Walid Shoebat Claims Jewish Ancestry “On Both Sides”

A particularly strange exchange between self-described “ex-terrorist” Walid Shoebat and Christian Zionist radio host Sid Roth:

Sid:… you also told me that on both sides of your family there’s Jewish ancestry and you went a bit further; most of the Palestinians you tell me have Jewish ancestry. Why do you say that?

Walid: Well, because I researched the archives of my family heritage, the Shoebat clan comes from Harris Ben Cobb [see below], a Jew who converted to Islam. Before him he knew Harris Ben Cobb comes from a Ashomel Ben Adaya, no Muslim has the name Shomoel in fact if you look at Wikipedia Shomoel Ben Adaya was a Jew who created [sic] to Islam in Yemen.

This makes little sense. First, Samaw’al ibn ‘Adiya was a pre-Islamic Arab poet in Yemen who was either a convert to Judaism or of Jewish descent, not a Jewish convert to Islam (as “Shmu’el Ben Adaya”, he has a street named after him in Jerusalem). Second, “Cobb” is an English surname, and “Harris” is an English first name. Perhaps there’s a Jewish “Ben Cobb” surname of which I am unaware, but either way, it seems unlikely that a person with such a name would be the origin of the Palestinian Shuaybat clan, or that the family of such a person could be traced back to a sixth-century Yemeni poet.

It’s also not clear how he would have Jewish ancestry on his American side. According to his own account in Why We Left Islam (blogged here), he states that (pp. 19-20):

My maternal grandfather, F.W. Georgeson… was a great friend of Winston Churchill.

Frederick W. Georgeson was the mayor of Eureka, California; according to a 1915 biography here, he was born in Scotland, and his wife was from Iowa and named Thompson. However, elsewhere he names Georgeson as his “Great Grandfather”, and from the birth date (F.W. was born in 1858) it seems likely that there is at least one intermediate generation (Incidentally, Georgeson’s supposed association with Churchill appears to have eluded the attention of historians and biographers).

Shoebat’s more general point of a genetic link between Jews and Palestinians has some scientific validity, although it’s a strange line for him to make, and in his case his argument is based on a supposed special access to knowledge:

…in all Palestinian homes you will find the Star of David in front of every home. The Star of David you will find Palestinians who still observe many things Jewish. Eating the lamb standing up comes from Exodus.

That “in all Palestinian homes you will find the Star of David” is a new one to me.

UPDATE: Shoebat now explains:

First off, you stated “”Cobb” is an English surname, and “Harris” is an English first name.”
end quote.

You misspelled the name, it is “Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab” and he has no links to any English names.

And indeed, no one in the world can deny his CONNECTION to Samuel Ben Adaya who according to Al-Ma’rifa is of Bani Dayan.

Actually, I didn’t misspell the name, although I’ll plead guilty to assuming that Roth and Shoebat had managed to produce a competent transcript between them.

Shoebat further explains that both Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab and Ben Adaya were members of the “Bani Dayan”, although I have not been able to trace further references to this particular group. Who exactly Shoebat means by “Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab” remains unclear, too; there was a sixth-century Christian martyr in Yemen named Al-Harith ibn Ka’ab (var. Harith ibn Kaleb, or St Arethas), who was executed by Dhu Nuwas, but also a more general  Banu Harith b. Ka’b group, which adopted Judaism in the pre-Islamic period. Of course, the existence of Jewish tribes in Arabia at this time is well-known and uncontroversial. Shoebat concedes that describing Ben Adaya as a Jewish convert to Islam was “a slip”. For some reason, Shoebat did not make clear to Sid Roth that the figures he presents as having special significance for his family history lived 1,500 years ago.

Shoebat also wishes it to be known that a 1929 newspaper report mentioned F.W. Georgeson meeting Winston Churchill in 1929, when Churchill was touring the west coast of the USA, and that a 1982 newspaper report recalling the incident described Georgeson as Churchill’s “old friend”. However, I have yet to find any references to the two men’s friendship in biographies of Churchill.

10 Responses

  1. [...] Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion: Walid Shoebat Claims Jewish Ancestry “On Both Sides.” [...]

  2. [...] Walid Shoebat Claims Jewish Ancestry “On Both Sides” (barthsnotes.com) Share this:EmailLinkedInPrintTumblrPinterestDiggRedditStumbleUponTwitterFacebookGoogle +1Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. [...]

  3. You stated “Incidentally, Georgeson’s supposed association with Churchill appears to have eluded the attention of historians and biographers”.

    If you care to send me an address, I will be glad to send you an original article that discusses the friendship between F.W. Georgeson, my great grand father and Sir Winston Churchill, then I will await your prompt and public apology. But much of your rantings are easily refutable, but will take this one to set an example.

    Walid Shoebat

  4. And just to speed things up and in case you get cold-feet to accept a serious challenge, you can look up in the archives at the Times Standard in Eureka dated Sunday, November 7th, 1982 in which an article was published titled “An Impressive Gust List” in which it states some history “Eureka was a planned overnight stopover for Churchill since he had made arrangements to meet with old friend, Frederick Georgeson, editor of The Humboldt Standard. Arriving on Sept. 8, 1929, Churchill was treated in grand manner by high society members of British and Scot descent …” I obtained more of these pieces of evidence. I enjoy thwarting slander, since I was telling the truth all along. Walid Shoebat.

    • If you have an “original article”, by all means send me a scan or details of where I can look for it, and I will gladly ensure it receives appropriate attention. At least you’re now confirming that you mean your great-grandfather, rather than your grandfather.

      • Indeed, give me an address. A physical address.
        I have ran into your critiques every now and then and smiled. I wanted to wait till the piles of doubt dung reached high heaven.

        To add even more, you can review the archives. One dated September 9th, 1929 from the Humboldt Standard as was written in documenting Sir Winston Churchill’s journeys when he made a special visit to my great grand father F. W. Georgeson “continuing to Eureka yesterday morning. They ["Churchill in company with his son, his brother and nephew and Gerald Campbeli, British consul-general"] after leaving here, the party continued to Crescent City, where they stayed Saturday night, continuing to Eureka yesterday morning. They were met at the Eureka Inn by F. W. Georgeson, publisher of the Humboldt Standard, upon their arrival here”.

        But what if I had not had these from the archives? Must one always provide evidence to every claim made by slanderers?
        Not all claims can be verified. But why is it that I have been put on the crosshairs of doubters who love to scorn, ridicule and spread all sorts of slander?
        I am not attempting to solicit an apology from you. For I only solicit confessions from gentlemen who always first assume that people are innocent, until they are proven guilty.
        But of course, I must admit, you have easily found my words that were done in a speech or spoken comment. While there is no opportunity to edit these as in the written word. But slips of the tongue are common. But it’s the way of slanderers to only search for these, while they ignore the other monumental evidence.
        In other words, why not look to correct your monumental errors and false assumptions, before you insist on the editing specs of my speech?

      • I’m not giving you my address – you can send me a scan, or post the evidence to your own website. But your 1929 quote doesn’t show that Georgeson was “great friends” with Churchill. Why don’t you tell us how this friendship began, and how it developed, etc?

        Also, if there’s a reference in a book about Churchill which I may have missed, please let me know of it.

  5. You initially stated “Georgeson’s SUPPOSED association with Churchill”.

    And when that was PROVEN false and a “friendship” was shown, you then changed the tune and insisted that I needed to prove a “GREAT friendship” between them.

    But first things first.

    The fact was ESTABLISHED that they were “ASSOCIATED”.

    Do you CONFESS that you were WRONG at this point?

    And if indeed I proved a “great friendship” you would still insist that by record I prove other issues.

    A prejudiced person can never be satisfied.

    You state: “I’m not giving you my address”

    I NEVER asked you for your ADDRESS.

    I asked for an “address”, any address.

    You asked for details that fills several pages, I offered to send, but you insisted, instead of me putting a stamp on an envelope that I sit all day long scanning pages for you.

    Here is what I suggest you do–you were provided with references and dates. You can access the archives to double check.

    My prediction. You won’t.
    Why do I predict this?
    It’s because you know they are true and correct.

    As I always say, it’s not an issue of truth, but an issue prejudiced mindset.

    Now, if you had any scruples, at least publish our dialogue here.

    We’re done.

  6. [...] Shoebat (this guy) has been in contact to express his displeasure at my my commentary on his claim, made in the book Why We Left [...]

  7. You wrote: “Shoebat further explains that both Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab and Ben Adaya were members of the “Bani Dayan”, although I have not been able to trace further references to this particular group. Who exactly Shoebat means by “Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab” remains unclear”.

    WRONG. You were provided a formidable link and reference to exactly what we are speaking of.

    You could have easily used Google translate or you could have consulted someone who knew Arabic. Yet you intentionally failed to do your homework, which I will not do for you.

    So when you are cornered the best policy is ‘play dumb’?

    Secondly, while you linked to my objection, you failed to post the full quote I made.

    You intentionally provided half quotes in order to make a confusing argument.

    I stated: “First off, you stated ““Cobb” is an English surname, and “Harris” is an English first name.”
end quote.

    You failed to indicate that you misspelled the name, it is “Al-Harith Ben Ka’ab” and MORE IMPORTANTLY that he has no links to any English names” as you FALSELY indicated.

    In response to ALL THIS ERROR, you stated: “Actually, I didn’t misspell the name”.

    Not only you misspelled the name, but you had indicated that “Cobb [Ka’ab] is an English surname and Harris is an English first name”.

    It’s worse then just a misspell, but a blunder in comprehending anything I was speaking about.

    Conclusion: When you are cornered the best policy is ‘play dumb’?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>