UN Guidelines: Jews are indigenous to Israel


Under UN guidelines Jews are indigenous to Israel, Palestinians are not, hence those who argue “for Palestinian ‘indigenous rights’ are usually those who have little grasp of the history, and no understanding of the truth behind indigenous rights.”



Israel Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?

By Ryan Bellerose


I am a Métis from Paddle Prairie Metis settlement. My father, Mervin Bellerose, co-authored the Métis Settlements Act of 1989, which was passed by the Alberta legislature in 1990 and cemented our land rights. I founded Canadians For Accountability, a native rights advocacy group, and I am an organizer and participant in the Idle No More movement in Calgary. And I am a Zionist.

Magdala stone with Menorah that was found in the Archaeological site inside the Migdal Synagogue area – Photo: Wikimedia Commons/Hanay

Indigenous status

To begin, let us acknowledge that there is no rule that a land can have only one indigenous people; it is not a zero sum game in which one group must be considered indigenous so that therefore another is not.

However, there is a very clear guideline to being an indigenous people. It is somewhat complex but can be boiled down to the checklist below, as developed by anthropologist José R. Martínez-Cobo (former special rapporteur of the Sub-commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities for the United Nations).

This list was developed because indigenous rights are beginning to be respected across the planet. This recognition is incredibly important, so we as indigenous people cannot allow non-indigenous people to make false claims, which ultimately would harm our own rights.

The creation and declaration of the sovereign nation of Israel marks the first time in history that an indigenous people has managed to regain control of its ancestral lands and build a nation state.

Israel is the world’s first modern indigenous state: the creation and declaration of the sovereign nation of Israel marks the first time in history that an indigenous people has managed to regain control of its ancestral lands and build a nation state. As such, this is incredibly important for indigenous people both to recognize and to support as a great example for our peoples to emulate.

The actual working definition of “indigenous people,” (not the Wikipedia version, nor Merriam Webster, both more suited to plants and animals) for purposes of this essay is that developed by aforementioned anthropologist José R. Martínez-Cobo. With this as my foundation, I will detail why Jews are indigenous to Israel, and why Palestinians are not.

Martinez-Cobo’s research suggests that indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society, excepting Israel as noted above, and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.

This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present of one or more of the following factors:

  • Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them
  • Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands
  • Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.)
  • Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language)
  • Residence in certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world
  • Religion that places importance on spiritual ties to the ancestral lands
  • Blood quantum – that is, the amount of blood you carry of a specific people to identify as that people. The concept was developed by colonialists in order to eventually breed out native peoples.

Close up of relief on the Arch of Titus in Rome depicting the golden Menorah, one of the spoils brought back to the city by returning Romans soldiers after their Siege of Jerusalem, when they sacked the Jewish Temple in 70 AD.

  • Their lands were occupied, first by the Romans in the first century, then by the Arabs in the seventh century.
  • They share common ancestry with previous occupants as determined by several genetic studies.
  • Their culture can be traced directly to the Levant, where it developed into what is now known as “Jewish culture.” While different Jewish communities have slightly different traditions, they all share the same root culture, and it remains unchanged. They have resurrected their traditional language, and while many still speak Yiddish and Ladino, Hebrew has become the primary language again.
  • They have spiritual ties to the land, which plays a large role in their traditions as a people.

Despite all the arguments about “European” Jews, they in fact meet all the criteria set forth by Martínez-Cobo. Even though Israel is the first modern indigenous state, it still has lands that are occupied by foreigners in Judea and Samaria. Those are ancestral lands and, many feel that they should be returned to the indigenous peoples for self-determination.

Now, for the flip side.

Palestinians have what are called “rights of longstanding presence;” and although these are legitimate rights, they do not trump indigenous rights. The very nature of “longstanding presence” means that although they lived somewhere a long time, they do not have the right to occupy indigenous peoples and control them.

The argument that Palestinians are indigenous is incorrect for several reasons.

  • Approximately 50% percent of Palestinian Arabs can track their ancestors back farther than their great-grandparents. Many are descended from Arabs brought to the Levant by the British to build infrastructure after World War I.
  • The vast majority of Palestinians are Arabic speaking Muslims; the Arabic language is indigenous to the Arabian Peninsula, as is the Muslim religion. The Muslim religion’s holiest places are not in the Levant, but in the city of Mecca, located in the Arabian Peninsula. They have no specifically Palestinian culture that is completely Palestinian dating before the 1960s; in fact, prior to that, the majority identified as “greater Syrians.”
  • Some Palestinians share common ancestry with indigenous peoples, but they neither follow indigenous traditions nor do they self-identify as those indigenous peoples. They share neither religion nor language with them. Blood quantum alone is insufficient to transmit indigenous status.
  • The Arabs of the Middle East subsumed several indigenous populations, but no group can become indigenous through subsuming indigenous peoples. Rather, they conquered the entire region and spread their own language, customs, and religion. This is historical fact.

Israeli Independance Day Stamp 1955Now you might ask, why is this important? It is important to indigenous people because we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous. If we, as other indigenous people, allow that argument to be made, then we are delegitimising our own rights.

If conquerors can become indigenous, then the white Europeans who came to my indigenous lands in North America could now claim to be indigenous. The white Europeans who went to Australia and New Zealand could now claim to be indigenous. If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless. This is somewhat peculiar, as those who are arguing for Palestinian “indigenous rights” are usually those who have little grasp of the history, and no understanding of the truth behind indigenous rights.

If you should encounter the argument that conquerors may themselves become indigenous to a region by virtue of conquering, direct those who assert the argument to this article, and help them understand not only is the argument wrong – it is dangerous to Indigenous people everywhere.




Ryan Bellerose

Ryan Bellerose

Ryan Bellerose, a Zionist, is Metis from the Paddle Prairie Metis settlement in Northern Alberta, Canada. He founded Canadians For Accountability, a native rights advocacy group, and is an organizer and participant in the Idle No More movement in Calgary as well as a founding member of an Israeli advocacy group called Calgary United with Israel.

Follow Ryan Bellerose on Twitter @Fenris6


View original Arutz Sheva publication at:



Israel and Stuff Postscript:

The Ottoman Empire, founded in 1299 by Oghuz Turks under Osman I, came to an end only in 1922. This map below, from 1855, shows all the provinces of the Ottoman Empire and clearly demonstrates that during the 623 years of rule, there was no ‘Palestine’, perspicuously disproving the existence, claims, of any so-called ‘Palestinian’ nation dating back “thousands of years.”

Also take note that throughout the empire, the names of areas, cities or villages are Turkish, Arabic, Latin etc. but the capital of the Nation of Israel is identified as “Jerusalem” and not by the Arabic name of Al-Quds.


Colton’s Turkey in Asia and the Caucasian Provinces of Russia. Published By G. W & C. B. Colton & Co. No. 172 William St. New York


Liked this post? well,app_10_511201348925160_377921524
One click, and you can download our free App

Logo from site







  1. Ashley says:

    This is the best article I’ve read on this topic. Thank you for writing it and standing for the truth. Nowadays just speaking the truth has become an offense and people are so desperate to be politically correct that they’ve become fools who can’t see past the tip of their noses. The people who boldy proclaim the truth are the brave ones.

  2. adolf says:

    yes Israelites may be indigenous to that area but the modern day jew came from Eastern Europe. Just because you adopt a religion doesnt mean you adopt their indigenous rights to land.

    • Rafael says:

      You mean azhkenazi jews (while forgetting sefardic and mizrahi jews), who anyway can also trace their roots back to Israel, having emigrated to Easter Europe after the assyrian and roman conquests

    • Daniel says:

      Ashkenazi Jews do not originate in Eastern Europe nor in Rheinland. Just ask the real indigenous peoples of Eastern Europe and Rheinland who slaughtered them as Semitic foreigners.

    • drdean says:

      On a pro-Israel website, who gives a rat’s ass what a guy named Adolf thinks?

    • Adrienne Schiff says:

      Sorry Adolf, but you are wrong. My parents both Jewish.. Both born in the US and both first generation American. (but not Native American) My Grandparents,4, came from 4 different countries; Russia, Austria, Hungry, and Pursia. All are descendents from the 12 Tribes of Israel. My lineage is to Abraham and I am proud to be a decendent of God’s children, the Hebrews from Judea…

    • josh says:

      And guess where the European Jews came from dumbass?

    • Sally says:

      Adolf, one does not adopt the religion of Judaism, one is Jewish through inheritance from ones ancestors. It is possible to become Jewish but very difficult. It takes about 4 years, so our ancestors were the Jews who have traveled the world being thrown out as we were persecuted throughout history from our original home of Israel .

    • petravitus says:

      The Jews of Europe are all descended from earlier Israelis, and have always had the same religion. Before Germany existed, some Jews fled to Ashkenaz, which became Ascania, then Saxony. They lived among Saxons, but we’re not of Ashkenaz blood.

    • Claire Edelstein says:

      Jews don’t adopt their religion. They are born Jewish and have no other choice. And they are proud of being Jewish and would rather die than change their born identity. So dear Adolf, you have no argument there.

    • Sharon says:

      Lovely name you have!! (Says it all really!) European Jews did not adopt a religion (judaism). We are direct descendents from the ancient Israelites…one look at me and that is clear!! We are the closest to pure blood that YOU will find!!

    • Vivarto says:

      Dear Afolf Hitler,
      You are confusing nationality with race.
      Jews are a nation, a people, not a race.
      All nations mix. Your beloved Germans are actually much more mixed that Jews. Which is really good for the genetic health of Germans.
      They are mixture of various Germanic tribes, Celtic/ Gull nations, and the West Slavic nations.
      Additionally Germans have Jewish, Italian and other genes.
      What makes them German is not he genes, but their national identity, their belonging to culture, language, history.
      I know this is too hard for you to understand.
      You’d really like it all to be about race.

      So let me console you, according to genetic studies, the Ashkenazi Jews are most closely related to Sephardi and Misraim Jews.
      They are genetically more continues with ancient Jews, then for example modern Greeks are with ancient Greeks.

    • Aviva-Roth Sucher says:

      NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      How can you be so dumb. Where do you think all the Jews or Israelites went…. for long hike.
      Get smart!

    • Susan says:

      Actually – your spurious racism of “the modern day jew [sic] came from Eastern Europe” aside – according to those who make the rules for the land, converts to Judaism DO inherit the indigenous rights to the land. So you are wrong on both counts, “adolph”.

    • Aoifa says:

      Such rubbish, I had to say it. No they did not come from Eastern Europe. You cannot be a Jew unless your mother was a Jew. That is because Judaism is matriarchal, e.g. passed down by the mother.

      • Neil says:

        Actually Judaism, in homogeneous ancient Israel, was passed from father to child. It was only in the diaspora that it became matriarchal.

        I am an American and modern Jew whose recent ancestors are from eastern Europe (Belarus). But my DNA tells a different story – I am 80% Semitic and 20% European. My markers trace from Mesopotamia to Israel. The path of our father Abraham.

        • Annie Cope says:

          Wrong, in the tanach we are told that Ezra told the men to put away their foreign wives and the cildren they had with those wives. They obeyed because they knew they were in the wrong. If it had been Patriarchal the children would have been legitimate offspring, but even back then they knew it came via the mother and so even with a sad heart for the love they had for their children, the fathers let the children go, just as Abraham let Ishmael go because he was conceived by some one outside the chosen family. Patriarchal lineage was for trial lineage, and Matriarchal for national.

  3. Cyril Ziman says:

    Adolf. You have chosen to ignore the distinction between an Israeli and a Jew. You also appear to have ignored the criteria upon which the writer’s contention is founded, which include that “Their culture can be traced directly to the Levant, where it developed into what is now known as “Jewish culture.” While different Jewish communities have slightly different traditions, they all share the same root culture, and it remains unchanged. They have resurrected their traditional language, and while many still speak Yiddish and Ladino, Hebrew has become the primary language again”

    • Daniel says:

      Cyril, what exactly is your point on “the distinction between an Israeli and a Jew”? Neither “Israeli” nor “Jew” originate in Eastern Europe. Stupid and ignorant comment on the part of Adolf, why give it any credence, whether for “Israeli” or for “Jew”?

  4. josh says:

    When does America, who has been long standing, give back the land to the indigenous people?

    • israelandstuffcom says:

      You mean “North America”, Central America and South America, not to forget the Caribbean Islands…..right?

    • Susan says:

      And now you have the root of modern-day, leftwing antisemitism: it is FAR EASIER to falsely scapegoat Jews in Israel (& by extension, all Jews) then it is to acknowledge their actual guilt in keeping stolen, unjustly conquered, lands.

      • Aoifa says:

        Sorry Susan, Jews did not steal any land. It is legally theirs and has been for at least 3000 years. They can trace their roots archaeologically.

      • natalie says:

        Susan, it was (most recently) the Arab conquerors who stole lands, not the indigenous Jews. Or is that what you meant: you just said “THEIR actual guilt” — who are THEY?

  5. Jason says:

    “It is important to indigenous people because we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous. If we, as other indigenous people, allow that argument to be made, then we are delegitimising our own rights.”

    And there in lies the rub. Jewish historical and religious claims to the land, the foundation of both ancient and modern Israel and the entire premise of Zionism are based on the Jewish peoples’ own proud, documented and unashamed accounts of their conquest, victory, and the ethnic cleansing of the Canaanites in the land that was previously Canaan.

    So by your very own definition and rule of measurement (as outlined in the above article) the Jewish people are thus NOT indigenous to the land and, in turn, their claim to the land, based on the Israelite’s conquest of Canaan, is no more valid than say those of any subsequent conquerors, be they Roman, Arab, Turkish, British or Zionist.

    Rewinding to the nearest convenient point in history to legitimize a so-called indigenous claim or right to the land and ignoring everything before that point is, at best, no more valid than the same argument being made by the Arabs and Palestinians you have attempted to delegitimize through the exact same reasoning. Or as you so succinctly put it… “If we, even once, allow that argument to be made, indigenous rights are suddenly devalued and meaningless”.

    I believe you have allowed exactly that “argument to be made” and we should thus consider and include all Jewish and Zionist claims of indigenous right to the region “delegitimized”, “devalued” and meaningless”.

    • israelandstuffcom says:

      ~Your argument would only have relevance if any one of the ancient peoples defeated still existed.
      Modern Jews share common ancestry with the previous occupants after intermarriage & conversions among the original occupants, that has since been determined by genetic studies. Of them all, the only to survive and flourish are the Jews.

      Go find a culture that speaks a language as old as Hebrew (or older….and good luck with that), still worships idols of old, and is verified by archeological relics found (good luck with that too), then you may have a valid hypothesis.

      Furthermore, your comment of ‘Zionist conquers’ is nonsense. Zionist are Jews who believe in the reconstitution of the Jewish people in their ancient homeland.
      Remember that the world recognized the Jewish claims as valid which is why the League Of Nations placed Britain as caretakers of the Palestine Mandate, to guarantee a sovereign nation state for the Jewish people…..SO, it was RETURNED and NOT conquered.

      • Jason says:

        No. You are now making an argument based on a different set of criteria initially set out in the article.

        I quote yet again “…we cannot allow the argument that conquerors can become indigenous”. This is exactly what the Jewish Israelites did to the Canaanites, so my point stands unchallenge, unless you are willing to prove otherwise or supply evidence to the contrary. Therefore, based on this exact line of reasoning, the Jewish people cannot claim to be indigenous based on the definition set out in the last two paragraphs of the article. It’s both hypocritical and disingenuous to claim otherwise.

        If the author, or you yourself, is willing to strike those paragraphs and definitions of ‘indigenous’ from the article and make a new or different case, as you just did above, then I’m more than willing to revisit that new case and possibly cede to any new points or ideas made, else the article, as it currently stands, serves only to reiterate my initial observation. Which is that if Israelites conquering the land and establishing a pressence and culture there makes them ‘indigenous’ to said land, then why should the Romans, or Arabs, or Turks, or British not be granted the same privilege or entitlement?

        As for other surviving ethnic peoples and cultures in the region with a valid and documented link to the land. I think that you will find that Egyptian archeological relics, established Egyptian presence in the land and the known and very well documented borders of the ancient Egyptian kingdom, that included what was and is now Israel, also predate those of the Israelites. Making Egyptians no less ethnically and culturally indigenous and connected to the region that is modern Israel than the surviving Jewish people today. Some could even go so far as to say that, based on this evidence (the exact same type used to connect and validate Jewish presence and connection to the land), that their claim is both older, more established and possibly even more valid than those of modern Jews.

        • You base your entire premise on the Israelites that defeated the Canaanites. But they were but a small section of ancient Israel. Remember also there were 12 tribes of Israel, each in their own area of the Land of Israel.
          Also, if I take your argument further, the only rightful people to claim indigenous status would be neanderthals or other such cavemen.
          As for the Egyptians, they are a people whose origins fare from Northern Africa, not here in Asia. Although a few places (digs) have produced hieroglyphics, archeological interpretation combined with historical acknowledgments have concluded they ruled over the local inhabitants.
          Egyptians are a people with distant genetic markers. They are not Semitic. Their original language is Coptic, not Hebrew, the language of Moses and those that returned to Israel.

          Your argument, may sound logical to a novice or layman, but holds no real value. With this last comment, I wish you well.

          • Jason says:

            Canaan? A small action of ancient Israel? If by small you mean from what is now Lebanon all the way down to the Brook of Egypt and eastward to the Jordan River Valley, or basically all (and more) of what Zionists would now declare Israel, then I guess you can say that the conquest was small. As for the twelve tribes of That is exactly my point. Where do you draw the line in history. Modern Israelis and Zionists have decided

          • OK…last comment. I grow tired of having to prove you wrong each time.

            You make it sound as if Canaan was the majority of the total land mass of ancient Israel, when in fact it was less than half. See: https://www.israelandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Maps-of-Israel-vs-Canaan.png

            Modern Israelis (or Zionists) did not determine the size of modern Israel. The League of Nations did. But….the Brits, through the goodness of their hearts decided to fulfill their obligation under the Mandate, to bequeath the Jewish People less than 20% of the mandated territory. Israel’s final borders were determined by the results of having been attacked by 5 Arab armies.

          • jmk says:

            Canaan looks from your map like it does cover much of modern Israel. I’m a zionist, but it’s hard to deny that the Israelites were conquerors–it’s right there in the torah.

          • israelandstuffcom says:

            Indeed they were BUT, modern Jews share common ancestry with the previous occupants after intermarriage & conversions among the original occupants, that has since been determined by genetic studies.
            And as many millennia have passed, the Jews are the only living people to have survived. So, as the only survivors, having flourished, maintaining their ancestral language and culture, I believe that qualifies them as ‘indigenous’ over future ‘conquers’ that followed.

            What still existing culture predates the Jews in the Land of Israel?

        • Aoifa says:

          Coptic Christians are the indigenous people to Egypt, not muslims. islam conquered Egypt.

          • Ryan Bellerose says:

            You do not become indigenous THROUGH conquering, you can only become indigenous through the genesis of culture, language, and tradition, as well as connection with the land, and if applicable, previous inhabitants.

            Conquering does not preclude any of those things, it just means you have to pay attention. People like Jason are desperate to deny Jewish indigenous status. I wonder why?

    • David says:

      Jason, you make a valid point. However, you (and perhaps the article) are missing one fact. Ever since Adam and Eve were expelled from Eden, every nation in the world has been conquering and eradicating every other nation. Not just Israel against Canaan. So actually, there are no indigenous peoples, anywhere in the world at all, period.

      But on the other hand, if there were still Canaanites in Israel, then yes, they would be indigenous and the Jews, the usurpers. But there aren’t and they aren’t. So this article is accurate. The Jews (and don’t forget their offshoot, the Samaritans), are the indigenous people of Israel. The fact is that nowadays, “indigenous” refers to the oldest extant people in any given country by virtue of the fact that they are the oldest extant people in a given country.

    • Sharon says:

      There no genocide against the Canaanites but they did disappear by integration into the Hebrews tribes. The jews, as other ethnias, have always mixed absorbed and been absorbed into other ethnias. The Jews are still around (much to the worlds’ chagrin) but the canaanites, malekites,philistines and other biblical tribes, are not! The palestinians are not descendants of either canaanites or philistines, much as they may want to imvent their history….much as you would like this invention to be true due to your ignorance and basic anti semitism!!

      • Aoifa says:

        There is no such thing as a Palestinian, or Palestine. They are muslims from surrounding muslim states. I hate the term being used because it is wrong. Call them Gazan’s if you need to, but muslim is correct.

    • Susan says:

      If you want to say that Israel cannot own Israel because of the Canaanites, then you had better move out of your own home, no matter where you live, because I guarantee you there was a far more recent unlawful conquest than the one you are STRETCHING to (& yes,m i deliberately types it in caps because of the exaggeration YOU are making).

      Even if you want to pretend that millennia-old wars invalidate ownership of the land, then you still must admit that Jews are far more indigenous to Israel – JUDEA – than YOU are to wherever it is you are living.

  6. Amit says:

    Very nice, however you MUST fix the mistake regarding palestinians.
    According to international law, Jewish people are palestinians and palestine is Jewish.


  7. Theodore Ewoluwa says:

    which nation did the sacking of \israel from the land in AD 70? that nation should carry the whole burden of restoring the whole land of Israel back to the Jews. Then whatever the terms given by the Sovereign God of Israel for peace and for pacifying His anger must be met in the shortest possible time. To this end, a powerful committee to handle this should be set up. Given the scripture in Proverbs 16:7, This committee must seek to please the Sovereign God as quickly as possible.

  8. David Rubin says:

    This whole argument about Jewish indigenous-ness to Israel is informative and interesting, but we are preaching to the converted. We stand no chance of winning the propaganda and Hasbarah war going on worldwide for Israel’s legitimacy. As an Israeli citizen and IDF veteran, I take great solace from the facts on the ground. We have one of the most united, educated, and motivated populations in the history of humanity, we have an amazing army and scientific establishment whose young men and women work day and night to advance our protection, security, and prosperity. And we have some cherished, wonderful friends across the world who have no Jewish stake but nevertheless support us in word and deed, such as Mr. Bellerose. Our deep thanks to them all.

    • israelandstuffcom says:

      David, believe it or not, but our argument was basically confirmed by British archeologists and historians when they investigated Israel’s ancient diggings during mandated Palestine, and has been strengthened throughout each decade with hundreds of additional archeological discoveries year after year.
      As an Israeli citizen, you may recall in last week’s news, even a majority of Israeli Arabs acknowledged Israel had an equal or stronger claim to the Land of Israel.
      57.2 % of Israeli Arabs: Jewish claims to Israel are equal/stronger than Palestinian

      SO, declarations from Mr. Bellerose, who’s authority has been backed by his knowledge and contributions in the field of indigenous nations, only fortifies our claims further, and is seen by those not blinded by antisemitism.

  9. Israël – Quo Vadis says:

    Shared! Used as a reference at: Quo Vadis

    • Eliška Homolová says:

      Full article, including comments was a great experience for me, as I heard the symphony … despite all partial disagreements discussants sounds to me like an ode to joy, because of all the logical consequence is – Israel belongs to the Jewish nation. This was the case in the past and will be so always been ….

  10. Deborah says:

    As someone previously claiming the Palestinians were indigenous, I now see through this article that I was in error. Archaeological and genetic evidence has proven that Jewish antiquity predates the long-standing presence of the Palestinians (which also should be respected). I will point out, though, that the Jews in turn conquered the previous peoples owning the former land of Canaan so they were conquerors too at one point.

    • israelandstuffcom says:

      I agree there were Arabs living in Israel for hundreds of years, and have earned the right of respect for their presence.

      EVERY Arab, living in Israel, who has citizenship, enjoys every right, privilege and service afforded under the law….equal to Jews, Christians etc.

      It’s not a secret that Arabs living in the Jewish State, have MORE rights and personal freedoms that Arabs living in any other Mid-East, Arab or Islamic country.

      Unfortunately, as has been admitted (and documented) the Arab leaders have exposed the fact that the “Palestinian” are a political invention of uniting the Arab cause to stop the Jewish invasion to ‘Palestine’.

      The influx of Arab migrants to Europe now mirrors exactly what happened in Israel beginning with the Ikhwan Revolt (1927) and was facilitated by the Brits when they brought the Bedouin House of Hashim (better known as the Hashemites) to Palestine to rule ‘Trans-Jordan’. So you see, the vast majority of the Arabs known as “Palestinians” were themselves migrants…but arrived before the WWII Jewish refugees by 20-25 years.

      Even the “Palestinian refugees” are a sham. Most (not all) who are spread out in Lebanon, Syria and the Mid-East are there from “Black September” when the King of Jordan used his Army to expel them in 1970 for trying to overthrow him and assassinating members of his family.

      True, many left when told to flee by Arab leaders in 1948, but they were almost all of the migrants that simply returned to whence they came, to their families to give then temporary lodgings until the ‘Arab victory’…that simply never materialized.

      The Palestinians would have had their own country a generation ago if not for a few details:
      1) They invented a lie (Goebbels Propaganda) to advance a political agenda.
      2) They said ‘No’ to 6 serious offers, because their true aim is the end of all of Israel
      3) ALL Palestinian leaders became billionaires, by maintaining conflict. This led to 1700 millionaires in Gaza alone!

      So, in summation I ask:
      If the Palestinian cause was so just and true, why do they lie and deceive about everything?

  11. Jimmy says:

    I’ve been browsing online more than 3 hours nowadays, but
    I never discovered any attention-grabbing article like yours.

    It is pretty value sufficient for me. Personally, if all
    web owners and bloggers made just right content as you did,
    the net will probably be much more useful than ever before.

  12. I think God himself got to start fighting for his people, that’s if the nation Israel still means something to Him, and of course why not mean anything to Him, since by this the Lord Jesup was geologically born from. But why now Palestine still remains a nightmare, but we cannot underestimate them since they had been living in for a while, they can only be considered what I call citizens as well, but not an indigenous people, for even in the bible Israel has long exist in this place, but Palestine according to my knowledge is no thing to remember. Let God arise for his own, and fight for his people. But until Israel began to appreciate what they hhave, but had not acknowledge, I think it not yet over

  13. natalie says:

    Reply meant for Louise Maheux’s comment below:

    Ils avont l’opinion que ce sera bon avoir nom juif et non nom d’exile. N’etait aucun autre raison.

    Pardonnez mes erreurs en francais — je suis americaine, mais je voulait repondre usant VOTRE langue! 🙂


    They have the opinion that it will be good to have a Jewish name and not a name for exile. There was no other reason.

    Forgive my mistakes in French – I am American, but I wanted to answer using YOUR language!)

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply