Talk:Issa El-Issa

Palestinian Christian or Arab Christian

WarKosign has suggested at the Zionism article that Issa El-Issa should not be referred to as a Palestinian Christian, but rather as an Arab Christian. He founded a newspaper called Palestine, and referred to Palestine as "my country" on numerous occasions in his writings. According to this page, in 1911, the newspaper began "addressing its readers as "Palestinians". In a 1922 letter he refers to being "a descendant of an ancient Christian Family of Palestine". Oncenawhile (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

It is also worth noting that "Arab" is not an ethnicity but a pan-ethnic group. Hence the term Palestinian Arab. It is also worth noting that the concepts of Arab nationalism and Palestinian nationalism formed in parallel with each other. Oncenawhile (talk) 13:44, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Although he supported pan Arab unity, he self identified himself as a Palestinian, which he did on numerous occasions. It doesn't even matter what he self identified. For example, scholars and historians refer to Jews during Mandate period as Jewish Palestinians. Also, it is important to clarify he's a Palestinian, considering the extraordinary role he played in Palestine. Correspondences to Albert Einstein, Herbert Samuel are examples...--Makeandtoss (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Do you have a source supporting the claim that he described himself as Palestinian ? Currently the reference cites a letter where he wrote "a descendant of an ancient Christian Family of Palestine", and it does not really support the claim, since "of Palestine" does not necessarily mean "Palestinian". If Issa El-Issa supported pan Arab unity, it seems reasonable that he would consider himself an Arab born and living in Palestine. Considering himself Palestinian and belonging to a separate sub-ethnicity would be against the declared views. “WarKosign” 15:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi WarKosign, it's worth noting that many (most?) Palestinians used both identities, choosing the one that suited the situation in any given time. When exhorting support from the surrounding nations they called themselves "Arabs", but when highlighting their nativeness in Palestine, they called themselves "Palestinians". Over time it became clear that "Arab" was a label which wasn't greatly cared for by other Arabic-speaking countries, and also it was manipulated by the Israeli propaganda machine to suggest that Palestinians could go live happily in any "Arab country".

Note that many Jews did the same thing (e.g. German vs. Jewish vs. German Jewish = Arab vs. Palestinian vs. Palestinian Arab), and their use of different labels evolved over the years as the political situation changed.

Oncenawhile (talk) 17:48, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

You could as correctly say that over time Arab propaganda machine manipulated the identity of Arabs living in Palestine to suggest that they are native to the land and couldn't live happily in any Arab country.

Is there an example of the man referring to himself as Palestinian, or a reliable source saying so ? Preferably a source that is not a part of the alleged propaganda machine. “WarKosign” 17:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

No, that wouldn't be "as correct". That you think that an outside force "manipulated... to suggest that they are native" is a terrible indictment of your understanding of the Palestinian people. You are going to have to get a much deeper understanding of their history if you are to be able to approach NPOV. I had hoped for better. Oncenawhile (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you. All Arabs and Palestinians are not "native" to the land and came in Muslim conquest of the Levant in the 7th century. Palestinians were not considered a separate ethnic group until much later, at earliest during Peasants' revolt in Palestine in and even that is disputed. One can't ignore these inconvenient facts even when supporting their right for statehood and self-determination in parts of the land their predecessors captured so long ago. “WarKosign” 08:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok WarKosign, you just went on full Zionist mode. You claiming that all Palestinians came from Muslim conquest is another way of saying that all Palestinians are Saudi Arabians. Does Issa El-Issa look like a Saudi Arabian to you? Who came in the Muslim conquest are a tiny fraction of the Palestinian population, the rest are interbreeds of Romans, Greeks, Russians, Egyptians, Arabs, Persians, Bedouins, Jews and god knows who else lived in that region. While this discussion is silly and highly irrelevant, here's where Issa El-Issa is quoted where he explicitly says he's a Palestinian. page 97. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

The quote seems like a good quote, you should use it to support the statement you changed.

Which of the peoples you listed are ingenious to the region ? Romans or perhaps Russians ? It's very likely that the different invaders interbred with each other and the locals, but the bulk came from outside, and it's obvious even from your long list. “WarKosign” 14:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

None. Nobody is ingenious. Considering the fact that human life originated from Africa. Palestinians lived there for the last centuries, they are more native to Palestine than those who came from "gutters of Europe". Makeandtoss (talk) 14:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad that you agree that those who's ancestors lived earlier are "more" native. Canaanite or Philistines would be first in the line if they still existed, Israelites and therefore modern Jews are next, followed by later conquerors such as ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Greek, Romans, Arabs/Palestinains, etc. “WarKosign” 17:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Lol, modern Jews are barely connected to Israelites. Israelites were genetically close to Arabs, modern Jews are gentically close to Europeans. Also, Jews left the land for centuries,they can no longer be considered native. And finally, Canaanites and Philistines did not vanish into thin air, they are the ones who lived in the land after Jews left, later interbed with various ethnicities to produce today's Palestinians. That is just my humble view. Have a nice day. Makeandtoss (talk) 18:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like you'd find Genetic studies of Jewish origins enlightening. “WarKosign” 20:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually, that proves my point, except for the first sentence "modern Jews are barely connected to Israelites". In other words, why would modern Jews (who originate from Israelites and Europeans) be considered Israelite rather than European, just because they maintained their Jewish faith across the millennia ? That doesn't give them the right to consider Palestine their homeland. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps you missed it: "all major Jewish groups share a common Middle Eastern origin" "Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews have roughly 30 percent European ancestry, with most of the rest (that is, almost 70%) from the Middle East." So you have people who share most of the genes with ancient Israelis, practice the same religion and speak the same language, and yet you ask why they should be considered the same people ? “WarKosign” 22:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

As about your second point "left the land for centuries", see History of the Jews and Judaism in the Land of Israel - there was maintained a Jewish presence in the land of Israel. “WarKosign” 22:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

What same language? Hebrew was revived, most of them spoke Yiddish/Russian/German/etc.. Yeah of course, a small Jewish presence after their exile in Palestine is an undeniable fact. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Have you read Revival of the Hebrew language, especially the lead ? Hebrew has been continuously used as a sacred language and trade language among Jews of different countries. It had to be reformed to be fit for modern life, but any user of modern Hebrew has no problem reading, say, Dead Sea Scrolls. “WarKosign” 07:38, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

@WarKosign: I will not comment on most of the myths you describe above. But you should note that your theories are logically inconsistent. The DNA scholars (whose work has been disputed) that you believe in conclude that Ashkenazi Jews are mostly Middle Eastern. How do they define "Middle Eastern" DNA? They look at Palestinians and other groups in the region. But you seem to think that Palestinians, and presumably everyone else conquered in the Islamic conquest who began speaking Arabic, are actually Saudi Arabians. See where your logic becomes absurd. You can't have your cake and eat it. Oncenawhile (talk) 15:52, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't tell about the specific research, but you have a point. This article describes a research that supports it. If this is correct, neither side can say the other is not native and doesn't deserve to live in their ancestor's land.“WarKosign” 21:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)