The Evil Israeli Jew Hamas Warned You About

If they're you or your friends, you're a leaky asshole and need to get the fuck off my tumblr.

Anyone who supports the SJP is a goddamned idiot. Full stop.

Anyone who still thinks Isreal committed genocide in Gaza is a goddamned idiot. Full stop.

Anyone who still thinks the UN agencies involved in calling the war in Gaza a genocide are unbiased and wholly honest and forthright is a goddamned idiot. Full stop.

There are a plentitude of resources out there for one to learn better. One does NOT have to remain an idiot. One can choose to look at other perspectives and search out sources with more information. One can choose to get educated on topics one is interested in.

People who prize Honor and Integrity and choose to place them boldly in their moral & ethical compass would not be antisemites. They do not blame Jews everywhere for the actions of a foreign government, just as I do not blame Christians or Catholics everywhere for the actions of a single priest in Rome.

Intellectual Dishonesty is fucking rampant. Please, choose to examine your sources with a critical eye. Chances are they're telling half-truths at best, trying to manipulate you. Look for people who disagree and follow up on those sources. Broaden your horizons.

Don't worry everyone they are in great company

and it all makes sense because wikipedia thankfully explains it via a footnote:

The Palestinians of the Ottoman era were the Jews, and were certainly descended from the Indigenous population, but were very much not descended from the Arab conquerors. They were socially and legally considered inferior because they were descended from the Indigenous population and not the Arab conquerors.

And, yeah, the Arabs did consider themselves the heirs to the Indigenous population, but that's only because all of Islam considers themselves the heirs of ancient Judea.

Don't worry everyone they are in great company

and it all makes sense because wikipedia thankfully explains it via a footnote:

Thank you, Jewishgay4il! Now I can have a nickname for you that'll be easier to say on the regular: Jewishgay4il, Queen Regnant of the Moon. Queen of the Moon for short.

Anyway, yeah, this is ridiculous.

I'm not a confirmed editor on the English Wikipedia and thus can't have a voice in this conversation. As a matter of fact, talking about it on a Social Media site is probably also disqualifying.

What's their culture? What the fuck are you talking about? Canaanite died hundreds of years before Arabic was spoken. Hebrew existed before Arabic. Why do Palestinians speak Arabic if they're indigenous? What was their original language?

Since apparently they're an original indigenous group? What group is it? What is it called? Name it for me. Show me relics from these people, show me historical sites from these people. Bonus points if it isn't just like, built on top of a synagogue lmao.

Don't worry everyone they are in great company

and it all makes sense because wikipedia thankfully explains it via a footnote:

Even though in the very same footnotes you get this

I mean there is still some historical revisionism even in there. Like putting the onus on Hadrian and not you know the Roman Empire who are the ones who actually changed the name. Claiming that Syria-Palestina is some connected to the Philistines and Caanan as well as claiming that the name Syria-Palestina is "neutral".

Something tells me the wikipedia vandalism has extended to pages on the Philistines and Caanan in order to support certain narratives shall we say.

I'm surprised that Yitzchak and Yaakov were not on the list to be honest. What about David Hamelech or Shlomo Hamelech.

At what point do they start counting as Palestinian. Like do Torah and Nevi'im not make the cut off.

Because that doesn't exactly make sense either. If everyone born in the Land is Palestinian including from biblical times shouldn't it include all those from the "bible" who was born in the land.

The fact that we are supposed to accept this illogical idea, this discrepancy filled concept all while in turn having the facts, data, proof, and logic that back up what we are saying is beyond sickening and frustrating.

Apparently reality doesn't matter when a new one can be made up. History doesn't mean anything when it can be rewritten. Archeological proof means nothing when it can be ignored. Truth has no weight when it can be twisted, reshaped, and full on denied when needed.

So what does it matter that Jews have always lived in the Land and those in the Diaspora have always maintained a connection to the and fellow Jews living their over thousands and thousands of years.

What does it matter that our calendar follows the seasons of the Land and the agricultural patterns of our ancestors who as an cultivated the Land as according to those seasons. And this present in our Holidays, in our practices, and etc.

Don't worry everyone they are in great company

and it all makes sense because wikipedia thankfully explains it via a footnote:

Thank you, Jewishgay4il! Now I can have a nickname for you that'll be easier to say on the regular: Jewishgay4il, Queen Regnant of the Moon. Queen of the Moon for short.

Anyway, yeah, this is ridiculous.

I'm not a confirmed editor on the English Wikipedia and thus can't have a voice in this conversation. As a matter of fact, talking about it on a Social Media site is probably also disqualifying.

a. There was an editing war, and evidence suggest it was started by the one who erased (henceforth Eraser) pre-Mandate Palestinians - people like Jesus, Herod, Rabbi Isaac the Smith and Rabbi Israel Ber Odesser first, then the entire list of pre-Mandate Palestinians. Then another editor (henceforth Reverter) reverted it, then it was reverted back by the Eraser. Current version is the one without pre-Mandate Palestinian, whether from before the land was renamed or after. I must say, looking at the edit history Eraser seems to be a bit of a hypocrite. They're accused of not seeking concensus before making this huge edit, but they throw this same accusation back in their last edit. They mentioned nothing about concensus when erasing the list. The list appears to have included a great number of pre-Mandate Palestinians for years prior to the edit - even before October 7th. this says nothing of whether or not this list should be there, just remarking that it was.

b. The purpose of the list, according to the Reverter, is to list people referred to as Palestinians in research and academic papers. Their sources are academic papers referring to the person listed as Palestinian. This includes some people who lived in Judea pre-renaming for some reason. This is an argument I can't get into due to unfamiliarity with the academic papers. I'm of the personal opinion that "Palestinian Talmud" is a terrible name for the Jerusalem Talmud, but this is what it's called in academic circles, sadly. Regarding pre-renaming of Judea people, I don't know if research papers refer to them as Palestinians and if so - where do they put the line. Reverter in the Talk page mentioned ancient Phillistine kings they think should be added, which is an interesting, if questionable, claim. If this is the working definition, including pre-Mandate Palestinians makes sense. Including pre-renaming Judeans is questionable, as is including Phillistines - albeit in a different way.

c. The way Eraser, as well as I, divided the definitions was between a national identity and geographical area. If this list is about national identity, pre-Mandate personalities don't belong in it because the Palestinian national identity didn't exist yet. If it's about geography, descendants of Palestinian refugees who weren't born in Palestine don't belong in it because they didn't live in Palestine. However, the definition according to academic papers is a different matter, because academic papers don't necessarily use one of these standards. Now, supposedly if one dug up papers from the Mandate period or earlier one could find many people not mentioned in this article to be called Palestinians. I don't know where the barrier passes on that. However, since it's based on academics and not specifically either a geographic or national identity, it's hard to refute. Whether or not research papers themselves are biased is, sadly, another matter.

d. What I find truly fascinating about Eraser's first act of erasure (they acted twice prior to Reverter's involvement) is that they seemed to have meticulously and specifically removed the names of post-renaming Jews living in the land. Essentially: there were two tables in the article - one for Mandate onwards Palestinians and one from pre-Mandate Palestinians. Beyond removing all pre-renaming people (with at least one stray post-renaming Christian), Eraser removed almost every Jew appearing on the list between 140 CE and 1920 CE. Considering the Mandate onwards list deliberately excluded Jews (unless they identified as Palestinians, according to the article), this made the list nearly Jew-free except for an example or two that were missed. Their second edit was deleting the pre-Mandate list altogether. This latter edit shows an assumption the list is nationality-based. When this understanding is used to shed light on the previous edit, well... Eraser definitely had an agenda. It just took them time to realize the implication of erasing just the Jews, I think, but it might be something else that moved them to act this way. I didn't compare the dates on the Talk Page, the tweet and the edits, so these may factor in in some ways. If the tweet has some relevant replies I'd be curious.

Now here's the thing: on principal, yes, I think the mixing of different definitions here is a problem. Calling pre-renaming Judeans "Palestinians" is also not great. However, it's possible the issue lies with academia or what is considered a reliable source by Wikipedia. I do think having the list exist this way encourages people to say things like "Jesus was a Palestinian", which is misleading in a number of ways. Except for maybe the reliable source definition, though, Wikipedia isn't going to care about any of that. So the next level of research should be which sources call who "Palestinian", why, and whether it's useful to include said person in the list. The division between pre-Mandate and post-Mandate should be looked into, as well as the lack of one with the renaming. Ancient Phillistines are a different matter that I don't know how to touch. However, if academia by and large is biased against Jews - which is a claim I've seen, though I don't know how true it is - this is going to be a losing fight and there's not much that can be done about it.

Another point is that the category of Palestine has the flag of Palestine on it. In my opinion, that makes this article immediately associated with Pallestine as a modern political entity, thus implying Palestinian nationality on the side of all who are listed. This, IMO, is worrying. But I think I'm starting to get repetitive.

So far, it doesn't seem a concensus of qualified Wikipedia editors has formed. Once that happened there should be a finalized version of the article. We might not like it, but it will be there, and possibly be used to prove "Jesus is a Palestinian". If so, the correct answer is "he's referred to this way in academic sources because the region was known by this name for centuries, though he was born before it was renamed and definitely didn't hold the Palestinian national identity - which isn't what the article is even about". A bit of a mouthful, but accurate.

I don't necessarily agree with Reverter. However, they're not basing this on a person's self identification or nationality (save post-Mandate); rather, they're basing it on academic terminology. Which is a bummer, since the latter seems to be not very consistent.

he’s “demonic”, he looks “satanic”, he’s secretly controlling everything behind the scenes. he’s allegedly harming actors he doesn’t like. he has this hidden power over the workplace, over the show, over people’s careers, over the rest of the writers, over the SHOWRUNNER. he will fire fellow cast members that piss him off or are “too progressive” to his liking. and whether people intend it or not, that is not neutral language when it is being aimed at a jewish man, because this is the thing: antisemitism is not just slurs and swastikas, and a lot of the time it works through older narrative patterns. the jew as secretly powerful, the jew as manipulative, the jew as corrupting, the jew as physically marked by evil. the jew as someone who tries to appear respectable in public while supposedly pulling the strings in private. those ideas have been around for a very long time, and they do not suddenly become harmless because the people saying them are in a fandom space and think they are just “criticizing a celebrity.”

and to be clear, this doesn’t mean ashkenazi jews are never white, or that jewish celebrities can’t have white privilege, class privilege, or industry power. the point is that jewishness does not always fit neatly into the sometimes flattened american white/non-white framework we’re all familiar with. ashkenazi jews can be perceived as white, move through the world with many of the advantages of whiteness, and still be racialized through antisemitism when the context shifts. that conditional quality matters. jewishness can be treated as irrelevant when people want to talk about privilege, then suddenly become legible through conspiratorial or dehumanizing tropes when people want to construct a jewish person as dangerous.

You do not get to profit, financially or attention wise or another way, off of a *potentially* queer jew whilst we are banned from pride events.

We do not know if she was questioning her sexuality but ultimately straight or if she was actually queer because she was killed for the crime of existing as a jew before she could come out. Queer rights obviously matter. Anne Franke is not the person you should be using.

You need to protect alive queer jews. You need to love all jews, not just the dead ones.

"But they banned zionists not jews", they banned jewish organizations, who refused to say they disavowed israel. That's like asking a local Chinese diaspora group to disavow the CCP or they can't be at pride.

And all of that is literally just the same tropes we have faced for centuries.

We are seen as inherently shady and untrustful. That we are trying to lie about our lived experiences to manipulate the masses.

Like imagine if all Americans residing or visiting outside of the U.S suddenly had to condemn Trump before being allowed to attend Pride, to host a panel or lecture in their field of expertise, to check in to a hotel room, to just exist in public or online. And even if you condemn Trump, people still refuse to exist near you because of where you were born.

Its just an exhaustion of always being immediately assumed to be a bad person before I get to even share my actual opinions and beliefs.

Whilst the NZ government is nowhere near as bad as the Israeli Government, I, a jew who has never stepped foot in Israel, am always expected to condemn the Israeli government but never at any point has anyone asked me to condemn the NZ government, not online and not irl.

Like the whole reason as to why white people cared was so they could take the actions of one specific iwi (tribe) that was forced to the Chatham Islands due to colonization and mistook a meeting of how to house Māori on the island long term as a meeting for war, and go "well Māori were violent so its okay for us to comit acts of violence against all Māori". (Obviously you understand the influence of colonization on what happened, included that for those reading who don't)