Beakerkin reads Palestine History of a lost nation so you don't have to

The myth of a distinct Palestinian ethnicity is a commie fable. Palestinians remain Arabs with a rather blatant history of colonialism. The myth of a distinct "Palestinian ethnicity" is a commie standard. The obvious odious stench of making land judenfrei would not market well with leftards.
Thus a naritive was spun almost entirely after 1967.

The narritive was concocted by Communists to co-opt the land greed of the planets most blatant colonialists. While comwads wax about "greater Israel" they are in fact endorsing ethnic cleansing.Moreover, commies love to mix in metaphors about apartheid, native americans and Blacks in the South. Another cliche repeated by the author is that things between Jews and Muslims were just peachy until those nasty Zionists messed it up.

What the author is doing at the onset is akin to claiming Blacks just enjoyed Jim Crow, Slavery and being lynched in the South. Moreover, this is akin to a white racist trying to sugar coat reality by pointing to a plantation that treated its slaves well as the norm. The mistreatment of indigenous people under the rule of Islam is once again being denied.

The metaphors about Native Americans are amusing. The actual situation is Israel is a defacto Jewish reservation with greedy Arabs demanding more land when they posses it in abundance.
This also is amusing as the Arabs have oppressed Jews historically for roughly 1400 years.

Condi Rice was the latest dimwit to compare Palestinians to Blacks in the South. Blacks in the South with the rarest of exceptions did not gratuitously kill White Americans. Moreover, every country has the obligation to protect its citizens. This is the reason we get screened going onto planes and it is a world wide norm. Moreover, even the oft criticized Israeli ID card system just happens to be identical to every Arab state. Commies themselves start to stutter when the Soviet ID with the word JOOO in big letters is displayed.

In the first chapter the author does not start with Palestinian history. The author starts with the premise that Jews are earlier Arab migrants who adopted the Canaanite culture. The claim that Israel was mostly a province of Egypt, that the Kings overstated their actual regional role and the kingdoms lasted 70 years should be familiar from the far left.

The author starts with the usual stories claiming Jews are cultural but not ethnic. Then he starts
off with evidence that backs the claims of the Jews.

From a tenth Century account in Arabic "Filastin is the Western most province of Syria". It was a part of a larger entity but never a distinct entity. This is something we have been saying all along. " In the province (note again not State or country) of Filastin, despite its small extent there are about twenty Mosques, with pulpits for the Friday prayer." This refutes the claim that
the region was densely populated. For reference if we were to look at Franklin County Vermont
we could quickly get that number with no effort. St Albans alone probably has ten Churches with a population of 8,000.

The author does state the fact that most of the adjacent states are also without any claim to a past culture such as Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia. This is amusing as the author is unwittingly making our case. Moreover, he does describe the Jim Crow elements of Muslim rule.

His points about the Jews is that is dificult to trace Jews back to Israel and that even if we could
this would not give Jews a claim to the land. Oddly the author points to Native Americans without noting the presence of Reservations recognized under US law.

Now with smoke and mirrors the author presents a Bedouin as the first King of Palestine. Even in the author's description Daher's family moved around in a general area that is currently part of four states. The author describes the series of payments to Ottomans and it is abundantly clear that Daher was a skilled local tax collector or at best a cross between and tax collector and
gang leader. The crime that the author describes as endemic was mostly Bedouuin raiders. In this case it was a Bedouin telling his kin to go easy on the locals. Daher was often involved with armed conficts with his son and rival local politicos.

The author attempts to portray a fuedal vassal with contacts with French traders and Russian military men as the begining of a nation. The author fails to note the Moroccan mercenaries he describes were there and subdued the locals with ease. He also visits distant relatives and finds familiar stories about relatives in the USA and elsewhere. His account of a minor episode that he concedes may be construed as such shows nothing worthy of nation hood. He also describes movement of people throughout the Ottoman Empire Christians fleeing Damascus for Cairo and people from Lebanon and elsewhere moving to and from the region.

In fact a running theme is the fluidity of movement around the general area. The author is actually the son of one of the expatriates he derides. Thus when he complains about an American
Jew who has emigrated from Arizona he points to his own roots that are older by a few hundred years. The notion of a distinct Pialestinian culture is still not proven. Palestinians have a regional
accent, well so do the people of St Louis. Palestinian people allegedly have regional cuisine, but so do the people of St Louis. The people of St Louis have nothing to do with the Native Americans who resided there. The author unwittingly makes the case for the opposition.