabitants of the Levant.

But then Beatty goes on to write that the Jews under King David conquered Canaan in 1000 BC until they were “wiped out” in 586 BC thus ending 414 years of Jewish rule in the area. This means that, Jews lived, worshipped and died in the area of Judea and Samaria including Jerusalem (David’s City…) some 1300 years before Arabs and Islam appeared in the Levant.

The Jewish Bulletin (1998) quotes Eli Shuikrun and Ronny Reich saying that “Recent archeological (sic) digs have provided evidence that Jerusalem was a big and fortified city already in 1800 BCE…Findings show that the sophisticated water system heretofor (sic)  attributed to the conquering Israelites pre-dated them by eight centuries and was even more sophisticated than imagined…Dr. Ronny Reich, who directed the excavation along with Eli Shuikrun, said the entire system was built as a single complex by Canaanites in the Middle Bronze Period, around 1800 BCE.” However, this time, it may be noted that while Jews are mentioned in antiquity, no mention is made of Palestinians, Arabs or Moslems.

Others like Henry Cattan (1984), a Palestinian Christian jurist and writer born in Jerusalem says: ‘The Palestinians are the original and continuous in- habitants of Palestine from time immemorial.”

And still others the PA President Mahmoud Abbas earnestly claim (2016): “Our narrative says that we were in this land since before Abraham. I am not saying it. The Bible says it. The Bible says, in these words, that the Palestinians existed before Abraham.”

For the novice reader in the Arab-Israeli conflict, such discrepancies in nationalistic historiographies may seem a little confusing. This paper will show that this does not have to be so and that the “history” of the “indigenous” “Palestinians” denied an “historic homeland” through Zionist machinations, started on May, 1964 at the Arab League Summit in Cairo. In other words, the “palestinian” conflict is an extension of the Arab-Israeli hostilities 1948-2019 (though even that is now being turned on its head).

I will start off by stating that

  1. The “Palestinian” Arab people, nation or culture have never existed.
  2. Islam arrived in the Levant 2,500 years after the establishment of Judaism and 750 years after the birth and spread of Christianity.
  3. Arabs arrived in the Levant some 2,500 years after the establishment of monotheistic Judaism and continuous Jewish presence in same and that ALL Arab commentators acknowledge the conquest of the Levant circa 700 CE….
  4. By the time Jewish Kingdoms were established in Judea, no Canaanites, Hittites, Moabites, Amorites, Horites or Jebusites existed. Even the genuine remnants of the Canaanites (Phoenicians of Gaza, Tzur and Sidon (last two-named now in Lebanon) had long before disappeared through intermarriage with the Hebrews.

The Canaanites are historically acknowledged as the first inhabitants of the Land of Israel, before the Hebrews settled there. Indeed, the correct geographic name of the Land of Israel is Canaan, not “Palestine” (a Roman invention, as we will see later). They were composed by the different tribes mentioned above, and who could be distinguished in two main groups: the Northern or Coastland Canaanites and the Southern or Mountain Canaanites.

The Northern Canaanites, better known in history by their Greek name Phoenicians, settled along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea from what is modern port of Alexandria to the proximities of the Gulf of Haifa. The Phoenicians called themselves “Kana’ana” or “Kinachnu”. Their language was adopted from their Semitic neighbours, the Arameans, and was closely related to Hebrew (not to Arabic!). Phoenicians and Israelites did not need interpreters to understand each other. During the Islamic invasions and occupations of what became known as the Middle East, they were Arabized, yet, never completely assimilated, and their present-day state is Lebanon. It is not coincidental that generational Lebanese look nothing like their co-religionists in Syria, Jordan and Egypt. And it is for this reason today that Lebanon today is the only one of Israel’s immediate Muslim neighbours not known as the Islamic Republic of…

The “palestinians” are not Lebanese. Therefore they are not Phoenicians (Northern Canaanites).

The Southern Canaanites lived in the mountain region from the Golan southwards, on both sides of the Yarden (River Jordan) and along the Mediterranean coast from the Gulf of Haifa to Yafo; the Canaan of Jewish and Christian biblical note. Through intermarriage and war, by the time of King David, the Canaanites had been absorbed into the Israelite nation. After all, when the Assyrians overran the Kingdom of Israel, they did not leave any Canaanite aside, as they had all become Israelites by that time. The same happened when the Babylonians overthrew the Kingdom of Judah.

For this documented (verifiable) reason, the only people that can trace a lineage back to the ancient Canaanites are the Jews, not the “palestinians” per Erekat (2014). The Canaanites simply did not exist as a definable ethnic group any longer after the 8th century BCE. If the “Palestinians” were indeed descendants of the ancient Philistines, would they not be speaking Hebrew, or, indeed, clamouring for a return of Lebanon as their rightful national homeland?

The name “Palestinian” is a modern political creation for a group of Arabs wedded to the idea of a Jew-free Middle East using various guises such as indigeneity, history and colonial theory. In the 20th century, a main protagonist of this colonial theory was the post-colonialist Edward Said. But even he could not remain consistent in his life’s work of removing Jews from the Middle East. In his seminal 1979 book “The Question of Palestine” he states “Palestine became a predominantly Arab and Islamic country by the end of the seventh century (emphasis mine). Almost immediately thereafter its boundaries and its characteristics — including its name in Arabic, Filastin — became known to the entire Islamic world…for its religious significance…”

This is curious on two counts: Firstly, it “disappears” Jewish presence, religion and indigeneity during the millennia which preceded the Arab Moslem invasion, and it ignores the fact that after 1071 CE when Jerusalem and surrounds were captured by the Seljuk Turks, it never again came under Arab rule until after the invasion of Jordan into Judea in 1948.  The Turks were not Arabs and the term “Islamic” was a word which developed out of Arab nationalism AFTER the disintegration of the Seljuk Ottoman Turkish lands post 1918. Further, there is no record of any country called Palestine until such was created by the British in San Remo in 1925 for the express purpose of actualising their 1917 pledge to create a Homeland for the Jewish People (see my previous blog for details of this).

And secondly, in his anti-Jewish zeal, in 1979 Said goes so far as to state that Palestine became known to the “entire Islamic world” for its religious significance after the Arab Moslem invasion of the Levant. This is a curious statement because the following quotes (and dates) will amplify that this was definitively not the case either before OR after the Arab Conquests:

  1. Qur’an 17:104 – “And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: ‘Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd.’”
  2. Jerusalem and the Temple Mount are considered the THIRD holiest Moslem site as opposed to the Holy of Holies by the Jews.
  • In 985 c.e. the Arab writer Muqaddasi complained that in Jerusalem the large majority of the population were Jewish, and said that “the mosque is empty of worshippers…” .
  1. In 1377, Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable Arab historians, wrote: “Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel extended over 1400 years… It was the Jews who implanted the culture and customs of the permanent settlement”.
  2. Comments by Christian travellers/pilgrims concerning the Arabs in Palestine in the 1800s: “The Arabs themselves cannot be considered but temporary residents. They pitched their tents in its grazing fields or built their places of refuge in its ruined cities. They created nothing in it. Since they were strangers to the land, they never became its masters. The desert wind that brought them hither could one day carry them away without their leaving behind them any sign of their passage through it”.
  3. The chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated: “The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 c.e. hardly lasted, as such, 22 years”.
  • Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937: “There is no such country as Palestine. ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. ‘Palestine’ is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it”.
  • Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946: “There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not”.
  1. Representantive of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956: “It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria”.
  2. Zuhair Muhsin, military commander of the PLO and member of the PLO Executive Council (1977?): “There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity… yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity serves only tactical purposes. The founding of a Palestinian state is a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel”.
  3. Syrian dictator Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yasser Arafat (date undetermined): “There is no such thing as a Palestinian people, there is no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria. You are an integral part of the Syrian people, Palestine is an integral part of Syria. Therefore it is we, the Syrian authorities, who are the true representatives of the Palestinian people”.

But, WHEN did the world first hear of a “palestinian” people, a people fabled in antiquity going back to pre-Canaanite times?

The answer is that the world first heard of the term “Palestinians” in May 1964 at the first Arab League Summit in Cairo. The League had convened to develop ways to destroy the State of Israel and the formation of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation in May 1964 was the tool and umbrella organisation used to organise disparate Arab paramilitary groups in and around the new state of Israel for this purpose.

Initially, the PLO’s legislature, the PNC, did little to further the “interests” of the new nation of “palestinians”. These “interests” started with the elimination of the State of Israel per Article 1 of their Charter.

Specifically, Article 1 stated that Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.

It is easy to see here that even in 1964, the Arabs could not decide if they were interested in strengthening pan-Arabism (Arab homeland), a Palestinian nation-state or an extension of a wider Arab ummah. What was never in doubt, though, was the intent of the newly formed “palestinian” (read Levantine Arabs) “people” to destroy the State of Israel.

Article 21 of that same covenant of the newly formed PLO was even clearer: “The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals.”

And in case the reader nurtured any lingering doubts that palestinianism was anything other than  the new tool on the block to avenge a stunning 1948 Arab defeat at the hand of a tiny Jewish enclave, the organisation through which Arafat rose to prominence was named the Palestine Liberation Organisation. The title of the organization included the word “Palestine” rather than “Palestinian”, since it was seen as a pan-Arab organization dedicated to the liberation of Palestine, rather than a Palestinian movement, and its leadership was appointed by the Arab League.

In the intervening years, the PLO was replaced by the Palestinian Authority (full name Palestinian National Authority; a name change of significance….), and the methods used to end the existence of the Jewish state morphed from mostly up-front physical violence to political and economic substitutes; all unsuccessful.

In the 54 years since “Palestinians” entered our terminology, very few institutions of state were ever enacted. “Palestinians” in the east of Israel would gladly rip the hearts out of those in the west of the country. The “palestinian” President hasn’t held elections for over fourteen years. And Sunni Arab and  Moslem support from formerly major players in the 1964 Cairo Conference which created the PLO have moved away from a feckless group of mostly migratory Arab pawns to the east and west of Israel who are anything but indigenous, ancient, a nation or a people.

The Legality of the existence of the State of Israel -then, as now

Ninety nine years ago this April, on April 24 1920, at San Remo, the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers, consisting of Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan, agreed to approve the Balfour Declaration of Nov 2, 1917.

The San Remo Conference thus changed what had been only a statement of British intent, into a binding legal document.

This was accomplished by significantly changing the wording of Britain’s pledge from using their “best endeavours” to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine, to one which made Britain legally responsible for “putting into effect” this objective.

And it was solely for this objective that the Mandate was conferred on the land aggrandizement of the shattered Ottoman Empire.

In other words, post San Remo, the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine meant two important things:

  1. Creation of the state and country of Palestine which till that time officially did not exist in international law and that
  2. Palestine in its entirety was reserved exclusively for the self-determination of the Jewish people.

The two new entities were synonymous since they were both created at the same time and for the same exact purpose. That is to say that if it was not that the Jewish National Home was to be housed in Palestine, and that Palestine was to be the Jewish National Home, the country of Palestine would never have been created…..

It is important to remember that the San Remo creation of the Mandated state and country of Palestine was not created to satisfy the national aspirations of Arabs in any part of the country, either east or west of the Jordan. Those aspirations were covered in a different paragraph of the San Remo resolution where it was decided that those aspirations would be fulfilled by  the adjoining territories of Mesopotamia (later Iraq) and Syria as well as the existing state of the Hejaz in the Arabian Peninsula.

The resolution was approved, in binding international law, by the subsequent Treaty of Sevres later that same year and by 52 nations in 1922, in addition to those nations which subsequently joined the League of Nations.

Equally importantly, the San Remo Resolution officially terminated and replaced the secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 where Britain and, particularly France, which bargained hard for, but ultimately failed to get, Palestine’s inclusion in Syria.

For the record, the Sykes-Picot agreement envisaged a confederation of Arab territories which would include Syria, Mesopotamia (now Iraq) and Transjordan.

What is of note here is that Palestine was never considered in that confederation of Arab states and it is this that makes the whole current-day concept of Judean Arabs and their enmity over 70 years nothing more than practised ethnic supremacism: the myth of “return” is merely a political ploy to remove a Jewish state seen as a blemish to ME Arab homogeneity.

The Jewish State of Israel exists legally both under the legal outcome of the actualisation of the Balfour Declaration as realised at the San Remo Conference as well as Article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant which transferred de jure sovereignty (legal title) over Palestine to the Jewish People by the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers who acted as the disposing agent by international law, by virtue of their military victory over Austria-Hungary, Germany and the Ottoman Empire.

And, of course, it should not be forgotten that that very same Supreme Council of the Allied Powers also created Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, thus negating any and all Arab complaints, then or since, in light of the huge territorial benefits in recognition of Arab nationalism provide them by that same Council.

The 100 year Arab-Israeli conflict will be seen as by future generations as a negative example of Arab ethno religious supremacism and bigotry towards a nation, country and people who had both moral, cultural and legal right for the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in its spiritual heartland.

“Palestinian” Land, State, Nation and Country – the myth of “return”

Two days ago, I was banned for 7 days on Twitter in response to a venomous Arab Muslim tweet saying Israel had no place in the Middle East.

In response, I tweeted that there had never ever been either an Arab OR Muslim state nation or country called “palestine”. I added that there is no “state” of “palestine” now and, with Iran’s attempts at Levantine hegemony, there would, for Israel’s continuing security, most likely now never be an independent “palestinian state”, but, rather some sort of Arab Palestinian (sic) autonomous mandate. The reason given me for my suspension was that I had “hatefully targeted a specific group of people”.

Slightly non-plussed, I went back to my research to see how wrong I might have been in the eyes of the Twitter censors.

At the risk of boring those who know, the Romans renamed the entire region Syria-Palestina (named for the Philistines and Assyrians) after they destroyed the Second Temple so as to erase its Jewish roots. This was later shortened to Palestina and it eventually became known as Palestine. There was never any connection to the yet -to-happen Arab colonisation of the Levant.

Today, after the Jordanian land-grab and colonisation of 1948, “Palestinians” call Judea and Samaria (in Hebrew, Yehuda and Shomron) the West Bank. However, Jews derive the very name of their religion and peoplehood from the name Yehuda, the fourth son of Jacob whose tribe settled in that region. Yet, these ancient names were not exclusively used by Jews. In fact, the U.N. itself, in General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947), referred to the region as Judea and Samaria, as do all maps published before 1948.

Additionally, west of the Jordan River, 277 villages and sites- almost two-thirds of all sites-  had names that were similar to or the same as Jewish villages on the same sites during Second Temple times.

Hebron (Arabic: al-Khalil; Hebrew: Chevron, which means friend), located in the Judean Mountains, is the second largest city under Palestinian Arab control after Gaza and it is one of the four Jewish holy cities (the others: Jerusalem, Sefat, Tiberius). Most significantly it contains Judaism’s second most holy site, the Cave of Machpelah, purchased by Abraham. It is here that Judaism’s Patriarchs and three of its Matriarchs are buried. (cf. Jewish Another large Palestinian Arab city, Nablus, whose  Hebrew name is Shechem, is actually derived from the Greek, Neopolis. 

Further, many of the Arab villages and towns in Judea/Samaria have names that are not only not Arabic, but also rarely appear in other Arab lands. Among such names are Kafr Yasif, Kafr Kana, Kafr yatta, Kafr Manda, Kaft Samia and others.

As an interesting aside,most Arab countries bordering Israel derive their names from the Hebrew Bible.  Lebanon: Levanon, means white in Hebrew, referring to the snow cover of the surrounding mountains. Syria: Siryon, in the Bible, is the alternate name for Mount Hermon. Jordan/River Jordan (Yarden in Hebrew) takes its name from the Israelite tribe of Dan, and means “descends from Dan.”  Gaza, Azza in Hebrew, is mentioned in Genesis and the Book of Judges with the Samson narrative.

As one can see thus far, there is no connection between what is today Judea, Samaria and Gaza to anything remotely connected to an “ancient indigenous” “palestinian” Arab OR Muslim history or culture.

As a clarification, my own research is not ‘post-modern’ in that I  do not believe that all accounts of the Israeli- “Palestinian” conflict should be seen as equally valid. There is a difference between those who make statements without apparent recourse to evidence and others who spend much time reading and checking their conclusions.

In searching for evidence of the Arab OR Muslim state, nation or country of “palestine” at ANY time prior to 1948, I come to Sachar’s 1977 study where he places the emergence of contemporary Zionist thought to the European Rabbis, Judah Alkalai and Zvi Hirsh Kalischer, who from the 1830s onwards stressed the need for Jews to return to the Holy Land as a necessary prelude to the Redemption and the coming of the Messiah. Sachar argues that such messianic exhortations did not immediately or widely take root among European Jews. However, he suggests that by the 1870s societies generally known as Chovevei Zion (‘Lovers of Zion’) had formed across Russia, which viewed Palestine as a site for national renewal
and a refuge from anti-Semitism. So much for the messianic aspect of the Aliyah.

But what of the Arab connection to Syria-Palestina? What of the Arab “palestinians” who had allegedly been the titled landholders of what is today Israel before the State’s declaration of independence? Berry and Philo (2006) state that the official Ottoman census of 1878 had put the total at 15,011 living among a combined
Muslim/Christian population of 447,454. Nowhere in the all-encompassing Ottoman Tanzimat of 1858 is the term “palestinian” mentioned. With the consent of Constantinople (for large sums of money…), Jewish settlements were built on land that was purchased from absentee effendi landlords. Often the locals who had tended the land were evicted with the help of Turkish police. Thus, the non-titled migrant Muslim and Christian Arabs of the Levant were themselves keen to throw off Ottoman rule in order to keep making a living.

To do this they then made a series of deals with the British to overthrow Constantinople and were rewarded with the creation of Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq; Muslim “nation” states all. The British also partially fulfilled their promise per San Remo and Balfour to create a Jewish homeland but then cut and ran when the promises they had made to everybody for the benefit of their own “spheres of influence” became impossible to reconcile. As well, the British Mandatory powers added to this confusion with their Article 46 of the 1922 order-in-council which in effect championed the benefits of bringing landed assets into a market economy while at the same time asserting rights of the state to as much agricultural land as it thought it could claim—redefining Ottoman legal categories when possible, deferring to local arrangements when necessary. This was further compounded by British definitions and locations of mulk and miri lands and only added to the general discomfiture.

By that same token, per the authenticity and/or validity of “palestinian” “land” claims, most of the mulk land was confined to urban sites, mostly buildings and gardens. It constituted a negligible fraction of the agricul­tural land in mandated Palestine. The owner of miri land did not hold the land by title deed but rather
by usufruct, which gave him the legal right to the land and to the profits
from it. He could not mortgage or sell it without the consent of the
state, which was obtained from the British Land Office. The Ottomans themselves kept a very tight reign on the administration of miri land providing as it did, valuable tax revenue for the central government in Constantinople. 

By 1918, after the defeat and breakup of the occupying Ottoman Turks, the economic outlook for the Levant’s rural Arab population, estimated at 440,000, was very uncertain. The cultivated land was not very fertile or sufficiently irrigated.  A severe
shortage of livestock had resulted from a prewar epidemic and Turkish
requisitioning of camels and sheep from 1914 to 1917. Conscription had depleted the agricultural labor supply. The massive destruction of olive trees by the retreating Turkish forces compounded the agricultural population’s woes. And unclear validity or absence of land titles hindered the granting of loans, particularly in the administrative turmoil created by World War I.

The severely damaged agricultural sector and diminished yields had resulted in a decrease in rental incomes and therefore less capital accumulation. No longer able to use the Ottoman modalities of operations, numerous Arabs in Mandate Palestine chose to sell land to individual Jews and immigrant Zionists as a convenient alternative for ready cash.

But, all said and done, even as late as end 1947, still nobody had yet heard of an Arab “palestinian” people whose state land had been “occupied” in order to create a Jewish state. In fact, nobody had ever heard of the “palestinian” people, their “land, nation, state or country” till 1964.

Nation building often involves the invention of foundation myths although these normally require a certain relationship to historic facts (Bukay, 2012). This is demonstrably not so in the case of the “ancient and indigenous” “palestinian” people. The Arabs of Judea and Samaria and Gaza calling themselves “palestinians” used  a different tack: stealing the enemy’s heritage, history, and values, and denying its legitimacy as a people and a state. Their objectives remain to disqualify Israel’s historical standing and to inherit its belongings by delegitimising and even dehumanizing its national identity and personality.

These self-same “palestinians” suffer no intellectual dissonance even when gainsayed by the Quran. The Qur’an declares that the Jews are the chosen people, exalted among the nations of the world. It clearly declares the Jews (Bnei Israel) as the only owners of the Land of Israel, which is al-Ard al-Muqaddasah; al-Ard al-Mubarakah; Ard Bani Israil (the sacred land; the blessed land; the land of the People of Israel), and they are not allowed to leave it, for otherwise they will be punished: “It is the promise of God, and God does not go back on his promise.” The Qur’an goes on to acknowledge that the Jewish first and second kingdoms existed but states that they were punished by God.  Nor do the ideological Muslim “palestinians” have any trouble reconciling the Quran’s description of the destroyed Temple of the Israelites;  the existence of which, though acknowledged by officials of the Islamic religious endowment authority (waqf ) in their publicity materials from the 1920s and 1950s, with the fact that Jerusalem and Judea are Arab Muslim heart land going back (in some revisions) 7,000 years…..

In brief, the area of Roman-named Palestine never became an independent state. In the 7th century, Muslim armies conquered it, precipitating battles with Christian crusaders for the “Holy Land”. In modern times, the province of Palestine
passed from the Ottoman Turks to the British who gifted 80% of British Mandate Palestine to the Muslim Hashemite clan from Saudi Arabia for helping defeat the Muslim Ottomans.

The “palestinians” have pulled a swiftie in calling ancient Judea “Palestine” and hide behind the reference to the “Roman designation” for the province as a cynical ploy to fudge the history of the Aegean Philistines 3200 years ago.

The “palestinians” have declared a state twice (in 1948 and 1988; in itself a giveaway for the conflicted and chaotic antisemitic goals of their leaders…), but on neither occasion to much institutional effect.

“Palestinian” Arabs, as opposed to Arabic-speaking residents, have not been in the area west of the Jordan River neither from the Islamic occupation, nor the Ottoman Empire, or even from British rule since 1917.

No Palestinian state has ever existed, and so, no “palestinian people” has ever been “robbed” of their land. Importantly, there is no Palestinian culture distinct from that of surrounding Arab ones; and there has never been a land known as Palestine governed by “palestinians” at any time in history.

For these reasons, the migrant Arabs who now call themselves “palestinians” have been driven to fabricate a past by denying and expropriating that of Jews and Israel.

And so, I re-iterate my tweet of two days ago: No Arab OR Muslim state, nation or country called “palestine” has ever existed. It STILL doesn’t. And with the advent of hegemonic Iranian initiatives in the Middle East, is now no longer likely to ever be created save for an autonomous and territorially contiguous Palestinian entity allied perhaps to Jordan. Those who perpetuate the lie of stolen “palestinian” land will die bitter.


Fortunately, I cannot be suspended from my own blog.