Maybe the Canaanites were never indigenous to Eretz Israel?

There is an interesting tension among us defenders of Modern Israel, between the Leftist desire to stress the indigeneity of Jews to Israel, and the more Conservative Religious Zionists who are not so afraid to brag about how Biblically the Ancient Israelites conquered people there before them. 

I have mostly chosen to stress when this issue comes up that whatever your moral opinion of what happened in Biblical Times, the only way anyone in the Common Era can claim descent from the Canaanites who lived in the land of Israel (the Canaanites of other Levantine countries are a different matter) is through the Canaanites who were absorbed into the population of Israel, by the time of Solomon all those Judges 1 hold outs in the Valleys were defeated. That includes any Canaanite DNA that arguably exists among the Palestinians, some of them may descend from Jews and Samaritans who converted to Christianity and/or later Islam, but for them the only claim would be Blood Quantum.  And the Philistines had no descendants left even before Alexander came and destroyed Gaza completely. 

However I recently watched a video from the YouTube channel titled Dig about Canaan and the Canaanites. They aren’t someone who believes in the inerrancy of Scripture but the facts I learned from it are still interesting. Including that when going to Early Bronze and Early-Middle Bronze Age texts, the references that would predate even the time of Abraham, Canaan as a Geographical term referred originally to mainly the area around Baalbek, Sidon was defined as to its South.

Genesis 10:19 is at face value based on how we’re used to interpreting certain names seemingly says the opposite, that Sidon was the northern limit of Canaan. But I think a more careful reading can imply something consistent with what the Dig video revealed. 

Genesis 10 is written from the standpoint of where Noah’s Family first settled after The Flood, where your approach to the regions of Lebanon and Israel would be coming from the north. So in that context “Sidon as you go to Gerar” is a southern border. 

Genesis 10:19 is the only time the name Gaza appears in Genesis, in fact the only time it appears in the Pentateuch, so in that context it being a different Gaza is not beyond the realm of possibility. Ghazzeh is a location in Lebanon along the Litani River in the Western Beqqa District, it shows up on the Wikipedia Disambiguation page for Gazza so clearly it’s considered a cognate name.  And a Gazza that you’d stop at “as you go to” Sodom and Gomorrah from the north makes way more sense as this Gaza then the one in the Gaza Strip. 

And I already talked about how Lasha is likely the same place as Leshem/Laish which would eventually be renamed Dan.  A Northern limit of Israel that’s also a Southern Limit of Canaan. 

These Canaanites were already settling in Eretz Israel by the time of Abraham. The Amorites in particular doing so as conquerors like they also conquered much of Iraq from the start of the Isin-Larsa period.  But people were there before them.

The City of Jericho is archaeologically considered to be arguably the oldest city on Earth. The destruction of its Middle Bronze IIC layer around 1580-1540 BCE is the only one that matches the description in the Book of Joshua due to details like the extensive burning and exactly how the Wall fell. But this was neither the first or last time the city would be in some way be destroyed and rebuilt. 

Et-Tell, which I talked about in my Ai post, was an Early Bronze Age city from before 3000 BCE to its destruction around 2400 BCE. There’s also Lachish, as well as Megiddo and Arad which like Jericho may even have been Cities of a sort already even before the Bronze Age. 

2400-2300 BCE seems to be a period of decline for Early Bronze Israel, many cities were destroyed then and possibly already having their original populations replaced, partially or fully.  This could be when the Canaanites first invaded. 

So what was the Biblical Genealogy of the Pre-Canaanites of Israel?

The Southern most parts, especially where the Philistines would later live, were Egyptian Outposts during the Very Early Bronze Age. 

If you’re willing to entertain a not entirely Global Flood view then perhaps some of them, those Pre-Bronze settlements were surviving non Noahites? The local Samaritans have a tradition that Salim Nablus (which I identify with Salem of Genesis 14 and Shalem of Genesis 33 and Salim of John 3) was founded by Yered son of Mahalaleel before The Flood.  Yered had many sons and daughters, it could be while Enoch “walked with God” that his branch of the Yeredite line moved somewhere else to where the hypothetical Local Flood happened (probably the Persian Gulf region). 

However, is it possible Abraham’s Family was not actually indigenous to where their story begins in the latter part of Genesis 11? 

I agree with the view that Ur Kasdim was Urkesh, Urkesh and Harran were both cities in modern Turkey, east of the Euphrates and North-West of Assyria. Because this era is sometimes called either Padan-Aram or Aram-Nahrain some verses call Abraham an Aramean based on where he grew up, but his genealogy goes back to a brother of Aram named Arphaxad. 

Arphaxad himself does not seem to have given his name to any ancient people or region, and I consider all of Bill Cooper’s proposals for Arphaxad in After The Flood dubious. 

I remain doubtful that the Post-Flood Cainan/Kainan/Kenen was ever original to the Genesis 10 or 11 genealogies, but I do believe he’s an authentic inclusion in Luke 3 meaning someone by that name associated with the Aprhaxadite genealogy in some way did exist at the right time. It’s possible he’s the Patronym of the Kenite Tribe which produced Jethro the Father in Law of Moses a Priest in Midian (but not Midianite himself). My theory that Salah married a daughter of Cainan would then suggest there is a pattern of Kenites marrying their daughters into the line of Salah. And as the father of a Pre-Aaronite Priesthood maybe he’s also Melchizedek?

Salah may have lived in the Wadi Sallah area in the Tubas Governorate. Salah and Shelah are distinct names in Hebrew, and Shelah of Judah wouldn’t be the namesake of a place in northern Samaria. Bill Cooper couldn't consider this because he was distracted looking for the Arphaxad line only in Mesopotamia. Tel El-Farah by Wadi Sallah commonly identified with Tirzah was an Early Bronze I and II city that was then uninhabited from about 2750 BCE to 1820 BCE. 

Genesis 40:15 calls where Joseph was before he was sold into slavery (Shechem if you want to be very specific) the Land of the Hebrews. Which can justify saying this is the original land of settlement for Eber/Heber. Neither Hamor or his son Shechem are ever called Canaanites so maybe they descend patrilineally from an unnamed son of Eber. Genesis 11:17 says Eber lived after he begat Peleg and had more sons and daughters, more than one son even when excluding Peleg. 

Joktan’s sons are associated with places in Arabia, especially Yemen, but Havilah shows they may have extended pretty far north. The way that’s described suggests they may have left where they originally were. Meaning maybe Peleg stayed where Salah and Eber lived. Or maybe Peleg left the Salah area too, but Bill Cooper’s claim of a Phalgu where the Chebar and Eurphates meet I can’t independently verify, same with his claims for Reu/Ragau.

Maybe the Egyptian name for this region, Retjenu, could be related to Reu/Ragau?

Serug did live in Aram-Naharin however giving his name to the area now known as Suruc but more anciently as Serugh or Sarug. 

It could be that some of the Pelegites left Israel for Padan-Aram during or after the conquests that destroyed Et-Tell and Early Bronze incarnations of Jericho and many other cities. 

Remember that Abraham was not alone when he came to Israel from Haran, nor was it just his family and a few servants, he was able to raise an army of 318 men from his household at a time before he even had Ishmael yet. 

Cheremon's Amenophis could be who you think.

This is a follow-up to my post about Amenophis in Manehto as Quoted by Josephus. 

After dealing with Manetho in Against Apion Book 1 section 32 Josephus recounts a certain Cheremon’s version of the Exodus, which Josephus then critiques in the following two sections. 

As someone who believes Manetho as received by Jospehus was already corrupted from the original in part by these Alexandrian Judeophobes, it’s possible that this story in Cheremon predates any references to Moses ever being added to Manetho, but it would probably have to be older then Cheremon himself for that to be the case. 

This account also has a Pharaoh named Amemenophis and he also has a son named Rameses.  One thing I glossed over in the prior post is Josephus saying Seti II was also called Ramses, in fact he winds up calling him Rameses more than he does Seti/Sethos.  There are to my knowledge no Egyptian records of Set II having any form of Rameses among his names. But in the version where Seti II is the one identified with Aegyptos, Rameses is the name of his brother he had a civil war with, and since the New Kingdom loved Synchronizing Amun with Ra it’s easy to imagine Amenmese being also called Rameses. 

This version does not mention the name Osarshiph or refer to anyone as a Priest of Heliopolis. 

If we look at Cheremon’s account without Manetho based preconceptions then the only thing that might lead one to looking at the 19th Dynasty is the use of the name Rameses.  But the name Rameses was already being used in the 18th Dynasty, one just hadn’t been the King yet.  Wikipedia pages use Ramose when talking about the 18th Dynasty ones but it’s the same name in Egyptian just with arbitrary differences in transliteration. 

However there is currently no known correlation with a Pharoah named Amenhotep having a son named Ramose. The only Ramose who was the son of a Pharoah was the son of Ahmose the first 18th Dynasty Pharoah. Then there is the father of Senenmut who likely lived during the reigns of Amenhotep I through maybe the early years of Hatshepsut. Then there is one who was a Vizier under Amenhotep III and Akhenaton, and a general during the Amarna period, and possibly another general.

Of course there is also the matter that the Meneptah discrepancy is not the only time when someone Manetho called Amenophis doesn’t line up with who we call Amenhotep.  And Manetho could still be who the creator of this story got the name from.

Manetho’s first Amenophis has the right reign length to be Amenhotep I but is placed too late in the sequence. The scholars Wikipedia cites use reign length to decide who is who in Manetho which for the Amenhoteps works here and here alone. The first Amenophis’s placement in the sequence is as the brother and predecessor of Hatshepsut (called Amesses but this is the least disputable identification, the 18th Dynasty had only two ruling Queens and only she reigned between 21 and 22 years, the name Amesses probably comes from her mother Ahmose) telling me he’s supposed to be Tuthmosis II with an exaggerated reign length.

The second and last 18th Dynasty Amenophis in Manetho has a reign length that lines up perfectly with none of the Amenhoteps, but the same scholars cited by Wikipedia say he is Amenhotep II. He is in the placement of Amenhotep III however, being the 4th King after Hatshepsut. Orus has the reign length of Amenhotep III but is in the placement Akhetnaten as the father and predecessor of the other ruling Queen called Achenres by Manetho, among her known Egyptian names was Ankheperure, she didn't rule 12 years but isn’t the only ruler Manetho gives way too long a reign length to.

In Manetho as quoted by Josephus the Pharaoh in the place of Amenhotep II is Mephramuthosis who also has a pretty close reign length, 25 years and 10 months. He’s followed by a Tuthmosis who reigned about a decade, a rare case of Manetho using the right name in the right position and the right reign length. 

So could the popular Exodus Pharoah choice Amenhotep II have had a son also known as Ramose? Well there is an Ahmose who was High Priest of Ra at Heliopolis and is presumed to be Amenhotep II’s son. 

Let’s step back a moment.  Remember the Ramose I referred to before as a son of Ahmose?  Well it’s actually unclear who his father was, our source for him is a much later 20th Dynasty Tomb depicting various Pharaohs and Princes where the order seems to be random. 

My using Hatshepsut as the main anchor in how I deciphered Manetho’s account of the 18th Dynasty has the issue of there being only 3 Pharoah’s before her not 4. There is ambiguity on when to distinguish Dynasty 17 from 18, they are technically the same Dynasty by the same Royal Family definition or Dynasty. Dynasty 17 as we know it isn’t in Manetho at all, his later transcribers just mirror the Hyksos account there.  Cheremon’s account of Amenophis kind of sounds like the entire Hyksos period condensed to the reign of one Theban King. 

But the reason this still isn't a final gotcha for Amenhotep II theorists is how this narrative makes the Pharoah of The Oppression the same as the Pharoah of the Exodus. And if it's possible to deduce a separation from the account it's that Amenophis was The Oppression Pharoah and his son the Exodus Pharaoh.

The reason why we call the Pharaoh from whom Moses fled the Pharoah of the Oppression traditionally is because in a casual reading of Exodus with no attempt to synchronize with known Egyptians history it's natural to assume the Pharoah who "knew not Joseph" and who Oppressed the Israelites and when Moses born and from whom Moses fled were all the same Pharoah. These hostile retelling are oddly more faithful to that assumption then most modern theories informed by actual Egyptology. 

In addition to all the things Josephus should be taking issue with in these hostile versions of The Exodus, he also objects even to the suggestion that the Jews are of partly Egyptian stock. But that is consistent with what The Pentateuch says, it was a Mixed Multitude (Exodus 12:38 and Nehemiah 13:3), probably mostly made up of other slaves, but slavery in Ancient Egypt wasn’t categorially race based the way the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade was, those slaves would have included Egyptians who were outcasts, some perhaps exactly the way these accounts are describing. “Leprosy” in ancient texts usually doesn't mean the exact disease we today associate it with, even Albinos were included in it. Leviticus 24 refers to a person whose mother was a Danite and father was an Egyptian, they probably weren’t the only one. Deuteronomy 23:7-8 makes clear that the Egyptians in the congregation are to be naturalized. 

The overarching theme of these hostile retellings of The Exodus is to change it from a story of slaves escaping a tyrant who wouldn't let them go to outcasts being forced out of a country that didn’t want them, and blaming them for everything that was going wrong.  To us moderners neither version makes The Jews look like the bad guys or the Egyptians look good. And the tragic irony is that kind of thing would become the origin story of Modern Israel.

Nazi-CIA-Palestine Pipeline

When it comes to talking about what surviving German Nazis did after WW2, the most popular topic is Leftists talking about the Nazis who became CIA assets and operatives, Renhaird Gehlen, Klaus Barbie, Paul Dickopf and the scientists involved in Paper Clip.  

The second would be Zionists talking about the Nazis who went on to serve at the disposal of Anti-Zionist Arab Nationalist regimes, Walter Rauff, Franz Rademacher and Alois Brunner in Syria, the countless who were employed by Nasser in Egypt like Johann von Leers, and many were helping the Arab Liberation Army during the Israel-Palestine War in 1947-49 but they don't have their own Wikipedia pages.

But the thing is these two stories are not as separate from each other as one’s modern binary assumptions about Cold War Era allegiances would assume. For starters many escaped capture at the end of the War via the exact same Ratlines. 

The section of the Wikipedia Page for Walter Rauff on his time in Syria is unclear about exactly where he stood in relation to the various Coups that happened in Syria. This article is more specific.

https://newlinesmag.com/essays/a-nazi-taught-interrogation-tactics-to-syrians-and-egyptians/

Walter Rauff worked for Husni al-Za'im specifically the entire time he was in Syria and according to a Sami Jumaa helped Zarim carry out the March 1949 Coup (the later December Coup is what resulted in him leaving Syria). That Coup was also backed by the CIA via Miles Copeland Jr.  So there is little doubt in my mind that Rauff was a CIA asset during his entire post War career, both in Syria and later in Chile working for the CIA backed Pinochet. The Syrian political party that benefited from the March Coup was the SSNP, Syrian Social Nationalist Party, the same Party that later opposed Israel during the Lebanon Civil War. Rauff is also known to have worked for West Germany intelligence, which was basically a subsidiary of the CIA via Gehlen. 

Antisemitic Conspiracy Theorists, in addition to falling for the bad leaps in logic all Conspiracy Theorists fall for, are also in blind ignorance of the fact that the U.S. “Deep State” has never been Pro-Israel. Miles Copeland, Kemrit Roosevelt Jr and Archibald Roosevelt Jr were open about how strongly Anti-Zionist they were.  The Dulles Brothers had spoken on it less explicitly but their close associations with St John Philby and James Forrestal show how they were never friends to Israel either. And OSS operative James Burnham wrote Anti-Israel articles for National Review.

Returning to the topic at hand, the CIA via Kermit Roosevelt also backed the Coup that put Nasser in power in Egypt in 1952. Many of those Nazi’s who Nasser employed were recommended to him by Gehlen. Nasser was already known to be a Fascist, he was a Green Shirt back in the 30s. Both Kermit Roosevelt and Miles Copeland remained close associates of Nasser for years.  And John Foster Dulles was responsible for the Eisenhower Administration's decision to save Nasser from Israel during the Suez Crisis, one of America’s most shameful sins.

There's also reports that Alois Brunner had been part of the Gehlen Organization at some point.

Paul Dickopf was a known CIA asset and a life long friend of Franocis Genoud, a Swiss Banker who supported the Nazis before and during WW2 and spent his post war life funding various Anti-Zionist Arab Nationalist causes.  Among them was George Habash’s Popular Front for The Liberation of Palestine which is nominally Marxist-Lennist but in my view is really a NazBol party.  

Dickopf'a CIA ties and Genoud’s influence in the Middle East helped him become head of Interpol in 1968 which position he held till 1972. His Wikipedia page avoids this topic but there are investigations that have shown him to have been at least complicit in Munich in 1972.  Ali Hassan Salamah, the leader of Black September is also known to have been a CIA asset since 1970. 

Now a Conspiracy Theorist would conclude from these two things that Munich was a CIA op, which I have said cheekily in some tweets and youtube comments.  But my real view is that the CIA probably didn’t intentionally cause Munich but they are absolutely morally culpable. 

After 1967 America’s Foreign Policy in the Middle East became officially more Pro-Israel and less Neutral.  But behind the scenes I’m convinced this true Anti-Israel agenda never went away. 

Fascism is the original Red-Brown Alliance

Neither popular answer to the question of why “Socialism” is in the name of “National Socialism” is entirely correct.  They were not indistinguishable from other Socialists on everything but the Nationalism v Internationalism question.  But neither can a claim it was all a lie to trick the working class with no sincerity behind it hold up to scrutiny.

The term “Red-Brown Alliance” is one of many used for the concept of the Far Left and Far Right being sometimes allied in mutual disdain for some aspect of the current Status Quo.  The reason the color Brown is referenced in that term is because in the post WW2 era Nazism is the Far Right.   But in the 19th Century the Far Right was regular old fashioned Royalism, in France it was being a Bourbon-Legitimist.  While the Far Left included both Internationalists and Nationalists, both Socialists and Jacobins, and The Center was Burkean Conservatism and Constitutional Monarchy.

The Philosophical groundwork for trying to be both a Monarchist and Revolutionary at once was laid by Thomas Carlyle who romanticized Medieval Europe and French Revolutionaries at the same time.  His works were popular in the Antebellum South and in Germany.  In The South it helped the Proto-Confederates form a justifying ideology that married Robert Filmer Paternalism with Jeffersonianism.

However the aftermath of the Franco-Prussian War is where Proto-Fascism begins to take shape on the ground in Europe.  

In France it resulted in Revanchism and the creation of the Ligue des Patriotes in 1882 by Paul Déroulède.  In 1883 the last heir to Charles X died and so the Legitimists were split between those who now supported the Orleans line and the Carlists, this opened the door for a fusion of Ultra Royalism with the Bourgeois Nationalism of the Orleanists.  But more importantly this was contemporary with the rise of Revanchism, that was the pan ideological phenomena.  Revanchism helped spawn a new mode of Antisemitism in France as France’s Ashkenazi population became included in French Germanophobia.  In 1886 Édouard Drumont published La France juive (Jewish France).  

In Germany meanwhile their Victory in the Franco-Prussian War emboldened the Volkisch Movement allowing Pan-Germanism to become no longer just a liberal but also an Imperialist goal as well as appealing to Social Reactionaries.  All while Modern Racial Antisemitism got its start there.

1888 and early 1889 saw the rise and fall of Georges Ernest Boulanger whose ideologically vague movement was founded on three Principles, Revanchism, Revision of the Constitution and Restoration of The Monarchy.  One influential student of that movement was Maurice Barres. 

Later 1889 also saw the formation of the Second International where Nationalists were formally disowned from the Socialist movement.

From 1894 the Dreyfus Affair became a new animating movement that untied Socialists and Royalists. Maurice Barres wrote La Cocarde (The Cockade) to defend his ideas, attempting to bridge the gap between the far-left and the far-right and went on to become a leader of the before mentioned Ligue des Patriotes.

At this time Action Française was founded by Maurice Pujo, Henri Vaugeois, Jacques Bainville and Léon de Montesquiou, and then was later lead by Charles Maurras.  Charles Maurras created the ideology of Integral Nationalism combining Olreanist Royalism with the Mutualist Anarchism of Proudhon.  A student of his was Georges Valois, he would also influence Jean Denis and the Rexist Party in Belgium.

Hubert Lagardelle and Gustave Hervé were other Anti-Reformist French Socialists who became radicalized by Nationalism during the WWI era, Mussolini himself cited Lagardelle as an origin point for Fascism. Herve founded in 1919 the Parti socialiste national (PSN) which was openly Class Collaborationist, and he openly vocally supported Mussolini.

Most of the key founders of Italian Fascism were former Leftists of some kind, not just Mussolini himself.  The common denominator was not which ideological subgenre they came from, they included former Marxists and Leninists and Syndicalists and Futurists and Anarchists of both Collectivist and Individualist varieties.  The common denominator was they were all people who supported Italy entering WWI because of their Nationalism. 

And today the primary unifying issue of the Far Right and Far Left is Anti-Zionism, and has been since Fancis Parker Yockey and Francois Genoud.

Being a Communist and being a Zionist on the Internet are very similar.

I can explain how I'm a Communist because I believe in Collective Ownership of the means of production while working towards the goal of a Moneyless, Classless, Stateless Society.  Or that I’m a Zionist because I support the Jewish People's right to self determination in their Ancient Homeland.  And for every response that does attempt to engage with what I said I support there are far more that just go “look at the obviously evil things done by this Nation-State” which has nothing to do with those principals.

So let me make myself clear, I am no apologist for all the actions of the State of Israel especially not recently, or of Modern China or North Korea or the Soviet Union for most of its history.  Now Cuba, Vietnam and Laos I do think are reasonably successful Communist experiments, but they aren’t hills I’m willing to die on either.

Many calling themselves Anti-Zionist have had what Zionism means defined for them by bad faith actors.  The reverse also happens of course, I know most American Leftist self professed Anti-Zionists do not advocate the forced removal of the Jewish population currently living there.  However they refuse to face the material reality that the dominant factions in the Palestinian Authority do want that. 

If you support a Binational State where Jews and Arabs and other residents all have equal Citizenship and you're a Communist, then you basically have the same final goal as the founders of Labour Zionism like Aaron David Gordon and Ber Borochov.  At a certain point the disagreement becomes a matter of semantics, whether the Binational State should be called Israel or Palestine. But I think the supposed Anti-Colonialists should stop wanting to be named after what Hadrian called the region.  And plenty call themselves Zionsits while still supporting a Two State Solution.

Also as an American Citizen I firmly oppose the U.S. getting involved in any Middle East conflict on either side, in any way, either Military or Financially.

Even if a given Nation-State’s ruling ideology has no significant differences on paper from the specific form of Communism or Zionism I espouse, that would still not make every action that State took a reflection of the ideology.

However, that's not the case.  I’m a Labour-Zionist, and yes a lot of Israeli Prime Ministers were too, but their Labour party was diluted not unlike the British Labor Party.  Israel isn’t the only Capitalist State to ever have nominally Socialist Prime Ministers, even Japan had one briefly in the mid 90s.  But now Israel has for nearly 30 years been dominated by Likud, the Israeli equivalent of the LDP, an Authoritarian Socially Conservative and Economically Capitalist Party.

And with Communism every Communist State has been not just specifically Marxist but more specifically Leninist.  Lenin was actually already controversial within Marxism, both in Russia and outside of it, before even the 1905 Russian Revolution happened.  So no Bolshevism didn’t become what makes it distinct from other Marxisms as a result of being a ruling party.  Rosa Luxemburg predicted why Lenin’s Vanguardism would prove inherently corrupt and what happened vindicated her completely.  

One of her main points was the innate spontaneity of a true Popular Revolution, something Lenin refused to accept after the February Revolution spreading conspiracy theories that it was an Allied plot (his "Revolutionary Defeatism” was always just an excuse for siding with the Central Powers, he was no true Pacifist).

Another of her main points was about Bureaucracy, which Lenin mocked people for being concerned about.  This is why Trotskyism, as sympathetic to Trotskyists as I sometimes am also fails, you can’t pretend you are rejecting only Stalin not Lenin when Lenin mocked you in advance.

I don’t claim to have all the answers to figure out how to do either Communism or Zionism correctly.  But I do know good Zionism needs to also respect the right to self determination of the other people living west of the Jordan.  And any desire to expand Israel’s border East of the Jordan is unacceptable.

The Star of David, Occult or Hebrew?

The Star of David, also called the Shield of David or Magen David, is a six pointed star that is a popular symbol in modern Judaism, it appears on the flag of modern Israel.

It is also a Hexagram/Sexagram, which is a symbol the Occult uses, in Freemasonry and other traditions it's called the Seal of Solomon.  This fact is often pointed out to smear the symbol, including by myself in the past.

Thing is, Satan commonly takes and corrupts Godly symbols.  And some of the Christians most determined to use this symbol similarity to smear modern Judaism and modern Israel are all for using the contrived Pillar of Enoch mythology to claim the Great Pyramid of Giza as a Godly symbol.

To start with, claiming the symbol's affiliation with Judaism began with the Rothschild family is simply false, there are known Jewish usages of the symbol that predate the 18th Century (when Mayer Rothschild and his father Moses Baur lived).  There is evidence that early Kariates had used it, those are Jews deliberately rebelling against Rabbinic and Kabalistic traditions.  The Book Art in Ancient Palestine (which can be found on Amazon) documents six pointed stars being found in Archaeological sites in Ancient Israel.

170. Kafr Yasīf III. L. f. Page 326
The report in Qobeṣ speaks of panels containing doves, serpents, cups, various fruits, a six-pointed star, &c.; intertwined crosses said to be later additions.

172. Khān El Ahmar XVIII. O. t. Page 327
Field: circle within square, the borders interlacing eight times, four times by a simple knot, in corners loops of type I 9. In circle six-pointed star, with trefoils filling the space between its re-entrant angles and the circumference.
--
Avi-Yonah, M. Art in Ancient Palestine: Selected Studies. Ed. Hannah Katzenstein and Yoram Tsafrir. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1981. Print.

It's popular to imagine the symbol being mentioned in The Bible negatively as the Star of Chiun in Amos 5:26 also called the Star of Rempham in Acts 7:43.  I think that reference is about actual worship of the Planet Saturn, (Chiun coming from the Akadian Kawanu, and the Babylonians called it Sukkot/Tabernacle, and Rempham comes from Repa a Coptic name for Saturn).  The Greeks tended to identify the main El the Pagan Canaanites worshiped with Kronos, who was Saturn to the Romans.

But if critics of the Symbol can read it into a Bible verse that just says "star" with no indicator of how many points it's depicted as having.  Then a supporter of the symbol can just as validly see it in the Star out of Jacob of Numbers 24:17, a Prophecy that refers first to David but ultimately to The Messiah.  Or for Christians the Star of Bethlehem, which we've often linked to the Star out of Jacob.

But what has become interesting to me lately is the Biblical significance of Lilies.  Hosea 14:5 uses The Lily as a symbol of Israel in a Prophecy of Israel's restoration.  The Song of Solomon uses it of Shulamith.  1 Kings 7:19&22 says the tops of the Pillars of Solomon's Temple were of Lily Work.

Lilies have 3 pedals and 3 sepedals that can look like pedals.  A Hexagram is a six pointed star that looks like two superimposed triangles.  Because of this Lilies can often look kind of like Hexagrams.  In fact there is a plant named Solomon's seal (Polygonatum multiflorum) in the lily family.  I've even seen in Japanese Anime (like YuriKuma Arashi) examples of lilies looking Hexagram like where making a Jewish reference was not likely the Author's intent.

So maybe The Lily is the key to figuring out where the Star of David/Seal of Solomon came from?

One element of this I originally didn't want to include is how people say this has something to do with the Number of the Beast.  But I decided I should address that.

The Number of The Beast from the last verse of Revelation 13 is Six Hundred and Sixty Six.  Not Six-Six-Six.  So no, not every usage of the number 6 is about the Mark of The Beast.  And that is all that should need to be said to refute that absurdity.

Six is a number that is used positively sometimes in Scripture.  12 and 24 and 72, and 144,000 are numbers that are multiples of Six.  The Sixth day of a Biblical Week was the preparation day for The Sabbath.  Which I'd argued in the past was the day Jesus was buried, but I've also recently become more open to a Friday Crucifixion model. Adam was created on the 6th Day, Jesus is the Last Adam.

However the importance the symbol has to modern Judaism is also as an act of reclamation, how it was used by the Nazis to mark for Persecution and ultimately extermination.  (Something which makes me rethink how intentional the Star's appearance in YuriKuma was since it definitely used the Pink Triangle intentionally.)

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/jewish-badge-during-the-nazi-era

So those who want to go again seeing the symbol as proof of the Evilness of Judaism or Zionism are unwittingly agreeing with the Nazis.

Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine

[Update June 2025: Upon further research I cannot still support what this Party has become, only what it started as.]  [Further Update July 15th: I've also softened my position on the Two State Solution, I can support it now.  https://kuuderekun.tumblr.com/tagged/Two%20State%20Solution] 

Calling Zionism Colonialism is completely Backwards.

Zionism means the belief that the Jews have the right to self determination and sovereignty over their ancient homeland.  If you replace “Jews” with any other group of people traditionally marginalized in the Western world, the Left is inclined to agree with that statement.  Treating Zionism differently is pure Antisemitism, I don’t care what your excuse is.

I am a Labour Zionist and a Communist, that means I wish Israel (like every other nation) was a Proletarian Direct Democracy.  I absolutely consider the Israeli State’s handling of the Palestinian situation in both Gaza and the West Bank to be pretty bad. 

I'm undecided on the Two State Solution.  

Until we have a Global Communist Utopia the Jews need a state that is their own, and I feel the same about other Marginalized Stateless groups like the Kurds.  

The Palestinians kind of already have a State, it’s Jordan, they are over 80% of the population of Jordan, the British Mandate originally covered both Israel and Jordan, Jordan was pealed off to be the Muslim State.  And that’s just one of many Arab states, the Arabs are not a people lacking Nations where they are the privileged ethnic group.  If Jordan were a direct Democracy the Palestinians it would be unambiguously a Palestinian state. 

Calling Zionism Colonialism is backwards because it’s actually if anything Decolonization, it was the Colonialism of Ancient Empires that removed the Jews from their homeland and placed Geco-Roman Christian and Muslim populations and places of worship there.

There is a common perception out there that it is anachronistic to use the term “Colonialism” to describe the actions of any pre-1492 Empires.  Rome especially tends to be popularly depicted as always simply invading and conquering people with no high minded excuses at all.  This is a very Modernist bias, the notion that it took till the Renaissance for Imperialism to ever start trying to disguise itself as something more benevolent.

What supposedly separates Colonialism from other forms of Imperialism is the claim that it’s simply about founding colonies in new lands but leaving the local populations to govern themselves while we trade and peacefully coexist with them.  But of course that peaceful coexistence always eventually turned out to be a sham.  Well guess what, that is how Rome operated in some parts of their Empire, especially in Judea.

Cities like Caesarea Martiima were the settlements while the Jews had carefully controlled nominal self rule via the Sanhedrin, the Priesthood and the Herodian monarchs.  In time even those were taken away over the course of various failed rebellions, and after the Bar Kochba Revolt Hadrian banned them from even setting foot in Jerusalem and rebuilt that city as a Roman colony named after himself.  And the Christian Emperors maintained that policy throughout their rule over Jerusalem.  However the Jews always had some presence within the borders of Modern Israel, especially in the Galilee where Jewish Rebellions against Christian Roman rule in Israel were chiefly based.

The Qurran is actually a Zionist text, Muhammad never intended his Arab State to extend beyond Arabia.  But while Umar and the other early Caliphs after him were violating Muhammad’s intent in their conquests, they still at first by and large let the local populations govern themselves, especially the Jews and Christians in Judea.  It was Umar who in fact allowed the Jews to finally return to Jerusalem after being denied access for five centuries of Roman rule.  The earliest references to Muslim presence on the Temple Mount I believe can be interpreted as Muslims actually allowing the Jews to worship on the former site of The Temple.

It was under Abd Al-Malik this began to change.  He began building the Dome of The Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque while Mecca was under the control of Rebels to be an alternative to Mecca. The modern notion that they are the third and fourth Holiest sites in Islam after Mecca and Medina (too Shiites they’re not even that highly ranked being topped by several sites in Iraq) is later cultural white washing of the actual origins of those structures.  That said I do not believe the actual proper site of Solomon’s Temple is either of those exact locations so a Third Temple could peacefully coexist with them.

Anti-Zionists either pretend Israel had no Jewish presence between the Bar-Kochba Revolt and the First Aliyah in the early 1880s.  Or as I saw on Tumblr recently will claim that “before the Zionists came Muslims, Jews and Christians all lived peacefully together in Jerusalem”, that is literally a Pre-Lapsarian Utopia fantasy, Leftists should no better then to make such claims, in any other context we’d call it out as being part of a fundamentally reactionary world view.

Karl Marx himself, who wasn’t a Zionist, debunks that fanciful claim in a piece he wrote in relation to the Crimean War in 1854.

“the sedentary population of Jerusalem numbers about 15,500 souls, of whom 4,000 are Mussulmans and 8,000 Jews. The Mussulmans, forming about a fourth part of the whole, and consisting of Turks, Arabs and Moors, are, of course, the masters in every respect, as they are in no way affected with the weakness of their Government at Constantinople. Nothing equals the misery and the sufferings of the Jews at Jerusalem, inhabiting the most filthy quarter of the town, called hareth-el-yahoud, the quarter of dirt, between the Zion and the Moriah, where their synagogues are situated – the constant objects of Mussulman oppression and intolerance, insulted by the Greeks, persecuted by the Latins, and living only upon the scanty alms transmitted by their European brethren. ”

Mark Twain would later confirm that Jews were over half the Population of Jerusalem already well before the First Aliyah.  And they had presence in more than just Jerusalem but also in Tiberias in the Galilee and down in Hebron.

In the early 1880s it wasn’t just Jews migrating to Israel, increased waves of migration of Muslims to this region from other Ottoman lands also started then, under Imperial encouragement.  So a good deal of the Muslim population of the region can’t even claim to go back to the original Arab Conquests.

The origins of the Zionist movement are very Socialist, with Moses Hess being a pre-Marx Socialist and the author of one of the first modern Zionist texts in 1862.  Later two Labour Zionist parties would be founded during the truly modern Zionist movement, one Marxist the other non-Marxist, they were the most popular parties all through the Cold War.  The earliest Zionist settlements were Communes.  One important Labour Zionist was Albert Einstein.

The association with Britain is the main basis for calling it Colonialism, everything else Britain was doing at this time was Colonialism at its worst after all, and their influence is largely why Israel was founded as a Capitalist state despite the Socialist parties overwhelming popularity.  However the Jews under the British Mandate never truly felt that the British authorities were actually on their side.  Brittan used the mandate as an excuse to continue controlling the region during a period when old fashioned Colonialism was waning in popularity and starting to be phased out.  It took the outcry of Jewish sympathy in the wake of the Holocaust to make them take it seriously, and that's why Holocaust Denial is specifically Anti-Zionist in origin.

Plenty of Arabs and Muslims in the region at the time supported Zionism, like Sharif of Mecca, Hussein bin Ali and his son, King Feisal of Hijaz and then of Iraq, as well as As'ad Shukeiri, a Muslim scholar ('alim) of the Acre area, the mayor of Haifa, Hassan Bey Shukri and Sheikh Musa Hadeib. 

But more important than those figures who you could dismiss as privileged collaborators with the British, is the support Zionism had and still has from certain entire Muslim communities in Israel, the kind who would still be just as demographically marginalized under a Palestinian State as they are under a Jewish one.  The Negev Bedouins who are in fact the oldest Arab population west of Jordan, the Druze who are often not counted as Muslims but I consider them essentially an offshoot of the Shia, and the Circasian Muslims who migrated to Israel as refugees in the 1800s to escape the Genocide that was being carried out agaisnt them by Tzarist Russia, so under circumstances similar to the Jews.

The people of Abu Gosh also supported the Zionists during the Israeli War of Independence.

That’s the thing, the Arab Nationalists opposing Jewish migration to the region during the 1880s through 1940s are to me just the same as European Nationalists refusing Jewish Refugees at the exact same time.  It’s the same Xenophobia and Antisemitism that was going on in Europe, only here in Islamic dressing rather then Christian.

Now some Right Wing defenders of Zionism on the Internet talk a bit too much about the Arab Nationalists who colluded with the Nazis during WWII, Amin al-Husseini is not solely responsible for giving the Nazis the idea to do the Holocaust, that was Hitler’s stated goal from Mein Kamf and anything that was pragmatically holding him back from it became irrelevant when the War started.  And they will often ignore the Muslims and Arabs who fought on the Allies side of the War, but the important fact here is that the Muslims who sided agaisnt the Nazis were the same ones who already supported Zionism.

Most of the Arab Nationalist leaders who allied with Nazi Germany did so just as begrudgingly as Mussolini, they knew Hitler was just using them and didn’t actually care much about what happens in the Middle East at all.  But not Amin al-Hussein, he was given the Honorary Aryan status and actually helped SS Leader Harun el-Raschid Hintersatz organize Muslim SS units in Bosnia, he was a true Arab Nazi, and during the 50s and 60s he had the backing of Nasser.

Stalin supported Zionism between the end of the War and 1948 then stopped, I feel he simply gave up on Israel having a Communist Revolution too quickly. However the USSR did not truly start backing Arab Nationalists till after Stalin, it began with Khrushchev's alliance with Nasser.  Nasser was a member of the Young Egypt Party also called the Green Shirts who were Egypt’s openly pro-Fascist and pro-Nazi party of the 1930s.  He also employed surviving SS Officers including Johann von Leers, Otto Skorzeny and Leopold Gleim as key advisors.  Leers and Skorzeny were already important even before the Nazi regime fell.  Khrushchev is a figure even many Tankies don’t like, TheFinnishBolshevik has argued he had Stalin murdered.  Nasser had banned Egypt’s Communist Party, Khrushchev asked Nasser to legalize them again but he refused, yet Krushchev kept the alliance anyway.  Nasser used quasi Socialist rhetoric that a lot of modern “Anti-imperialist” MLs like Caleb Maupin fall for, but this was no more legit Socialism than the National Socialist Workers Party.  François Genoud was the Nazi Regime’s Swiss banker who spent his post war life financing both Neonazis and nominally Left Wing Arab Nationalists, openly standing by his support of Hitler till he died in the 1990s.  

It is my thesis that the truest Nazis are those for whom the Antisemitism was their main driving motivation, everything else is in service of that.  During the first half of the 20th Century Antisemitism and Anti-Communism frequently went together because as a marginalized group many Jews were inclined towards Communism.  Some people were Anti-Communists because they were Antisemitic, and some were Antisemitic because they were Anti-Communist.  But during the 1950s as it became clear that Israel and the Soviet Union were going to be on opposing sides of the Cold War, this began to shift.  Otto Ernst Remer was a former high ranking Nazi Official who in the 1950s lead a Neonazi Party in West Germany called the Socialist Reich Party that was financed by the USSR.

In the United States there were two men who literally worked for the SD during the War and became Neonazi leaders after the War and developed ties to Remer, Leers, Skorzeny and Amin al-Husseini and began arguing that USSR was not controlled by Jews anymore thanks to Stalin and Khrushchev's purges and that the Far Right and Far Left should work together against their common enemies of Israel and the United States, they considered American Style Capitalist society far worse and more degenerate than the Authoritarianism of Stalinist Russia.  They were H. Keith Thompson and Francis Parker Yockey, there is evidence Yockey possibly traveled to Russia and even spoke with Soviet leaders.  In the US their brand of Nazism didn’t catch on, The American Right is over all more Anti-Communist then Antisemitic, so George Lincoln Rockwell’s firmly anti-Communist American Nazi Party was more popular, but in Europe Yockey’s approach was very influential including on Alexander Dugin.  Willis Carlo carried on the legacy of Yockey and became a close associate of Lyndon LaRouche.

That is the origin of the NazBol Vortex, but the modern Anarchists, LibComs and Breadtubers who oppose the NazBols still keep falling for the Anti-Zionist propaganda they popularized. 

Nazis of the Rockwell variety were still too Antisemitic to support Israel, they generally tried to convince people that Israel was secretly actually with the Soviets.  And yeah Socialist parties were still popular in Israel, but after the developments of the 50s none of them were Bolsheviks.

The current head of Fatah and the Palestinian Authority is Mahmoud Abbas a known Holocaust Denier.  In fact his most recent quotes are the worst kind of Holocaust denial, which is not denying it happened but alleging that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis to make it happen.  He is the leader of the movement you are claiming solidarity with when you Tweet "Free Palestine".

Update January 2026:There are no descendants of the Philistines still alive today.  

Whether or not anyone technically has some biological genealogical descent form Ancient philistines, their Language, Culture and Religion were dead centuries before the Common Era.

Even before what I'm about to list it can be argued the Philistines had already been pushed back to just Gaza by David.

Gath was destroyed by Hazael of Aram-Damascus around 830 BC as documented in II Kings 12:18, and further by Uzziah in 2 Chronicles 26:6-15

Ashdod was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 605 BC, but before that it was also destroyed by Uzziah at the same time as Gath.

Ashkelon/Ascalon and Ekron were destroyed, burned and depopulated by Nebuchadnezzar in 604 BC.

Gaza was destroyed by Alexander The Great in 332 BC, one of only three times he completely destroyed a city and only time wiping out the entire population.  The city was then repopulated with Bedouin Arabs and became Nabatean by Roman times.

Hadrian renamed the entire land of Israel Palestine as a deliberate move to De-Judaize the province.

And in modern history Gaza has once again been an outpost of Egyptian within the land of Israel, being occupied by Egypt from 1948-1967, and the base of operations of Nasser's SS trained fedayeen, one of whom being the Egyptian Yasser Arafat, and home to offshoots of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood like Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Same with the Canaanites, if any descent from ancient Canaanites still exists today, it's via those who were absorbed into the Israelite population. 

Judeo-Menshevism

Too many online Leftists today want to minimize the Jewish Contributions to Socialism and Communism for the sake of refuting the Nazi Judeo-Bolshevism Conspiracy theory.  

That's a shame, I feel we should be proud of the influence of Jews and other marginalized peoples.  

And perhaps Jews are overrepresented among the philosophers of The Left because of the overlooked support for Communism in the Hebrew Bible, a book many Conservatives also consider Sacred.

But sadly mainstream Christians have trouble accepting the Communism even in the NT much less the Old because of how they've been influenced by Neo-Platonism and Rome.

The irony of the Judeo-Bolshevism narrative however is that the Bolsheviks were the least Jewish of the many factions of the 1917 Russian Left, in terms of their leadership at least. 

Perhaps the USSR's failures could have been avoided by being more Jewish?

Early Socialists who were Jews or had Jewish Ancestry

Moses Hess

Karl Marx (his family converted to Lutheranism when he was a child)

Ferdinand Lassalle

Paul Lafargue

Paul Singer

Eduard Bernstein

Luise Kautsky

Victor Adler

Laura Marx

Eleanor Marx

Charles Rappoport

Rudolf Hilferding

Daniel De Leon

Victor L. Berger

Morris Hillquit

Meyer London

Aaron Zundelevich

Gesia Gelman

Marie Goldsmith

SRs who were Jews or had Jewish Ancestry

Mikhail Gots

Avram Gots

Grigory Gershuni

Vsevolod Mikhailovich Eikhenbaum aka Volin

Isaac Steinberg

Yakov Blumkin

Mark Natanson

Fanny Kaplan

Jewish Socialist Workers Party

Mensheviks who were Jews or had Jewish Ancestry

Pavel Axelrod

Lev Grigorievich Deutsch aka Leo Deutsch

Julius Martov

Lydia Dan

Fyodor Dan

The General Jewish Labour Bund in Lithuania, Poland and Russia

Haim Kantorovitch

Bolsheviks who were Purged by Stalin or Krushchev

Leon Trotsky (Former Menshevik)

Adolph Joffe (Former Menshevik who switched with Trotsky)

Lev Kamenev

Grigory Zinoviev

Karl Radek

Béla Kun

Shmuel Weizmann 

Maria Weizmann

Polina Zhemchuzhina

Michael Metallikov

Bronislava Poskrebysheva

Solomon Mikhoels

Alexei Kapler

Ignace Reiss

Alexander Parvus

Louis Shapiro

Noah London

Walter Krivitsky

Lazar Kaganovich

Gyorgy Lukacs

Spartacus League

Rosa Luxemburg

Leo Jogiches

Paul Levi

Mathilde Jacob

Bavarian Soviet Republic

Kurt Eisner

Ernst Toller

Gustav Landauer

Erich Mühsam

Eugen Leviné

Other German Socialists who had Jewish Heritage

Otto Landsberg (Only Jew among the Bad SPD)

Hugo Haase (SPD)

Alexander Parvus (SPD)

Kurt Rosenfeld (SPD)

Werner Scholem (KPD)

Ernst Heilmann (SPD)

Arkadi Maslow (KPD)

Ruth Fischer (KPO)

Gerhart Eisler (KPD)

The Frankfurt School also had some Jews but I'm not gonna list individuals since I don't like their pessimism.

Some might want to accuse me of simply labeling everyone outside Russia as non Bolshevik, but Rosa Luxemburg criticized Lenin when she died before he did most of what anti Lenninists later condemn him for.  

Ernst Thalmann and Walter Ulbricht were the German stooges of Stalin, they were both Gentiles and the Weimar KPD declined under their leadership.  Ulbricht and Stalin would turn their back on Thalmann during the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact making no attempt to get him released from Prison.

Labor Zionism

Aaron David Gordon

Ber Borochov

Nachman Syrkin

Joseph Trumpeldor

Jean Longuet (Grandson of Karl Marx)

Leon Blum

Albert Einstein

Oskar Cohn

Jacob Lestschinsky

Angelica Balabanoff

Haim Arlosoroff 

Zeev Latsky

Shmuel Niger

Yitzhak Ben-Zvi

Yosef Sprinzak

Ya'akov Zerubavel

Rachel Yanait Ben-Zvi

Berl Katznelson

Meir Ya'ari

David Ben Gurion

Moshe Sharett

Zalman Shazar

Levi Eshkol

Golda Meir

Ya'akov Hazan

Moshe Sneh

Meir Talmi

Victor Shem-Tov

Yigal Allon

Yitzhak Rabin

(Camille Huysmans was a Gentile leader of the Second International who also supported Zionism) 

American Anarchists

Emma Goldman

Alexander Berkman

Paul Goodman

Murray Bookchin

Noam Chomsky

David Graeber

You can be a Zionist and still be critical of the Israeli Government

Of the political disagreements I have with my fellow Twitter Leftists, my belief that Israel has the right to exist is perhaps the most contentious.

I am a Zionist, but I am also an Anarchist, I hate all Governments and much of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is atrocious.  But as long as Nation-States are going to be a thing, on that land it needs to be a Jewish one so the world's most oppressed minority can have a safe heaven to flee to, the Muslims have more then enough.  But I do believe Israel should give the Golan Heights to Jordan, give full citizenship to all Palestinian living in Israel, and stop responding to Hamas in Gaza so badly since their attempts to fire rockets at Israel never even do anything.

None the less every time I allow myself to get involved in one of these twitter threads, they keep trying to make me feel ashamed of my Zionism by talking about things the Israeli government is doing which have nothing to do with Zionism as a principle.  Remember these are the same people who don't like seeing Marxism blamed for the Human Rights violations of Stalin and modern China.  And likewise don't want Islam being blamed for what the Saudis do.

I believe all similar major minorities have a right to a home land, the Kurds, the Yazids, the Ainu and Okinawa and every Native American tribe that still exists.  But the "Palestinians" already have one, it's called Jordan, they are the majority of Jordan's population, the only thing keeping it from being a strictly Palestinian State is that it isn't a Direct Democracy..

I am confident that there is enough habitable room in Israel for all of the world's Jews plus twice the number of Gentiles who currently live there.  It is Capitalism not Zionism that is making these people fight over land and resources.  But it is only with Israel where it is appropriate on the Left to say the answer is one of these people groups shouldn't even be allowed to be there.

They keep calling Zionism a form of Colonialism.  If it's appropriate to refer to Post-Colonial things you don't like as Colonialism then it's also valid to call Pre-Colonial things Proto-Colonialism.  And it was Proto-Colonialism that removed the Jews from that land and placed Gentile "Holy Sites" in Jerusalem in the first place.

The Jerusalem of the Hasmoneans was basically completely annihilated in 70 AD, then in 132 Hadrian began plans to build a Greco-Roman city on the spot named after himself and that sparked another Jewish uprising which he brutally put down.  Then he built his gentile city and renamed the province and Jews were forbidden to even set foot in the city, a policy that shamefully the Christian Emperors kept.

However Jews were never completely gone from the region, many stayed in or settled in Galilee where they had a couple revolts agaisnt Christian Emperors.  But when Calif Umar captured Jerusalem he allowed Jews to return there creating what is now known as the Jewish Quarter which has been continuously inhabited by Jews ever since.  However later Califs eventually built Mosques on The Temple Mount, specifically Abd Al-Malik built them where Mecca was under the control of Rebels, their creation was always political.

There have been a lot of controversies lately about the American Government and/or Corporations building things on Sacred Native land.  I don't understand how religions that are inherently younger then Judaism building Churches and Mosques on the only land Judaism considers Sacred isn't viewed the same way?

So yes, religion is a major factor in why this land specifically was the land we gave to the Jews.  Thing is when you go back to their actual founding Sacred Texts, every still existing religion that gives any amount of sacredness to that land 100% agrees on who it belongs to.  The Koran says that the land of Israel belongs to the Children of Israel.  Muslim opposition to Zionism is a product of modern Wahhabism funded and prompted by the Saudis.  And New Testament Christianity is not interested in tying itself to any specific pieces of geographical real-estate at all.

The cultures that existed in this land before the Ancient Israelites no longer exist, whether or not some Palestinians have a connection to them in terms of genealogical ancestry is irrelevant, they no longer practice the same religion or customs, they are mostly Muslims, some are Christians, some may now be Atheists, and I'm sure some Canaanite Neo-Pagan group exists but there would be no actual continuity there.

Dog Whistles are a term we on the Left use to condemn things not explicitly bigoted as bigotry via guilt by association.  But when it comes to Antisemitism, the only thing constantly said by Antisemites you are NOT allowed to say is inherently Antsemitic is saying the Jews don't have a right to their homeland.  You can't utter the words "international banker" without being called a closet Nazi, but saying something that is definitely unambiguously bigoted when said about any other oppressed minority is perfectly fine.

I think maybe those of us who oppose Capitalism should be concerned about there being an entire subgroup of super rich Capitalists that have become free from criticism because the small number of them who have Ashkenazi surnames are the only ones most people have heard of.  But still it is true 90% of people singling out "international bankers" of all super rich people to complain about are at least indirectly influenced by Antisemitic conspiracy theories.  And likewise Anti-Zionism was founded upon Holocaust Denial and Anti-Rothschild conspiracy theories long before anyone in the west gave a damn about a sub group of Arabs naming themselves after the Latinized form of the Hellenized form of the name of a people who haven't existed since Alexander The Great burned their last city to the ground.

And sometimes people will try to use things like the 1933 Transfer Agreement to say "Zionism and Antisemitism actually go together".  Hitler at first tried to just kick the Jews out because he didn't think he'd have the ablity to do the Genocide he always preferred. But that arrangement was one he was inevitably going to back out of just like the pact with Stalin.

The people currently running Israel can go f--- themselves, but I will not apologize for defending The Jews right to their ancient sacred homeland.

Zionism is an inherently Leftist ideology in origin and in fact predates Marxism, the crimes of the Israeli state should not invalidate the ideology of Moses Hess anymore then those of the USSR, China and North Korea invalidate Marx and Engles.

BTW you may notice I didn't even bring up any Prophecy.  I actually reject certain Eschatological positions assumed to go with being a Christian Zionist.  I'm not Pre-Trib or a proper Dispensationalist and I don't even expect there to be a Third Temple, and I view the Gog and Magog Invasion as after the Millennium.  I actually don't currently solidly believe much of anything specific in regards to Israel's role in the End Times.  While that geographical land definitely has a role to play in what I think will happen, a modern Jewish State being there is not required at all, I only presume Israel relevant because that is the current geopolitical situation we have to start from.  My theories about "the antichrist" focus on their probable relationship with The Church not Judaism.  But at any-rate I don't think the Temple's actual site is on either those Mosques, I currently favor the Dome of the Tablets theory.

So my Zionism is more in-spite of my Eschatology then Because of it.

The Koran says Israel belongs to the Israelites

The Koran and early Hadiths contain many declarations that the Land of Israel belongs to the Children of Israel, just as much as the Land of Arabia belongs to the Arabs.

This argument is made by Shaykh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi The Qur'an and the Land of Israel.

You can also read The Quran is a Zionist Book.

There is also no support from the Quran for the alleged holiness of the Dome of the Rock.  It supports only Mecca as being a Holy Site for Muslims.  Regardless, in the context of where I believe The Temple was it can be rebuilt without needing to damage either The Dome or the Al Aqsa Mosque.  Others meanwhile think it wasn't on what we now call The Temple Mount at all but in the City of David near the Gihon Spring.  That is where I think David's Tabernacle was, so it could also be a valid spot to build The Temple.  [Update: I have become more open to that theory but for different reasons.  Also this.]

Islamic Eschatology foretells Israel's return to Her Land.

Qur'an 17:104 : And We said unto the Children of Israel after him:  Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter (wa3’dul akhirati) cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations. 

Qur'an 59:2 : He it is Who caused those who disbelieved of the followers of the Book (Jews) to go forth from their homes (leave their exile) till the first gathering (Li awalil hashr) you did not think that they would go forth, while they were certain that their fortresses would defend them against Allah; but Allah came to them whence they did not expect, and cast terror into their hearts; they demolished their houses with their own hands and the hands of the believers; therefore take a lesson, O you who have eyes!

Qur'an 17:4 : And We decreed for the Children of Israel in the Scripture: Ye verily will experience corruption (exile) in the earth twice, but Ye will then after (thumma) ascend (ta’lunna) to a great height (or station).

Other Quran verses on Israel belonging to Israel.

O Children of Israel! call to mind the (special) favour which I bestowed upon you, and fulfil your covenant with Me as I fulfil My Covenant with you, and fear none but Me. [Qur'an, sura 2:40] 

Children of Israel! call to mind the (special) favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations (for My Message). [Qur'an, sura 2:47]

And remember We took your covenant and We raised above you Mount (Sinai) : (Saying): "Hold firmly to what We have given you and bring (ever) to remembrance what is therein: Perchance ye may fear Allah." [Qur'an, sura 2:63]

"We [Allah] made a covenant with you [Children of Israel]  and raised the Mount [Sinai] above you, saying:  'Grasp fervently [the Torah] what We [Allah] have given you, and bear in minds its precepts, that you may guard yourselves against evil'". [Qur'an, sura 2:65]

And remember We [Allah] made a covenant with the Children of Israel (to this effect): Worship none but Allah; treat with kindness your parents and kindred, and orphans and those in need; speak fair to the people; be steadfast in prayer; and practise regular charity. Then did ye turn back, except a few among you, and ye backslide (even now). [Qur'an, sura 2:83]

After this it is ye, the same people, who slay among yourselves, and banish a party of you from their homes; assist (Their enemies) against them, in guilt and rancour; and if they come to you as captives, ye ransom them, though it was not lawful for you to banish them. Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest? but what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this life?- and on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty. For Allah is not unmindful of what ye do.[Qur'an, sura 2:85]

We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers; We gave Jesus the son of Mary Clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. Is it that whenever there comes to you a messenger with what ye yourselves desire not, ye are puffed up with pride?- Some ye called impostors, and others ye slay! [Qur'an, sura 2:87]

Those to whom We [Allah] have sent the Book [Torah] study it as it should be studied: They are the ones that believe therein: [Qur'an, sura 2:121]

O Children of Israel! call to mind the special favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others nations (for My Message).[Qur'an, sura 2:122]

"When God made a covenant with those [the Children of Israel] to whom the Scriptures were given He said:  'Proclaim these to mankind and do not suppress them'". [Qur'an, sura 3:187, "The 'Imrans"]
"God made a covenant with the Israelites and raised among them twelve chieftains [the princes of the twelve tribes of the twelve sons of Jacob/Israel]". [Qur'an, sura 5:12, "The Table"]

"Bear in mind the words of Moses to his people [the Children of Israel].  He said:  'Remember, my people, the favour which God has bestowed upon you.  He [Allah] has raised up prophets among you, made you kings, and given you that [the Torah and the Land of Israel] which He has given to no other nation.  Enter, my people, the holy land [of Israel] which God has assigned for you.  Do not turn back, and thus lose all'". [Qur'an, sura 5:20, "The Table"]

"We [Allah] made a covenant with the Israelites and sent forth apostles among them". [Qur'an, sura 5:70, "The Table"]

"We [Allah] divided them [the Children of Israel] into twelve tribes, each a whole community". [Qur'an, sura 7:159, "The Heights"]

"We [Allah] sent forth Moses with Our signs, saying:  'Lead your people [the Children of Israel] out of the darkness into the light, and remind them of God's favours'.  Surely in this there are signs for every steadfast, thankful man. Moses said to his people [the Children of Israel]: 'Remember God's goodness to you when He delivered you from Pharoah's nation, who had oppressed you cruelly, slaughtering your sons and sparing only your daughters.  Surely that was a grevious trial by your Lord.  For He had declared:  'If you give thanks, I will bestow abundance upon you:  but if you deny My favours, My punishment is terrible indeed'". [Qur'an, sura 14:6-7, "Abraham"]

"But it was Our [Allah's] will to favour those [the Children  of Israel] who were oppressed in the land [of Egypt] and to make them leaders among men, to bestow on them a noble heritage and to give them power in the land [of Egypt]; and to inflict on Pharoah, Haman and their warriors the very scourge they [the Egyptians] dreaded".[Qur'an, sura 28:3, "The Story"]

"We [Allah] gave the Book [Torah] to Moses (never doubt that you will meet him) and made it a guide for the Israelites.  And when they grew steadfast and firmly believed in Our revelations, We appointed leaders from among them who gave guidance at Our bidding. On the Day of Resurrection your Lord will resolve their differences for them". [Qur'an, sura 32:22, "Adoration"]

"We [Allah] gave the Book [Torah] to the Israelites and bestowed on them wisdom and prophethood.  We provided them with wholesome things and exalted them above the nations".[Qur'an, sura 45:17, "Kneeling"]

"We sent forth Noah and Abraham and bestowed on their offspring [the Children of Israel] prophethood and the Scriptures [Torah]". [Qur'an, sura 57:26, "Iron"]

To those can be added Sura 5:32 which quotes the Mishna and gives Israel authority over the land of Israel.

The verses cited from the Quran to support Anti-Semitism and/or make it look Anti-Semitic use the term "Jews" not Israel.  And I think all are really more about specific Jewish groups as they existed in Muhammad's time.  Mainly I think the Jews of Medina/Yathrib and Khyabar, (but perhaps also Jews of Yeman particularly Himyar).  And the Prophetic passages linking a Sect of Jews to the Dajjal were about Jews of Mesopotamia at the time, when the Exilarchs still existed, and one had only a century earlier attempted to revolt against Persia.  Also early Caliphs resettled the Jews of Khaybar in Iraq.

I've also seen it suggested that the positive references to Jews in the Quran and the Negative references don't even quite use the same word in the Arabic.  That the Negative references are more like how Arabic renders the name of Judas and so they're using the name as an idiom for traitor, like saying Brutus or Benedick Arnold.

Sura 9, which was the last major Sura and the basis for laws like demanding Jews and Christians pay a Tax, the Jizya.  Was only about Jews and Christians living in Arabia, Muhammad's political goal was only the Unification of Arabia (though a definition of Arabia that probably includes Jordan, the Golan Heights, and much of Syria and Iraq west of the Euphrates River).

The Bible also on the other hand gives little support for Israel taking anything East of the Jordan River (that Includes the Golan Heights).  The land that equates to modern Jordan, the Golan Heights, and most if not all of Syria west of the Euphrates is given to Ishmael, Abraham's Firstborn.  Prophecies of the future Messianic Kingdom clearly refer to Kedar and Nabojoth, (Ishmael's first two sons and the ones Muhammad is variantly claimed to descend from) still existing in this region, Isaiah 60:7.

What I consider to be the accurate Maps of the Tribal Allotments of Ezekiel [Update January 2021: I actually now consider that one out of date and would not include any of Syria or Lebanon] gives the 12 Tribes of Israel nothing East of The Jordan River or Sea of Galilee.

In ancient Israel three Tribes settled East of the Jordan early on, Half of Manasseh, Gad and Reuben.  But if you read Numbers 32 where the origin of this arrangement is laid out, it's clearly presented as not what God wanted for them originally, and eventually they were the first carried into exile by Assyria.  Dan also would wind up being affiliated with parts of Syria (and the Golan Heights), and that too is linked to Dan's disobedience, and where Jeroboam set up one of his Idols.

"What about Abraham being promised everything to the Euphrates River?" I'll bet you're asking.  Well I have argued that his Firstborn Ishmael was not cut off as we often assume, Ishmael, and the sons of Keturah, were given the lands between the Jordan and Euphrates, and also Arabia. 

David also ruled all the way to the Euphrates. But the nations beyond the Tribal Allotments were ruled as Tributaries, he ruled like Jesus will in the future as a King of Kings.  The Gentile Nations he conquered kept independent self governance.  

Even in terms of Lebanon, we clearly see God was fine with Tyre's independence during the reigns of David and Solomon.  It was only a problem when Israelites worshiped their gods.

If I were in charge of modern Israel, I would either give the Golan Heights to Jordan, or let the Druze (who descend from Ishmael's son Jether through the Greco-Roman era Iturians) self govern themselves there.

Originally the British were going to give all of modern Israel and Jordan to the Jews, but Jordan was wisely pealed off to be a nation for the Arabs of the region.  The "Palestinians" already have a state.  And to this day over 80% of the population of Jordan are Palestinians, including the current Queen and mother of their future King.

The Theology of the Koran I would never agree with.  But it is in fact compatible with The Bible in terms of what land belongs to Israel and what land belongs to Ishmael.  It's modern politicians and capitalists of various camps that want to create a conflict.

Update January 2021: Here are some YouTube Videos

Sarah Zoabi: Proud Muslim Zionist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTh4ReWk_jY&t=86s

I'm a Muslim Zionist, Here's Why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BC9GlA55sCI

LaChayum: Kasim Hafeed, Muslim Zionist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6MMyFdWqoI

I've also learned that many early Islamic Sources refer to the Al Aqsa Mosque of the Quran as another location in the area of Mecca in a village called Jiranah or Masjid al-Jiʿrānah (مَسْجِد ٱلْجِعْرَانَة).

Update December 2025: And modern Arab Antizionism is not even an exclusively Muslim phenomena. Naguid Azoury was a Maronite who wrote The Awakening of The Arab Nation in 1905, the first Arab Nationalist next. George Antonius was an Eastern Orthodox Christian who wrote the highly influential book The Arab Awakening.  Another Greek Orthodox Arab nationalist was Cosntanin Zureiq who coined the term Nakba.   Yasser Arafat's wife was an Arab Christian. Nayef Hawatmeh leader of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine is a Greek Catholic and George Habash founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine was Greek Orthodox. Antoun Saadeh the founder of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party is Lebanon was also Greek Orthodox.  Some Arab Christians also played an important role in founding the Baath Party.  And Issa Nakhle was a Palestinian Christian Arab Nationalist who was friends with Canadian Nazi Adrien Arcand. And then there's Edward Said.

Meanwhile literal direct Nazi propaganda was a huge influence on growing Antisemitism in the Arab world because of SS Agents like Johann Von Leers.

Arab Antizionism remains largely a product of Western Antisemitism. 

It is OK for a dispensationalsit to be critical of Israel

[Update 2020: I'm not a proper Dispensationalsit anymore.]

It is OK for a dispensationalsit to be critical of Israel

Another post on my Eschatology Blog that alludes to a political issue.