The Name Deception

Peloni:  Joseph Shellim, the author of the “Philistine-To-Palestine”, has offered to publish the 12 Deceptions described in this important work on Israpundit.  We will be posting one Deception each week for the next twelve week, beginning with the first installment today, The Name Deception.

Joseph Shellim | Sept 28, 2024

The name Palestine was a globally held reference to the homeland of the Jews, including in Muslim countries.
• In 1918-20 in the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic the Jewish communities published a Caucasian Jewish bulletin called “The Palestine” newspaper.
• The Middle East conflict was facilitated via name deceptions. The charges against Israel would be diminished without the corruption of names that are among histories’ most known and recorded. West Bank; Arab Palestinians; East Jerusalem. All three names are new historical fictions created in the Mid-20th Centuries, its aim to overturn the heritage marks of another people. All three names, presented as attachments of an Arab nativity claim and occupation charges are equally fictional. These are new names intended to cover the previous historical names of another people’s land. The impacts of these name corruptions affect all nations and their histories; it is a phenomenon that has nothing to do with Israel and thereby merits careful consideration.

Why Change Historical Names?
The new names are intended to give its reverse impression via the usurping of another peoples’ heritage identity theft. Their allocations are calculated implements designed to assist charges of land occupation which soon followed the name changes. West Bank and Arab Palestinians became the means to claim a 3-state in Palestine, itself one of a thread of deceptions by presenting this as a 2-state; Jordan was the 2-state the British declared as a ‘Historic 2-state compromise’ when the original Balfour Mandate was corrupted when oil was discovered. These are the views expressed by a host of prominent international lawyers. By altering the historical names of the land of the Jews it facilitates Israel’s land being presented as occupied; such charges of occupation lose their credibility when these names are not altered. Palestinian Jews, as they were called prior to the 1960’s, cannot be charged as occupying Palestine; likewise, the West Bank towns with Hebrew names like Hebron and Beth-Lehem cannot be presented as illegally occupied by Jews. Thereby, the names West Bank and Arabs as Palestinians were enacted to cater to the forthcoming charge of Israel’s occupation of Arab Palestinian land. These were Jewish Palestinian lands declared in the Balfour Mandate and three scriptures and a vast array of historical archives prior to the name switch; Arabs were not called as Palestinians prior to 1960. The name East Jerusalem, enacted for the first time in history, caters to the splitting of Israel’s capital, a claim no nation can survive. All three names signify the rejection of Israel’s right to exist, as declared in numerous Arab group’s charters. For the Arabs, its underlying premise catered to a Caliphate, a theological doctrine of dominion; for the British, it catered to commercial arrangements that justify dishonouring legal pledges and history, even at the cost of genocide. The slogans of extermination made by Hajj Amin, the British appointee as the mayor of Jerusalem and founder of Hamas, continue with no response from the British who master-minded this situation by accepting these name changes:
• “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli – civilian or soldier – on our lands,” Abbas said in a briefing to mostly Egyptian journalists.” – (Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas; Cairo Meeting with Mohamed Morsi)
Thereby, the name changes mark as a conspiracy that covers an underlying historical deception, one suppressed and shrouded from its underlying motives. Whether the worldly multitude was not fully privy or knowingly accepted these deceptions with indifference is a subjective issue. Yet their impacts that have become manifest globally speaks for itself; it legitimized a Caliphate in the Middle East that is not limited to one nation or people. The terror in the region’s only Christian state of Lebanon and the Copt and Armenian plight are also subsequent to a Caliphate doctrine.

Britain was the first country that approved the name West Bank on the most sacred land portions of the Jews, followed by Pakistan and Iraq. There is no issue that Britain, the Arab people, the UN and the world’s scholars and theologians were unaware of the history of these names that Britain fostered, rendering it implausible that its motives were unclear. They contradicted ancient and recent history, the pledges of Britain’s treaties, and of the Emir Faisal’s acceptance of agreements with the Palestinian Jews in 1919; two years later oil was discovered and the situation turned dramatically for the Jews. The issue arises whether Britain respected the sanctity of the older sites of the Jews as well as the Christians; the sites of the Hebrew Patriarchs in Hebron, of Joseph’s tomb in Shechem, Rachel’s tomb and Jesus’ birthplace in Bethlehem; these were fully disregarded by Britain. Whether by error or otherwise, Britain legitimized a Caliphate doctrine. Israel has been paying its price thus far, yet with definite omens of its extensions globally.

Emulating Mighty Rome.
The changing of a name can, via propaganda and inculcation, dislodge a prevailing paradigm, even one many thousands of years old and evidenced by more archeological relics than any other nation. Here, changing historical names become a means to change history, acting as destructive attacks on a nation and its people.

The term Palestinian has successfully entered the collective DNA of the world’s multitude and become almost impossible to anymore associate Jews with the name they held for 2,000 years. As was seen with Mighty Rome, the power of a name is an ancient mode of historical negation when used as a strategic weapon. Rome’s agenda for replacing Judea’s name with Palestine was the total its extermination and this can be seen as repeatable in the modern world; a doctrine of dominion is not limited to one small nation.

That Britain is revered as a great nation cannot exclude that WW2 Germany was also one of the world’s most emancipated nations; the rule is the higher a position the more severe the crime it participates in. While many Arab groups openly declare their aims of elimination in their charters, Britain did this covertly by masterly stratagems. Both names of West Bank and Palestinian were enacted after a Holocaust in Europe in the 1940’s; West Bank was created in 1950, Arabs as Palestinian in the 1960’s. The parallels are heightened by the Britons and Arabs at the helm of both scenarios of this land’s history, with the Roman legions and with WW2 Germany. There was a Roman siege and a British White Paper that made the Holocaust unstoppable; both preceded and influenced the Roman and the Nazi Holocausts. In both instances the name weapon was a pivotal factor and utilized as a war stratagem when the Jews were fully overwhelmed by the greatest of forces.

Global Impacts.
The name deception is fastidiously progressed with no correction in sight. Britain enjoys immunity from the Christian and Arab sector and unlikely to be confronted. The Jews, the original owners of the name Palestinian which was Judea, are never included in the discourse, such as ‘previously a name held by the Jews’, or that ‘West Bank was previously Judah and Samaria’, or that ‘East Jerusalem is part of the 3,000-year capital of Israel’. The new names are presented with an assumption such prior history is not relevant, including one that subsisted only a decade ago from the new name enactments.

The name Palestine and its derivative Palestinian were both applied exclusively to the ‘national home of the Jews’ by Britain in all her legal documentations prior to this name’s transfer in 1960; Britain was silent of this contradiction, indicating an alignment with the Arabs of this name usurping. Prior to Herzl’s endeavours for Israel’s re-establishment, Palestine had the same employ as Zionism; he uses the term Palestine as the homeland of the Jews in his writings. Yet Britain made the name Palestinian as antithetical of the Jews, overturning the Balfour Mandate when oil was discovered.

The issue is also complicated by its negative default impacts outside of the Jews; the new Palestinians that emerged in the 20th Century face their true Arab heritage being lost irrecoverably, with Christianity confronting even greater impacts than any other sector. How did:
• “And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.”
(Matt 2:20). Become:
• “The necessary legal steps to put an end to Israel’s occupation of the Arab territories” – (The Synod of Bishops chaired by Benedict XVI; 24 October 2010.)

Israel’s history has inter-twining trajectories; a historical name reversal cannot be made without inevitable impacts on history itself. While the Jews have sustained themselves in numerous exiles and destructions through the ages, it is questionable that Christianity can withstand a Jesus of Nazareth rendered as a Palestinian of the West Bank. Here, history per se becomes fluid and discretionary; if a deception can impact a 4,000-year history, it can equally do so a 2,000 year one. Its biggest victims become the Christian and Muslim people inculcated with manipulated depictions of their history and belief.

Sheikh Ahmad al-Adwan of Jordan, when asked if he recognized Jewish sovereignty of the Jews’ historic land, explained:
• “Indeed, I recognize their sovereignty over their land. I believe in the Holy Koran, and this fact is stated many times in the book. ‘We made the Children of Israel inheritors of such things.’ [Koran 26:59] and additional verses in the Holy Book.”
• The name abuses foster negative impacts on the Arab people in contradiction of the Quran and a host of Islamic theologians and scholars who decry the political manipulations of their history. Christian History is also contradicted by the charge of the Jerusalem Temple denial:
• ‘A 10-year-old Russian boy, Matvei Tcepliaev, recently made an extraordinary discovery in Jerusalem. Working as a volunteer in the Temple Mount Sifting Project, he found a 3,000-year-old seal from the time of King David. The artifact was nestled in tons of earth that had been illegally excavated from below the Temple Mount by the Muslim Waqf. The Temple Mount is sacred ground for Jews, Muslims and Christians, but Jewish historical claims are denied by many Muslims.’ – (“A Boy’s Discovery’ by Jerold S. Auerbach; WSJ)
• The chaos created in the nations by the abuse of Israel’s historical names cannot in any wise be directed at Israel. Book publications have emerged by prominent scholars with ominous titles such as Londonistan and Eurabia, and new buzz terms such as No-Go Zone enclaves that have become a new reality; perhaps in like manner of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Palestinian deceptions. [17]

A Viral Phenomenon.
If a name change in the 20th Century can render the most sacred land portions of the Jews with 3,000 year Hebrew names to become as an Arab Palestinian peoples’ West Bank territory, then the nations of Europe, with relatively new names, can more easily be prevailed upon. Whose territories are the No-Go-Zones of Europe, and will the world one day encounter new names and never ceasing 2-state and 3-state demands in European countries; and why will East London not succumb to the name Londonistan when such has precedence in Palestine; or why will enclaves in France and Norway not become part of occupied territories by a surge of immigration aspiring autonomy after thirty years?

Otherwise, such impacts are aptly described as ‘The Israel Experience’ and able to extend as a global viral phenomenon. These are not hypothetical questions; they are firmly based on actual slogans declared in the streets of London and across Europe. To view such a phenomenon as errors or circumstantial affectations becomes a difficult endeavour; it boldly exposed its premise, one that had to be fully supported by Britain to have any means of success. The most impacting factor of how and why such a name transfer from Jews to Arabs became justified is nowhere addressed in the discourse, when it ought to be made as pivotally relevant. Reasonably, Britain and the Bishop synod should have been aghast of such historical and scriptural impropriety, so should all Christians and the Arab people themselves; yet it’s astonishing reverse syndrome resulted and it was fully supported. It is a subjective issue for the people to consider their leaders’ decisions; they cannot be directed at an overwhelmed Israel.

Consider it well. The name Palestine was arguably the most commonly known historical attribution less than a century ago (from 2015); one held by no other people as a national symbol than of the Jews and their homeland for 2,000 years, including in the 20th Century up to the 1960’s. Subsequent to the silence, in 1964 the new Palestinians will claim a time immemorial history stemming 7,000 years in Canaan, altogether negating Rome’s anointing this name on Judea and a validate history of both the Jews and Christians. It was followed by denials of the Jerusalem Temple, even that Jews have no connection with this land.

With Britain’s promotion these name changes became condoned by a resultant multitude. They include the following luminaries as an indication of the onslaught Israel is subjected to:
The UN, Scholars, Historians, Encyclopedias, Dictionaries, Kings, Queens, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Islamic Clergy, Popes, Bishops, the Media, Journalists, School Principles, Humanitarian Agencies, Environmentalists, Sport Champions and Music and Stage Artists.

Few will brave disagreement with such a large purpose driven assembly and use terms such as ‘deceptions’ directed at an array of esteemed luminaries, except that it all falls apart by the accounting of its historical veracity; it does so not by a few irrelevant or incidental occasions, but on all of its manifold thresholds. A vast measure of humanity embraces the 20th Century phenomenon of a Palestinian people as one with historical credibility. Yet there were never any people or nation called as Palestinians for 2,000 years other than the Jews; it is the name that was applied to the historical homeland of the Jews. Palestine is Judea; there was no country called as Palestine, nor any Arabs referred to by this name. There was also no nativity of an Arab people to this land (See, “The Refugee Deception”). It thus challenges the held premise how can the whole world be mistaken.

• The Arab Palestinian premise and its nativity claims are pursued with a determination not seen elsewhere of any other issues of the modern world; it is fulcrum and pivotal to the illegal occupation syndrome. The occupation charge becomes dysfunctional without the historical term ‘Palestinian’ being applied to the Arabs; that Palestine was Judea and that only Jews were called as Palestinians till the 1960’s is shunned from the discourse. The Arab Palestinian is a phenomenon presented in all narratives and made as prominently prefixed adjectives always followed by ‘occupied territory’ and ‘international law’. Yet its extent can be equally measured as highly and fully questionable when devout Islamic scholars and prominent figures differ with the worldly multitude and are not given adequate acknowledgement; many are subjected to grave character diminishing or a casting aside from the radar when their views are more credible than the politicized historical deceptions of this region:
• “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in the Koran. Your demand for the Land of Israel is a falsehood and it constitutes an attack on the Koran, on the Jews and their land. Therefore, you won’t succeed, and Allah will fail you and humiliate you, because Allah is the one who will protect the Jews (Sura 5 Verse 21), and that Jews are the inheritors of Israel (Sura 26 Verse 59).” – (Sheikh Ahmad Adwan, a Muslim scholar.)

As well, by a renowned President of a neighboring Islamic State:
• “Never forget this one point: There is no such thing as a Palestinian people; there is no Palestinian entity.” – (Syrian President Hafez Assad to the PLO leader Yassir Arafat.)

And by an American Statesman:
• “There was no Palestine state. We have invented a Palestinian people who are Arabs from the surrounding Arab community as a war against Israel and it is tragic” – (US Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich; Jewish Channel Cable TV; Reuters)

Thereby, the term ‘deception’ is not utilized for evoking undue attention or contention; the Arab Palestinian promotion is more than a myth and borders on a genocide premise targeting Israel, one that does not appear an error or a naive consequence. The figureheads denouncing this phenomenon may be few and credible, yet not scale-tipping of the accumulated multitude. A vast and growing sector of Christians and Muslims are not in concert with their leaders and the representatives of this paradigm; especially so those who examine the credibility that this issue relies upon when researching this history. The world now has open access to the historical archives that affirm the recent 20th Century Palestinian name shift from Jews to Arabs and of scholarly books by honest and able scholars. Ultimately the corruptions will be seen as more than an error.

Palestinian Nativity
• “The problem is that another people are trying to lay claim to that land through a narrative that is not only false but that relies on twisted facts and outright lies to try to make the case. The people making the treaties with the Jews (the British) went back on their word and gave the majority of the land (75% of the promised mandate) to the colonizers: essentially, the colonizers gave the land to other colonists.”
– (“Broken Treaties: Palestinians are not indigenous people like Native Canadians” by Ryan Bellerose; Canada-Israel Friendship Association)

Extermination by a Name.
It appears unlikely any confusion can pertain of such an antithetical history that over-turns the name Palestine away from the historical homeland of the Jews, accepted with a disregard of its import and consequences. There should be no confusion of Rome’s intentions when Judea was changed to Palestine; thus its analogy applying in the modern world’s conflict is not a hypothetical one or one that can be disregarded. No confusion should prevail why this conflict is irresolvable; one side is facing an existential crisis as was seen with Rome some 2,000 years ago. It can reasonably be viewed as an extermination premise via a name change; its impacts of dire contradictions hover ominously on the nations who still wish to uphold their own histories and beliefs. The UN Security Council holds four out of five Christian
countries controlling its veto powers (USA, UK, France, Russia; and China); the Vatican is a powerful impresser of a billion Catholics.

It appears implausible such a historical name corruption could prevail without the positive support, or an absence of reaction, from the Christian groupings, including the multi-denomination Churches, the Vatican, and their Political representatives. This says that as was Britain given the caretaker role in the 20th Century, so are Christian countries handed the onus of fostering an Arab Palestinian name as an antithetical symbol of the Jews. The most impacting issue concerns whether the legitimizing of such provisions in this region can stem its extending flow elsewhere, or increase them; if the latter then its onus cannot apply on anyone other than its supporters.

The internet has emerged at a poignant juncture; it can expose history as a new force and become a beacon of the truth, setting it free when others fail this responsibility; a lie can be investigated today as never before. The promoted assembly of a name dislodgement points only to a miss-represented theological and commercial enterprise as opposed one of historical veracity; it is one diabolically in contradiction of its own sublime premise of ‘The truth shall set us free’.

Such is further reflected in the entire assembly of states that overwhelm the UN General Assembly by always voting one way against Israel no matter what the Motion. Here there are strong facilities and options of corrupting international laws. That this name transfer aligns with an extermination premise becomes better manifest in its unfolding, with too many too silent of it also becoming its own vindication of its extending impacts.

A Rose by another Name.
In this scenario, a rose by another name is promoted as its antithesis; they form the basis of almost all UN Resolutions of international laws against Israel. Thus, whether it is a theological or political phenomenon appears as the osmosis of both, each with an absence of historical vindication. How then can the denial by Arabs with respect of both the Jerusalem Temple, and by the Christian community of the name applied to Judea, win such a widespread acceptance, and does it mean history will be changed just for Israel without impacts elsewhere; it is a paradigm stalking the modern world. Will it not impinge on the Gospel that mentions a Temple in Jerusalem; or of the Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Roman archives and the scholars that wrote of it? Why is an Ottoman king’s archives concerning Jerusalem’s ownership in contradiction of the modern world’s determinations in the 20th Century; or why is the Christian community calling Arabs as Palestinians when they know it is much more than a mere falsehood; these are the challenges waiting to be confronted. What kind of roses grow in such a landscape requires a closer examination of the first case of this conflict?

Episode 2. The Balfour Deception.
[See Next week]

Link to the book on Amazon: