So you keep saying.HAHAHA!!! The laughter is all mine.
8 more times, and someone other than you might start believing it.
Not all Jews are Zionists
- Thread starter eanassir
- Start date
8 more times, and someone other than you might start believing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopher
The Bible teaches that all Christians are required to faithfully adhere to
all of that Book's teachings.
Nope! There is only one Christian sect that embraces the OT and it's not the Catholics.
And there are those who think that if you don't subscribe to their particular brand of Christianity, you are not Christian. I have talked to people who profess a great number of different varieties of Christianity and the most accepting group would be the Catholics. That might have something to do with the "universal" nature of their beliefs. I think that the closer you get to the fringe of the Born Again groups the less accepting they are.
You mean someone other than you.
LOL!
petros; said:
Jesus said that he came to fulfil the Law of Moses so that all Christians must adhere to the OT.
Jesus said that to the Christians or did he say it to the Jews?
Israel Approves Construction Of 1,600 Settler Homes In East Jerusalem
August 11, 2011
The Israeli interior ministry has given final approval for the construction of 1,600 new settler homes in East Jerusalem.
Israel gave the initial green light for the 1,600 housing units last year during a visit to Israel by U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden, causing a diplomatic rift between Israel and the United States.
Israel considers East Jerusalem, which it captured from Jordan in the 1967, as part of its "undivided capital" -- a status not recognized abroad.
Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state and have said they will not resume peace talks if Israel continues to build there and in the West Bank.
Israel has said building would not begin for several years, but the country is now gripped by escalating protests for cheaper housing, raising speculation that some settlement projects could be sped up.
Yuuuup they're out for Piece and not for Peace.
Jews having a place to live is a war crime!
Notice how it's important to point out that Israel "captured" East Jersalem in 1967, but just ignore that Jordan "captured" it in 1948. Once again, land conquered by Arabs becomes Arab land. Land conquered by Jews becomes occupied land.
Notice how it's important to point out that Israel "captured" East Jersalem in 1967, but just ignore that Jordan "captured" it in 1948. Once again, land conquered by Arabs becomes Arab land. Land conquered by Jews becomes occupied land.
You've got the poor me down pat.... Now why not take a look at the 1948 map? It was all Arab land before that.
Thanks for proving my point, lol.
You make this so easy, it's almost mean.
No it wasn't.
Who inhabited the land? "No it wasn't" is the sort of arbitrary and unrelenting bullshyte that the Muddled East is all about.
Interesting! That would make all of Israel occupied land. I wonder if supporters of Israel are experiencing white guilt for having the ship of fools returned to Germany so the passengers could be exterminated?
It seems to me that those who decided to place Israel in the middle of all those oil rich Arab countries did so more to destabilize the ME than out of any compassion for the Jews. Seems they have been extremely successful. Jews could have had a homeland anywhere on the planet since for the last 2000 year they have lived all over the planet. There were a lot of places they could have gone without all the trouble they have had since being placed in Palestine. Probably could have had better land to work with too and not have had to struggle as much trying to make a living in a desert.
Semites, which includes, Druze, Jews, and so on, under British rule.
And...
Is a paragon of unmuddled fact?
That's actually a neat hypothesis Cliffy.
Nope. Did you ever see any place where I said the Muddled East was easy to figure out? ... especially with all the armchair quarterbacks and rabid extremists spouting opinion for fact?
You mean Lawrence of Arabia is a fib?
:roll: If you want the win so bad, you can say it wasn't all Arab land. Seems to me the Brits called 'em Arabs - and we all know a Brit is never wrong.
Win what? All I did was say "no it wasn't". You're the one that obviously took it as a stab to your ego or whatever.
They also called natives "Indians". Your point?
Since you seem to think they're all "Arabs". I don't know if this is sarcasm, or something you believe.
That's right.... You can actually BE right this time. That's what you said alright: "No it wasn't"
BTW: "Indian" has been attributed to Christopher Columbus. He wasn't a Brit....
BTW: "Indian" has been attributed to Christopher Columbus. He wasn't a Brit....
Actually Jerusalem is one place where the Jews typically outnumbered the Arabs. Before 1948 it was administered by the British and was supposed to be an open International city administered by the UN if I'm not mistaken. Any way you slice it, Jordan "captured" it in 1948, and wasted no time getting busy deporting the Jews. Nobody cares though, only Israel qualifies as an apartheid state.
Yeah, it was just a random choice. You realize that "Palestine" was Greek for "Israel", right?
But to your point, the same goes for Arabs. Most Arab Palestinians are recent immigrants to the area as well. They also could have gone elsewhere. Trouble is, those pesky Jews made Palestine an economic zone that offered jobs for Arabs.
Shyte happens ... and always has. Israel took it back. If they were so honourable, shouldn't they have respected the International City clause in the Writ that gave Israel right?
Six of one, a half dozen of the other....
They took it back in a defensive war. Like you said, shyte happens, and once again, we expect Israel to rise to a higher standard by respecting the "International City clause", even after winning it in a defensive war, while we place no such expectation on Jordan, after winning it in an offensive war.