History has a way of repeating itself..

mishkan

There's room for YOU in the Mishkan!
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2011
1,560
276
Germantown, MD
Visit site
✟40,950.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Simply put- if God wants you to live somewhere- what do you need guns to make it a reality for? The whole "God gave us this land and we'll blow your head off if you think otherwise" shows an amazing lack of faith in God's own providence. This goes for Jews and Muslims equally.

It sounds like you would have had problems with Joshua leading the military battles against Jericho, Ai, etc. Even in those instances where Hashem did employ supernatural intervention, it was always contingent upon the Hebrews first taking up military postures.

Obviously, God is in this, because Israel exists and that's a fact that the world has to live with. However, if land is being taken by theft or any other violation of the Law, then God's name is being defamed. Agree on the borders and be honest with it, I say.

There are a lot of things that exist, which are clearly contrary to the will of Hashem. Even as you state you believe that "what is, is", you invoke an idea of "oughtness" that requires fundamental change in the status quo. This seems inconsistent to me.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
God is in this, because Israel exists and that's a fact that the world has to live with. However, if land is being taken by theft or any other violation of the Law, then God's name is being defamed. Agree on the borders and be honest with it, I say.

For the situation to really improve, IMHO, Israel would need to return some or much of the land they have invaded over the years since at this point the areas controlled by Palestinians are tiny and too fragmented to work as a nation. A major part of what makes life as a Palestinian difficult is having to move between these islands of Palestinian lands since passage is often disrupted by checkpoints and other Israeli belligerence.

5vhyM.jpg





It's difficult to ignore how Israel itself doesn't really allow for safe passage without harrasment in many cases and goading others on as they make their way to their designated zones doesn't do well for peace. Truly, maps always make a world of difference when it comes to how we see the people of Earth. It's interesting to see what happens when the definitions of territories that others live on are often changed.


This happened in the U.S.: there were indigenous people living on this Land, which changed hands many times, Mexican Territory, French Territory, Spanish Territory, etc., this did not change the face of the indigenous people, eventually forced to live on reservations in states set up by a new government, where the indigenous people are now called Arizonans, New Mexicans, Oklahomans, etc., because of the state they live in... this does not change who they are, this does not change their tribal affiliation, just because another people moved in, took over, and changed the name of the area. And the ways that they had to travel through areas they were supposed to stay out of in order to get to the new areas set up for them was difficult when it seemed the geography influenced them being set up for looking like they were trying to violate things.

As another said best:
150241_10151232978628954_137494735_n.jpg










Remember when Native Americans were the aggressors and were "just as bad" as the United States' government? Yeah, those Native Americans, they were oppressing U S-Americans too, don't you know. If only they disarmed themselves and did sit-ins, I am sure that the US-American government would have ceased forcibly removing them from their homeland and systematically encouraging US-Americans to settle in stolen lands.

“If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”
― Malcolm X

PS: And don't forget, the Israeli government is NOT all the Israeli people or all Jewish people.

Governments historically and consistently throughout history have done actions which aren't in sync with the people who are subjected by their rule.

Border changes make a world of difference when it comes to describing others. As mentioned in another discussion, was reading an National Geographic Atlas of the World (as I used to love doing that growing up, alongside reading encylopedias) and it was amazing seeing the ways that being able to define boundaries always had a lot of significant impact when it came to who did...or didn't have power. The same things could be noted when it came to showing that others were unable to truly be identified as a people if you could change their boundaries..

The same thing has been done to other groups in the Middle East....specifically, with Trans-Jordan which is another world in/of itself :) Many Arabs have not been treating other Arabs properly, including those Jews who live in Jordan...and where many struggle is with the Palestinian Jews/Arab Jews who were forced to move out even though they lived in the land--and have claim just as the other Jews who came back/said "This is our part of the Land, Israel!"

On a side note, as it concerns the ways that Arabic people, Palestinians and Jews were played/manipulated when it came to the creation of the State of Israel, thought it was worth mentioning something one of my sisters in Christ once noted when she said how it is helpful to access a detailed SERIES of middle-eastern maps at least from the old Ottoman Empire, and next the interim period between WWI & WWII, and then consecutive maps from 1948 to the present. In her view, she felt it was important to view the former Palestine & the current State of Israel in the FULL Cartographical CONTEXT of the Entire MUSLIM Mid-East, including both the African & Asian continents as a WHOLE--and she noted how an Arab State WAS Already Created for "Palestinians" in 1948 with JORDAN. She based here information from maps found here.

What is interesting to consider is that the group called "Jews for Justice" actually wrote an extensive article discussing the issue of mapping--as it concerns the Palestinians being given land and many of the Zionists interpretations that leave out a host of other issues when it comes to trying to make it out as if Palestinians belonged in Jordan (as discussed best here in the article entitled "Is Jordan Palestine?" )---and of course, again, that doesn't even take into account the issue of those Palestinians that were MIXED with Jewish blood (akin to Samaritans) and considered to be "Non-Jewish" as the Samaritans were before being told they couldn't own land. Though many Palestinians are Arabic, many are very much of the Samaritan kind since many Jewish people chose to come/live with the people who were in "uncharted territory" at one time...and thus, for them, they don't identify with the Arabs as much as they do with the Jewish people--thus, giving them reason to be very upset when people treat them as if they don't belong in the Land. More on the issue, if interested, was discussed here when it came to the subject of mapping.​

Maps are truly powerful....and so often they're not considered, which is highly sad when considering the need for geo-literacy .






One must wonder to what extent the land should be expanded for the Palestinians to have proper resources. And sadly, it seems that trying to usher in a Two-State solution may be futile. Israel is one country between the river Jordan and the Mediterranean. You can call it Israel or Palestine according to your own religious affiliation the reality is that one ust stop pretending that somehow you can carve out a state for Muslims or Palestinians in the country of Israel since that's similar to what happened to the Native Americans when land was taken and they were told that you can't have a Sovereign nation within another Sovereign nation (like a circle within a circle).

palestine+Israel+Peace+2.jpg

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Truthfully, just the logic of creating a territory which is not coherent and crisscrossed by the Jewish settlements is warped and here are just few of the reasons why two state solution will not work in practice. [/FONT]

  • 1. Jews will not stop building new settlements
  • 2. Muslims will never let go the right of return for their refugees just as Jews are returning from all parts of the world to settle in Israel/Palestine
  • 3. Muslims will not want a state which will not have any security services to protect its borders
  • 4. Israel will not allow free access between Gaza & West Bank
  • 5. Hamas will not accept the current regime running Israel/Palestine
  • 6. No Jewish government will give any concession to Muslims over the issue of Jerusalem
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]These are just few of the many issues that stop the creation of a Muslim state in Palestine. Palestinian areas have been crisscrossed by so many Jewish settlements that a viable Palestinian state is now impossible. Jerusalem should be the undivided capital of the new state and apartheid regime must end for peace to prevail in the land of David and Solomon.[/FONT]



Call a spade a spade..as what's being done is genocide and people responding to it are portrayed as if they "struck" first - no different than what happened to many American Indians when they fought back by attacking and it was claimed that they were aggressors in the conflict and needed to be wiped out for peace.

No surprise, on that note, that other Native Americans have actually been boycotting Israel and speaking in support of Palestinians:

As another said best elsewhere (for a brief excerpt):
The main reason people can flippantly say "well if you support the Palestinian right of return then you should support Native Americans returning to their land" in order to justify Israel not recognizing the Palestinian right is that there are simply so few Native Americans that the question does not really arise. Native Americans in the United States are struggling for survival, justice and recognition, but generally not by seeking the return of land that is now, say, a neighborhood of Chicago. Their struggle came poignantly to light recently in the affair of the US refusal to recognize tribal passports of the Iroquois Lacrosse team that was supposed to travel to the UK (link here).

But imagine if the situation were more analogous to Palestine today in terms of numbers. Imagine if Native Americans constituted 30, 40, or 50 or even 20 percent of the population of the United States and that they lived in sealed reservations in conditions similar to those in the Gaza Strip or refugee camps in the West Bank or Lebanon?

If there were 30, 70 or 100 million people who identified as Native Americans and existed in such conditions, no one would be able to so flippantly dismiss either their right to return to their original lands or any challenge they would make to the legitimacy of the United States. The United States would have a legitimacy crisis and bloodbath on its hands.

The only reason the United States can so easily ignore the rights of Native Americans is that they suffered near-genocide. Palestinians today are 50 percent of the population in their historic homeland and cannot simply be ignored as they could be if they were one percent. This is why Benny Morris said in 2004 that yes, ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was necessary and justified to create Israel, but if Ben-Gurion had made a mistake it was that he did not "finish the job." The United States, Canada, Australia did "finish the job" and those are the settler-colonial states that survive.

 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
There needs to be open communication and compromise without trying to use God to get our way. If God wants things to go a certain way then let him do it. For now human beings are going to have to sort out their differences and make things work without declaring any one side winner via their holy book.
There are a lot of ways, IMHO, that we can really have real discussion on the issue that can lead to beneficial solutions in the long run.

I know some people say " the Palestenians will still keep rocketing even if a two state solution is implemented." They act as if oppression doesn't influence people towards violence and that a lack of oppression isn't beneficial in terms of bringing peace. That doesn't make sense.

There are many, amazingly, who've argued that the battles over Palestinine/2 state solutions are arbitrary since (in their view) Jordan is Palestine. And that one has always seemed to be a trip. Interestingly enough, the claim has actually been addressed a number of times when it comes to the claims that Jordan is Palestine, as that's more of a slogan than factual.....even though it is true that others for the logic have valid points when noting how Palestinians have been greatly mistreated in Jordan just as they have been in Israel (seen here and here/here).

Jordanians that are of Palestinian origin, having been forced from their homeland during the 1948 and 1967 wars with Israel, have interesting struggles. Jordan was the only Arab state to grant all Palestinians the right to Jordanian citizenship and many have exercised that option, playing an important part in the political and economic life of Jordan. Some Palestinians continue to live in a number of refugee camps scattered throughout the West Bank and the northern part of Jordan, where the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) is responsible for the welfare of the refugees, including their health and education. There are currently close to 1.4 million Palestinian refugees registered in Jordan. Although massive influxes of refugees have strained Jordan’s economy, Palestinian Jordanians have contributed greatly to the health and prosperity of the country.

Nonetheless, for many that may do well, it does not change the reality of those that've suffered...and others have often noted how being in Jordan doesn't mean that Jordan was ever meant to be Palestine.​

For a good review:

"Jordan is Palestine" - Problems and Insights


As much as I disagree with Daniel Pipes on a host of issues, especially in regards to some of the comments he has made on Palestinians and his views on how Israel was founded by Zionists (seen here), there are certain things that I think he has some wisdom on. As another said best on the matter:
Refuting argument 1: Palestine, historically, included Jordan:
Palestine was a concept, not a clearly defined location, and thus various periods included various definitions. In the Torah/Bible, Numbers 34:1-12, the East Bank of the Jordan was NOT a part of Israel/the promised land. Read it, and also consider that Moses saw Palestine from Mt. Nebo rather than entering it, before dying as punishment. He didn't enter the promised land, despite marching all over what we call Jordan. Under various empires, Jordan and Palestine were sometimes jointly administered, sometimes independently of each other. "To take Roman times as an example, the Jordan River initially formed a boundary; after 66 C.E. it did not. Conversely, the first Jewish revolt extended beyond the Jordan, the second ended at the river." Pipes and Garfinkle explain the various Arab empire divisions, concluding that "The territory promised by the Balfour Declaration [by the British in 1917] can justifiably be interpreted as ending at the Jordan River or as extending further."​

Refuting Argument 2: the British Mandate regarded Jordan as Palestine

For 8 glorious months between 1920 and 1921. But, in 1921, Churchill, who was directing Britain's colonies at the time, created the Emirate of Transjordan and gave rulership to Abdullah, great-grandfather of the current king. So yes, for eight months the Brits found it convenient for their colonial purposes to put Palestine and Jordan together. And then promptly did an about-face, setting up the independent state we have and love today. So Jordan is Palestine in the same way that Ohio is the Northwest Territory (but about five years briefer).​

Refuting Argument 3: Jordan and Palestine are Identical Culturally

In this section, Pipes and Garfinkle talk about the Jordan River as a traditionally large, natural border, difficult to cross in the days before Syrian and Israeli irrigation. I think it's even more important to note, though, that Palestinians and Jordanians certainly do not regard themselves as the same. Check out anything on Jordan's Palestinian relations these days for evidence. And, of course, even if they had at one time been the same, decades of administrative differences as a result of colonial line-drawing means that even historical sameness is now regarded in a statist fashion. That is to say, Syria and Lebanon were once one cultural unit; now, not so much. No one has suggested uniting them. In short, culturally and as far the people's identity, Jordan is Palestine in about the same way that Canada is the USA.​

Refuting Argument 4: Mutual Claims from Palestinians and Jordanians
The PLO in 1971, and again in 1972, declared that it wanted one government in Palestine and Transjordan. Which at that time, made sense - King Hussain was claiming administrative control of the West Bank, in absence of any effective government there. And indeed, all of the Arab world was using rhetoric like this, that all Arabs were in fact one nation. King Hussain did indeed assert in 1981, as J-is-P folks love to remind us, that "Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan."​


As Pipes and Garfinkle discuss, this means that he intended for Jordan to be a prime advocate and defender of Palestinians, as a sympathizer with Palestinians, and as a nation with many Palestinian residents. His last word on the topic? In 1988, Hussain said: "Jordan is not Palestine." Meaning, we are not the same people, we are not the same government, and we relinquish any claim to administering Palestinian territory.


There are practical ways that may be more appropriate in dealing with the situation...and personally, I think one of them would be for having the creation of a three-state solution, also called the Egyptian-Jordanian solution, and the Jordan-Egypt option, by giving control of the West Bank to Jordan and control of the Gaza Strip to Egypt.

639px-Is-wb-gs-gh_v3.png


The three-state solution essentially replicates the situation that existed between the 1949 Armistice Agreements and the 1967 Six-Day War. Beginning in 1949, Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and no Palestinian Arab state existed

Demographics may make the issue of a One State, Two State or Three State solution a bit sticky since it can change rapidly depending on the increased development of a group...but a Three-STATE solution seems reasonable on some levels. As seen in a September 2008 publication of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, as Giora Eiland wrote:
This proposal suggests that rather than establishing another Arab state, the parties could return control over most of the West Bank to Jordan. Until recently, such an idea was rejected completely by everyone, especially the Jordanians themselves. Today, however, more and more Jordanians, Palestinians, and Israelis have come to believe that this is the right solution. The main reason for this change of heart is the rise of Hamas. Israel can curb the group’s ascendancy, but only as long as Israel occupies the West Bank. If a Palestinian state is established there, many fear that it would be taken over by Hamas.
During the parliamentary election, Jordanian politicians expressed fears that if the 2010 Israeli-Palestinian direct talks broke down and the Palestinian Authority collapsed, Jordan would be forced to re-absorb the West Bank and grant citizenship to its residents...and concern was also expressed that Israel may prefer this solution over the traditional two-state solution. Jordan, which already has Palestinian majority, would be further cemented as a de facto Palestinian state. That is not something that many are for.....and I agree that trying to say "Jordan is Palestine" doesn't seem to cut it, IMHO.


At one point, Israel's hard-line foreign minister has praised Jordan and condemned talk of it becoming the Palestinian state. At Israel's parliament , Avigdor Lieberman said, "Talk about Jordan as a Palestinian state damages Israel." He praised the neighboring country as a "stabilizing element in the region." Palestinians make up about half of Jordan's population. A fringe minority of Israelis believe a Palestinian state should be founded there. A Lieberman spokesman said he has never said Jordan should be the Palestinian state....more shared here.


What perplexes many is that talk of "Jordan is Palestine" comes after the decades-long political assumption that an independent Palestinian state would be part and parcel of any future peace agreement. At one point, Palestinian statehood seemed a common realization, one that even the U.S. and Israel finally came to terms with. Now, U.S. and Israeli leaders, many of them elected officials or holding senior government positions, openly make public statements not only dismissing right to exist as a people in certain areas.

Indeed, a three state solution may be beneficial

With Hamas controlling the west bank and the Palestinian Authority in control of the other part there are essentially 2 different Palestinian governments neither of which who see eye to eye with each other. Given this it makes a 2 state solution impossible therefore it makes sense to pursue a solution in which Gaza and Palestine become their own separate nations.



Of course, there are factors to consider with having a three state solution. There are serious problems with making peace with the West Bank without Gaza. Firstly, most Israelis are not willing to concede nearly as much to a West Bank that is already reasonably peaceful (for now) when they figure that they will have to make even more concessions to Gaza later. Also, when it comes to land swaps, all Israeli land swap proposals have suggested trading large swathes of sparsely populated territory near Gaza for settlements, since most land near the West Bank is much more heavily populated. That won't work if they are negotiating two separate treaties. Thirdly, many Israelis are worried that the West bank could turn into another Gaza if Israel left. Presumably, this is even more likely if Israel is still at war with half the Palestinians. Fourthly, the Palestinians are always talking about unity agreements, but never seem to manage to make one. However, it has struck many commentators that a great time for unity would be just after Israel had concluded a treaty with the West Bank. Then the West Bank could take what they'd been given, while claiming that, as only half of Palestine signed the treaty, it was invalid, and the Israelis would need to offer more.

That might seem ridiculous, but it's the kind of thing that actually happens in the Middle East.





 
  • Like
Reactions: visionary
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Now, we hear today that Abbas wants to bury the hatchet with Hamas. This means that potentially in the future we could find a unified Palestinian state with an elected Hamas government. Based on the Hamas stated purpose of destroying Israel, this would make any peaceful co-existance impossible. There can be no recoginised Palestinian state until peace and security are guaranteed- and that means the rejection and dismantling of radical Islamist parties and the de-programming of the victims of their campaign of anti-semitic and anti-West propaganda. .

In order for there to be solutions, there has to be realization that people on all sides have often been made to seem homogenous when in fact there are sub-groups within the camps of Israelis and Palestinians who are differing with others and often left out. People make it all as if all in the world of Hamas are representative of Palestinians or as if all Jewish Terrorists represent Israelis all around - and yet for the Palestinians and Jews who've been harmed by all sides and yet still work together for peace/reconcilliation, their voices are often put on mute.

There are others who are Palestinian Zionists..as seen:

Also, there are other Palestinians mistreating others who are themselves Palestinians....as seen in many of the accounts of how Hamas mistreats those who are Palestinians (as many Palestinians are viviously harmed and treated as "dirty" by the radical Muslims and seen as no more than pawns in a chess battle to achieve their own ends in the name of "helping Palestinians"). For more:

Muslim Palestinians persecuting Christian Palestinians - YouTube

Does any of this justify how Israel treats their Christians or Muslims? Absolutely not..but it does show that many automatically taking the side of Palestinians in all conflicts with Israel may not have all the facts.

There are bad things happening on all sides and walking out true peace is a part of finding real solutions.

As Elias Chacour, author of "Blood Brothers" , said best on the matter:
“ You who live in the United States, if you are pro-Israel, on behalf of the Palestinian children I call unto you: give further friendship to Israel. They need your friendship. But stop interpreting that friendship as an automatic antipathy against me, the Palestinian who is paying the bill for what others have done against my beloved Jewish brothers and sisters in the Holocaust and Auschwitz and elsewhere.

And if you have been enlightened enough to take the side of the Palestinians -- oh, bless your hearts -- take our sides, because for once you will be on the right side, right? But if taking our side would mean to become one-sided against my Jewish brothers and sisters, back up. We do not need such friendship. We need one more common friend. We do not need one more enemy, for God's sake.

Brother Elias Chacour, the Melkite Archbishop of Galilee, has literally been amongst the key individuals that seemed to change the minds of MANY so that they'd be open to seeing the ways Jews/Arabs did have peace and were mistreated by Zionists. Internationally known for the school he set up in the Middle East for both Palestinians/Jews---alongside his work as a peacemaker---he has literally galvinized the Protestant movement into action. And for other resources:


I have appreciated the voice of Chacour as well as others who stood up on the same issues plauging things today - such as others like Joseph Raya, one extensively involved in the American civil rights movement, and later, while serving as Archbishop of Akko, Haifa, Nazareth and all Galilee while doing extensive work with Dr. Martin Luther King (as both a co-laborer and dear friend) and other rabbis working for desegration/fair treatment toward both Jews and Blacks. Being a very controversial/radical figure in the church....helping to organize marches/often suffering alongside other blacks, he was twice beaten badly by the Ku Klux Klan....but later sought to emulate Dr.King's example with the marches over in Palestine. For a Video clip of Archbishop Raya leading a peaceful protest, 1972-08-14.




Even though there were and are still others contributing to the problems, it must be remembered that many issues people bring up with Jews/Palestinians not getting along are often engineered and were never there at all times. Arabs who lived alongside the Jews in the area for centuries/had peace at many differing points (as well as intermarriages...leading to Arab Jews) were not against Jews coming into the land since they felt they were "Blood Brothers" and needed to get along. Many were of the mindset that the Lord wanted Jew/Gentile to live together--and many villages in Gallilee and Bethlehem have discussed that often. There has always been a Jewish prescence there...especially in Trans-Jordan
To this day, there're still plenty of Jews who are adamantly against the way the government treats others in the name of defending Jews...as for them, it has never been about Islam against Judaism or Jew against Arab--but all about power misused.



It may sound bad saying it..but I do think that part of the struggle for many Palestinians is having to deal with realizing that they may be on the side of a losing battle when it comes to trying to remain in the land and being caught on all sides - be it with Hamas in its own actions (as well as the mistreatment by many Palestinian Muslims toward Palestinians Christians) or the actions of the Israeli government in despising Palestinians in general and the U.S which often doesn't seem to be aggressive in aiding it.

I do think there's wisdom in noting the ways that arguing for a Two-State Solution may not be feasible in light of how the areas are set up for Palestinians in Israel...and seeing how the government doesn't want them to integrate as equals. There may be more of a need for nationalism that calls for them to look elsewhere rather than trying to do things on the terms of Israel.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
The Arabs that live there who are now called "Palestinians" are most likely not all related with the Philistines. In fact, I read recently that something like 86% have Jewish DNA mixed in there!
There are many good discussions/research that've been done on the issue to show the many way that Palestinians and Jews have always been intertwined in a myriad of ways.


All things on the planet happen with God's permisison and according to His plan. So, if the Arabs are there, then the Arabs are there. If He wanted the "Jews to maintain it until He comes to reign from Jerusalem", then He's done a lousy job. Seems to me that He pretty much wanted the majority of Jews out of there for nearly 2000 years!

I think perhaps a re-evaluation of such an eschatology could be in order. Might also be worth taking a look at how God's sovereignty is understood too. :)
Addressing the issue of Christian Zionism would make a world of difference on the matter in light of how much it influences political decisions and arguing for policies against the Palestinians in the name of supporting the Jewish people, as if you have to curse an Arab in order to bless a Jew or acting as if any violation of human rights toward another people is justified as long as it's done to protect Jewish people.

There are many good resources that've been made available to help others in addressing those within Evangelical culture addressing the errors of others who are literally trying to justify/shape dangerous mindsets that allow for mess to be done in Israel.



There are other interesting resources from others such as NT Wright:

As said in one of Wright's books:
He [Jesus] had not come to rehabilitate the symbol of the holy land, but to subsume it within a different fulfillment of the kingdom, which would embrace the whole creation. …Jesus spent his whole ministry redefining what the kingdom meant. He refused to give up the symbolic language of the kingdom, but filled it with such new content that, as we have seen, he powerfully subverted Jewish expectations.
Jesus and the Victory of God (London: SPCK: 1996), 446, 471. 17.

Through the Messiah and the preaching which heralds him, Israel is transformed from being an ethnic people into a worldwide family
The Climax of the Covenant (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 240. 18.
Those who now belonged to Jesus’ people were not identical with ethnic Israel, since Israel’s history had reached its intended fulfillment; they claimed to be the continuation of Israel in a new situation, able to draw on Israel-images to express their self-identity, able to read Israel’s Scriptures (through the lens of Messiah and spirit) and apply them to their own life. They were thrust out by that claim, and that reading, to fulfill Israel’s vocation on behalf of the world
The New Testament and the People of God (London: SPCK, 1992), 457–58.

With the New Perspective of Paul, one of the central issues in debate is how is it that others are to see Israel--for whereas many see Paul supporting what most people in Christian Zionism do with saying the physical land of Israel is only for Jews/all others must leave, those seeing Paul as being open to it being more diverse fall on the other side of the debate and feel that Paul truly was for Judaism and yet felt that others disqualified themselves from inheriting it if they did not trust in Messiah...and that Paul would've been a Jewish theologian/consistent with the viewpoint just as there are others today who are in Judaism (such as many Orthodox Jews protesting against the State of Israel) and yet believe that those claiming Israel should be supported by all are wrong since they feel that they are currently in disobediance to what the Lord commanded to the Hebrews on what it took to remain in the Land.


N.T. Wright has often come up in regards to others who may be against Zionism, as his NPP views are often used in support of others saying that Israel itself is far too restrictive and justifying of things done toward others that are not Biblical. There was actually a conference on the issue where I believe Wright may've been in attendance called "Christ at Checkpoint." For more:





Personally, I'm more than for the thought of how believers are to be in prayer for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122), although I'm also not of the mindset that all things done in the name of Jerusalem were ever things that the Lord himself was ever pleased with....or things he called us to support at the expense of knowing how to truly love others....an more of this was discussed elsewhere in other threads critiquing aspects of Zionism that've been damaging...and some of this reminds me of what others have noted when it comes to their own critiques of Christian Zionism. For reference, one can go here in regards to what others such as John Hagaee and other Zionists do when having a Mercenary mindset toward Israel starting war so as to bring back Messsiah (more here in #14 , #24 and #72 )as discussed more in-depth in threads such as "Standing with Israel" /Obama calls for a return to pre-1967 Israel and Beautiful Video on Jews and Arabs in Messiah.. .

Even apart from that, from a Biblical perspective, some of the very arguments used by Zionists to support all things done in the name of Israel don't line up. As seen in Zionist Logic -- Malcolm X on Zionism/here, Malcolm X correctly identified the Messianic nature of Zionism, its insistence on the theft of Palestine, its desire to rule the world with a rod of iron (Numbers 24:17-20. Psalm 2:9), the fact that the Jews were not permitted to enter Palestine en masse until their Messiah had arrived (Leviticus 26. Deuteronomy 4:24-27; 28:15-68; 30:1-3. II Chronicles 7:19-22. Jeremiah 29:1-7. Kethuboth 111a).

To be fair...to say that the return of the Jews was without SPIRITUAL significance would be error, though...and with the Spiritual/Political aspects being renconciled, my own view is that there are connections between Israel and the Israeli State. Eschatology wise, from what I can understand, it does seem scripture notes that at one point it will return in a state of UNBELIEF in the Messiah or His ways...which would lead to much violence/war AND doing things God said He hated....and all of this is in addition to the fact that there'll always be a Remnant of true Jewish believers who are persecuted by an unbelieving state (more shared here in #52 /#49 and #47 ).

It is possible that the land having others come back to it in disbelief has not been seen yet and was never intended to have others come back to it in the way/manner in which the nation has been established. On the issue, one view that comes to mind is what the scriptures also discuss---in line with the reality of multiple gatherings--that there are many for the view of 2 worldwide gatherings that believe the present state of Israel is in no way a fulfillment of those prophecies that speak of a worldwide regathering in faith in preparation for blessing...but rather a fulfillment of those prophecies that speak of a worldwide regathering in unbelief in preparation for judgement. Ariel Ministries discussed it best, IMHO, as seen in their article entitled THE MODERN STATE OF ISRAEL IN BIBLE PROPHECY.....concerning the passages of scripture that deal with the issue.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

xDenax

Jewish
Jul 20, 2009
3,675
378
United States
✟13,510.00
Country
United States
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Easy G (G²);61893786 said:
On what is this map based given that Palestinians have NEVER had their own state? Also, I find it difficult to believe they were inhabiting all that space when there is desert out there.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
On what is this map based given that Palestinians have NEVER had their own state? .
Where was anything mentioned on statehood as it concerns the areas Palestinians resided in? Map wasn't based on the concept of Palestinians having their own state as much as it was based on the areas they inhabited BEFORE the mass immigrations of Jewish people into the Holy Land (as they were amongst the biggest residents in the times the Jews were predominately absent for ages in the area).
I find it difficult to believe they were inhabiting all that space when there is desert out there
There were many areas in Israel historically that included desert areas where people lived - including those who are nomadic...and other parts of those areas were cultivated, counter to the myth that the land was largely "uninhabited"
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Qnts2

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2012
1,323
111
✟2,056.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Easy G (G²);61893786 said:
For the situation to really improve, IMHO, Israel would need to return some or much of the land they have invaded over the years since at this point the areas controlled by Palestinians are tiny and too fragmented to work as a nation. A major part of what makes life as a Palestinian difficult is having to move between these islands of Palestinian lands since passage is often disrupted by checkpoints and other Israeli belligerence.

A couple of points.

Israel did not invade. Israel was attacked and defended itself successfully.

To use the term invaded is absolutely invalid. Actually it was Israel that was invaded. Just because Israel was successful at turning back the invaders was miraculous as they are always greatly outnumbered by the surrounding invading countries.

In 1967, Syria was bombing Israel from the Golan heights which belonged to Syria. In defense, Israel had to stop Syrian bombs and marched on the Golan Heights capturing that territory.

Egypt had attacked at the same time and Israel, fighting larger armies on two borders successfully drove the Egyptians back, taking control of the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip.

Jordan also attacked Israel in the 1967 war from the west bank, and Israel successfuly drove Jordan back.

So it was not Israel who initiated or invaded these territories but actually Egypt, Syria and Jordan who were invading Israel. None of this area was owned by any so called Palestinians.

In exchange for a peace treaty, Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, and offered to return the other lands to their respective countries in exchange for peace.

What makes life difficult for Palestinians (they didn't call themselves Palestinians until 1964)? Well, they were lied to by their own people, the Arabs. Jordan never took the land back because they were tired of dealing with Arafat and wanted no more of that kind of trouble. All Arafat wanted was to fight Israel.

So, the Arab people living in the land captured became political pawns of those who wanted to claim the land of Israel.

In 1948, the number vary widely from about 460,000 to about 750,000 Palestinian Arabs left the land being transferred to Israel. This is heavily propagandized but these people were encouraged to leave by the Arab countries. About 850,000 Jews who lived in the Arab countries were heavily persecuted and forced out and they moved to the land being transferred to the Jewish people. So to say that Israel was an Arab owned land in 1948, is entirely inaccurate.

In Israel proper, the number of Jewish people was steadily growing, to the point that the Arabs protested because the number of Jewish people was going to quickly exceed the number of Arabs, making England bend, and restrict immigration of Jewish people to England controlled Palestine. It was in this situation that Nazi Germany came to power and Jewish people desparately tried to escape to Israel, but were turned back by the British.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
A

aniello

Guest
A couple of points.

Israel did not invade. Israel was attacked and defended itself successfully.

To use the term invaded is absolutely invalid. Actually it was Israel that was invaded. Just because Israel was successful at turning back the invaders was miraculous as they are always greatly outnumbered by the surrounding invading countries.

In 1967, Syria was bombing Israel from the Golan heights which belonged to Syria. In defense, Israel had to stop Syrian bombs and marched on the Golan Heights capturing that territory.

Egypt had attacked at the same time and Israel, fighting larger armies on two borders successfully drove the Egyptians back, taking control of the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip.

Jordan also attacked Israel in the 1967 war from the west bank, and Israel successfuly drove Jordan back.

So it was not Israel who initiated or invaded these territories but actually Egypt, Syria and Jordan. None of this area was owned by any so called Palestinians.

In exchange for a peace treaty, Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, and offered to return the other lands to their respective countries in exchange for peace.

What makes life difficult for Palestinians (they didn't call themselves Palestinians until 1964)? Well, they were lied to by their own people, the Arabs. Jordan never took the land back because they were tired of dealing with Arafat and wanted no more of that kind of trouble. All Arafat wanted was to fight Israel.

So, the Arab people living in the land captured became political pawns of those who wanted to claim the land of Israel.

In 1948, the number vary widely from about 460,000 to about 750,000 Palestinian Arabs left the land being transferred to Israel. This is heavily propagandized but these people were encouraged to leave by the Arab countries. About 850,000 Jews who lived in the Arab countries were heavily persecuted and forced out and they moved to the land being transferred to the Jewish people. So to say that Israel was an Arab owned land in 1948, is entirely inaccurate.

In Israel proper, the number of Jewish people was steadily growing, to the point that the Arabs protested because the number of Jewish people was going to quickly exceed the number of Arabs, making England bend, and restrict immigration of Jewish people to England controlled Palestine. It was in this situation that Nazi Germany came to power and Jewish people desparately tried to escape to Israel, but were turned back by the British.

Very good and concisely accurate statement of facts as they actually occurred.

Thank you for the good hard work. Very objective, no spin. Good!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
A couple of points.

Israel did not invade. Israel was attacked and defended itself successfully.

To use the term invaded is absolutely invalid. Actually it was Israel that was invaded. .
Couple of points..

Claiming "Israel did not invade" is a slogan, not an historical answer - and one that many Israelis/Jews have long noted when it came to the actual ways that the Israeli government was initially set up and the many apart of the Israeli Defense Forces who have long protested the issue in regards to military occupation. The same thing has been noted when it comes to he Orthodox Jews known as Neturei Karta , who have always brought some interesting factors to the mix. The Satmar Orthodox sect of Judaism and certain other Orthodox Jews, who form the Neturei Karta movement against Zionism, do not support an Israeli state due to its formation by people instead of according to G-d's Messianic prophecy...as they feel the state was made by the hands of man/forced through means counter to God's expressed laws on how to treat aliens/sojourners and not look to military force for security....even though the vast majority of Orthodox Jews (Traditional, Modern, Hasidic Haredi, and non-Hasidic Haredi) do support both Israel and Zionism.

And it's not surprising seeing the responses of many Jewish groups since the founding of the Israeli State, as they were concerned for consistency with the Torah/Tanak and felt that it was a direct violation on the parts of the British Zionists/other Jewish terrorist groups to found the nation by force/violence - thus meaning they set up a false nation in parallel to what the Lord intended and they tried to force the hand of God ahead of time rather than waiting for Him to deliver them. And others have noted that they wrongly sought to dominante the land by immigrating en masse before the Messiah was revealed.









Zionism was created in the 20th Century by Theodor Herzl. And Herzl's stance has caused damage on several fronts, IMHO. For more, one can look up the following:
A different perspective to consider, if I may offer, is from Messianic Jew Jerry Golden, who seeks to explains more on the situation in Zionist state of Israel in this article from 31 Dec 2003. This article may be old but still pretty relevant, IMHO, when considering many of the ways that there have been darker aspects present in the history of the Israeli state and many influences that were never of the Lord...some of it involving imagery/symbolism in many sites all over the nation that are connected with FreeMasonry (and similar to what was discussed here ).

History is history and cannot be selectively dealt with when it comes to addressing the ways things were set up. The colonial British Mandate over Palestine helped in the rocky transition to the state of Israel, which was recognized after WWII by among others Europe and the United States, both who bore guilt either for past abuses to Jews or for a desire to avoid an immigrant burden on their own nation. It worked out well for everyone — except, of course, the Palestinian and Arab Muslims who lived in Palestine. Militaristic Jews in groups like the Irgun undertook ethnic cleansing and other “terrorist” activities in the years after World War Two. The upshot was the Jewish State of Israel — in a land that had earlier encompassed both Arab and Jew in a less-than-perfect, but much more ecumenical fashion. It was no less a case of “manifest destiny” than the American expansion westward on this continent. The result was a nation that consisted of a conquering people and a defeated, subjugated people. The losers in this struggle were relegated in many cases to permanent refugee camps in the land their families and ancestors had been raised in.

Hate will always seek to produce more hate..and the ways that hatred has been developed between Palestinians and Jews is not necessary.

And amazingly, when a Holocaust is done on one people, it often can shape future generations to assume that anything to do to prevent other Holocausts toward their people are justified - even if what they do is Holocaust to others.

As another brother in the Lord noted best on the issue when seeing the irony of what Israel is doing:
When the Nazis locked up Polish Jews in a ghetto, it was genocide. When Israeli's steal land from Palestinians and lock them up in a ghetto, its A-Okay

How is this:
30357049.jpg


Different than this:
30010020%20WG.jpg



When the Nazis forced the Jews to wear identification, it was considered part of their genocidal plan.

When the Israelis force the Palestinians to have a similar type of identification (which they have to have if they want to move around anywhere), it is A-Okay.

This card restricts where you can go, despite being born in the area (in this case, East Jerusalem)
blog33.jpg


This card did too:
id_card.jpg




Auschwitz survivor claims there are many similarities: :: www.uruknet.info :: informazione dal medio oriente :: information from middle east :: [vs-1]




Now, couple that with other things:

Use of human shields by Israel
Attacking Peaceful Protesters
Cutting off a people groups food supply and lively hood
Denying access to critical health care
Denying access to religious and cultural sites (while demolishing other sites and placing Israeli homes on top of it)
Taking land from a people group and displacing the people, while putting their own people there and declaring it part of their own land.



We have seen this all before. I don't like to godwin. But when you have so specific similarities (not the vague ones that people throw around), it is critical that we recognize what we have seen in the past, and what we see now....
any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2
The UN also says this about ethnic cleansing:
rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group

.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Qnts2

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2012
1,323
111
✟2,056.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Easy G (G²);61895008 said:
Couple of points..

Claiming "Israel did not invade" is a slogan, not an historical answer - and one that many Israelis/Jews have long noted when it came to the actual ways that the Israeli government was initially set up and the many apart of the Israeli Defense Forces who have long protested the issue in regards to military occupation. The same thing has been noted when it comes to he Orthodox Jews known as Neturei Karta , who have always brought some interesting factors to the mix. The Satmar Orthodox sect of Judaism and certain other Orthodox Jews, who form the Neturei Karta movement against Zionism, do not support an Israeli state due to its formation by people instead of according to G-d's Messianic prophecy...as they feel the state was made by the hands of man/forced through means counter to God's expressed laws on how to treat aliens/sojourners and not look to military force for security....even though the vast majority of Orthodox Jews (Traditional, Modern, Hasidic Haredi, and non-Hasidic Haredi) do support both Israel and Zionism.

And it's not surprising seeing the responses of many Jewish groups since the founding of the Israeli State, as they were concerned for consistency with the Torah/Tanak and felt that it was a direct violation on the parts of the British Zionists/other Jewish terrorist groups to found the nation by force/violence - thus meaning they set up a false nation in parallel to what the Lord intended and they tried to force the hand of God ahead of time rather than waiting for Him to deliver them. And others have noted that they wrongly sought to dominante the land by immigrating en masse before the Messiah was revealed.

Were Jews persecuted in the Arab world before the advent of Zionism?



Zionism was created in the 20th Century by Theodor Herzl. And Herzl's stance has caused damage on several fronts, IMHO. For more, one can look up the following:
A different perspective to consider, if I may offer, is from Messianic Jew Jerry Golden, who seeks to explains more on the situation in Zionist state of Israel in this article from 31 Dec 2003. This article may be old but still pretty relevant, IMHO, when considering many of the ways that there have been darker aspects present in the history of the Israeli state and many influences that were never of the Lord...some of it involving imagery/symbolism in many sites all over the nation that are connected with FreeMasonry (and similar to what was discussed here ).

History is history and cannot be selectively dealt with when it comes to addressing the ways things were set up.

Hate will always seek to produce more hate..

And amazingly, when a Holocaust is done on one people, it often can shape future generations to assume that anything to do to prevent other Holocausts toward their people are justified - even if what they do is Holocaust to others.

As another brother in the Lord noted best on the issue when seeing the irony of what Israel is doing:

Sorry, but the initial attacking forces were Egypt, Syria and Jordan which by all standards classifies them as the invaders.

As far as the Satmars, they are known to be extreme and radical. I wouldn't trust their view or history as at all accurate.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Sorry, but the initial attacking forces were Egypt, Syria and Jordan which by all standards classifies them as the invaders.

As far as the Satmars, they are known to be extreme and radical. I wouldn't trust their view or history as at all accurate.
Doesn't deal with history, Q..especially seeing how many other forces were ALREADY involved beyond the ones you selectivly addressed. And that has long been noted repeatedly by Israelis/other Jewish leaders for a LONG time...seeing that it was never just the Satmars who were the only ones noting as they did. It goes back to the issue of how much of history has been consistently left out and not addressed.


There's no way of getting around the reality of how many of the Prime Ministers in Israel's history had JUST as much hatred as any Palestinian Terrorists. One of the biggest examples is how Ex prime minister, Shamir, was originally a member of the Jewish terrorist gang called Irgun, which was headed by none other than Menachem Begin. Shamir later moved over to the even more radical "Stern Gang," which committed many vicious atrocities.

Count Folke Bernadotte, who was appointed by the United Nations to mediate between disputing Arabs and Jewish settlers, was assassinated in cold blood in September of 1948. The man who organized the assassination was Yitzhak Shamir who later became prime minister of Israel...and many other things were done besides that (including approaching people like Hitler/the Nazi's seeking aid)-----things that many Jews have repeatedly spoken against and condemned, paticularly in light of how many JEWISH children were harmed as well by Jewish terrorists..

And as said before, there were many radical Jewish (as well as Non-Jewish Zionists) involved who harmed many Arabs who had homes...including Arab Jews who also had ties to the land/were stewards of it.

Inaugurated in 1920 and ending in 1947, the British Mandate for Palestine was the product of 1) British political ambitions to replace the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, 2) Britain’s promises of colonial control to the French in the region, and 3) conflicting British promises of self-determination to the Arabs and Jewish statehood for Zionists. The British ruled Palestine under the League of Nations Mandate which followed Britain’s Balfour Declaration of 1917, whose unilateral principle was “the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people,” in Biblical Palestine


In the 11 years leading up to the creation of the state of Israel in Palestine in 1948, Zionist extremists who lived in the territory of Palestine under the British Mandate used terrorism as a military strategy to accelerate the establishment of an independent Jewish state. Their violence was directed against the British authorities who governed Palestine and against the Palestinian indigenous population throughout Palestine. Over 57 violent attacks were carried out by Zionist terrorist groups (e.g. Haganah, Lehi, Irgun– ultra-nationalist groups from the far right wing of the Revisionist Zionist movement) killing over 5,000 Palestinians and dozens of British.


While Zionist terrorist groups assassinated UN personnel, murdered British officers and attacked British military headquarters to overthrow the Mandate, they terrorized Palestinian inhabitants in order to provoke mass flight, displacement and migration.



Prominent Zionist Terrorist Groups during the Mandate period included:
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]The Irgun (Etzel)[/FONT][/FONT]: Known as the National Military Organization and the Military sector of the Revisionist movement, the Irgun stated that “political violence and terrorism” were “legitimate tools in the Jewish national struggle for the Land of Israel.” Their attacks included:

• Al-Quds massacre, December 1937: Member of the Irgun hurled a hand grenade at the marketplace near al-Quds mosque, killing and injuring dozens.



• Haifa massacre, March 1938: Members of the Irgun and Lehi gang throw grenades at Haifa market, killing 18, and injuring 38.


• Haifa massacre, July 1938: The Irgun explodes booby trapped vehicles in Haifa market, killing 21 and injuring 52.

• Balad El-Sheik Village Attack, June 1939: This Palestinian village was attacked by members of the Haganah, the Main Jewish Defense. Five villagers were kidnapped and murdered.


• King David Hotel Bombing, July 1946: Led by Menachem Begin, the Irgun planned and carried out the bombing of the King David Hotel, the British military headquarters in Jerusalem in July 1946 in order to destroy documents proving the terrorist campaigns of Zionist groups. The attack killed 28 Britons, 17 Jews, 41 Palestinians and 5 others for a total of 91 victims.

• Attack on the British Officers’ Club at Goldschmidt House, March 1947: This Jerusalem attack killed 17 British military and intelligence officers.

• Kidnapping and murder of British Soldiers, July 1947: This attack which led to the murder of two British sergeants in Netanya was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Very soon afterward, the British abandoned the British Mandate, turning Palestine over to the UN.

• Bombing of the Jerusalem Railway Station, October 1947: The Irgun bombed the Jerusalem Railway Station in addition to mining roads and attacking army vehicles.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]The Stern Gang[/FONT][/FONT]: Founded by Avraham Stern in 1939, the Stern Gang was an eccentric group which even sought contact with the Nazis in order to subvert British control in the Middle East. Under Stern, the group conducted robberies and attempted assassinations against the British. Stern is also noted for his “Eighteen Principles of National Renewal,” which articulated an expansionist mandate of Zionism, claiming a Jewish state from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates in Iraq (discussed here ).


[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]The Lehi: [/FONT][/FONT]After the British assassinated Stern in 1942, his followers regrouped as an underground movement called the Lehi, acronym for Fighters for the Freedom of Israel:

•

Assassination of Lord Moyne, November 1944: Assassinated in Cairo, Egypt, Lord Moyne was the highest ranking British government representative in the Middle East at the time. The Lehi targeted him because of his support for a Middle Eastern Arab Federation.
• Cairo-Haifa Train Bombings, Early 1948: A few months before the 1948 Israeli-Arab war, the Cairo-Haifa train was bombed several times, attacks claimed by or attributed to the Lehi. An attack in February killed 28 British soldiers, and wounded 35 more. An attack in March killed 40 civilians, and wounded 60 more.

• Deir Yassin Massacre, April 1948: Commandos of Lehi and Irgun headed by Menachim Begin attacked Deir Yassin, a village of 700 Palestinians, ultimately killing between 100 and 120 villagers.




The Master Mind behind the Deir Yassin massacre, Begin justified the attack in his book The Revolt:
" [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]Arabs throughout the country, induced to believe wild tales of ‘Irgun butchery,’ were seized with limitless panic and started to flee for their lives. This mass flight soon developed into a maddened, uncontrollable stampede. The political and economic significance of this development can hardly be overestimated."



  • Assassination of Count Folke Bernadotte, September, 1948: Count Bernadotte, a UN Peace mediator who had come to the Middle East 1948 to modify the Palestine partition plan in an effort to resolve Arab-Jewish disputes, was also assassinated by the group.
  • • A Legacy of Assassinations: More than any other Jewish terrorist group, Lehi was known for using assassinations as a terror mechanism, even using them against Jews they accused of being traitors. Lehi carried out 42 assassinations, more than twice as many as the Irgun and the Haganah combined. Of its politically-motivated assassinations, over half of them were carried out against other Jews.
[/FONT]

[/FONT]
Most of the Zionist terrorist groups transitioned from underground terrorist groups to political mainstreams parties rapidly with the founding of Israel in May, 1948. (Note, however, that some groups continued to operate even after May, 1948, e.g.assassination of Count Bernadotte in September, 1948 as mentioned earlier.) Menachim Begin transformed the Irgun into a political party called Herut. The Lehi became the Moledet party which todaycontinues to openly advocate the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza,territories now occupied by Israel. Paradoxically, terrorist leaders Menachim Begin and Yitzhak Shamir later became Prime Ministers of Israel – their political heirs now forming part of the political establishment of Israel in certain ways..

There's an excellent read on the issue, on the dangers of Zionism, entitled Political assassinations by Jews: a rhetorical device for justice - ( seen here ). There were MANY who stayed, not caring to get involved in the battles...and many who were outside the country were protesting to the British government about how many Arabs/Jews alike were being mistreated. When many came home, they were told they could not be citizens--even though they initially left due to seeing how their homes were either destroyed or confiscated and they wished to go through due process.


 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
To use the term invaded is absolutely invalid. Actually it was Israel that was invaded. Just because Israel was successful at turning back the invaders was miraculous as they are always greatly outnumbered by the surrounding invading countries.

In 1967, Syria was bombing Israel from the Golan heights which belonged to Syria. In defense, Israel had to stop Syrian bombs and marched on the Golan Heights capturing that territory.

Egypt had attacked at the same time and Israel, fighting larger armies on two borders successfully drove the Egyptians back, taking control of the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip.

Jordan also attacked Israel in the 1967 war from the west bank, and Israel successfuly drove Jordan back.

So it was not Israel who initiated or invaded these territories but actually Egypt, Syria and Jordan who were invading Israel. None of this area was owned by any so called Palestinians. .
There are still a host of things that were left out in the analysis given by yourself when speaking on the issue of occupation and only focusing on certain countries rather than the whole issue.


What follows is the best attempt to give a general overview of the history of what went down before 1948---as the issue is not as simple as many try to make it...and to be clear, much of this is my attempt at transcribing what was said in the book "Blood Brothers."

In 1897, a conference had convened in Basle, Switzwland, to lay the foundation stone of the house which was to shelter the Jewish nation. The director of the gathering was a prominent writer named Theodor Herzl. He had fathered in Europe a new political movement called "Zionism:---an inspiring movement that hoped to rescue the downtrodden, impoverished and humilated Jews in the Big City Ghettos.....and by the end of the conference, the delagates had agreed on two points----a flag and an anthem, the symbols of their unity and purpose. Where there was a split, however, was the location of this homeland that was being pushed by the leadership: Palestine.

Immediately, many disputed Herzl's statement that Palestine was a "land without a people, waiting for a people without a land."..and though Herzl had been unwilling to contemplate settlement in Argentina or Uganda as alternatives. his sights were clearly set on the Middle East. It was to this proposal that many delegates primarily and strenously objected.....for by what right could Zionist expect to create a state in Palestine since it was a land with established borders and, more importantly, it had long been inhabited by people of an ancient, respectable culture. A homeland in Palestine, they declared, with the overtones of a dark prophecy, would have to be forgotten--or else established by force/physical might.

Devout Jews within and without the movement---paticularly the Orthodox--fervently argued that the Zionism Movement was a blasphemy because the elite, non-religous Jews felt that Zionism was the only Messiah that Israel would ever hadve. Such talk incensed the religious, as did the hints of milatarism that had already colored the fringes of th emovement. Other less religous Jews---and pragmatic---believed that Zionism would feed Anti-Semitism since it underscored the long-criticized "exclusiveness" of the Jewish people.....and therefore, to appease the religous consciences, the Zionist leaders adopted the principles of non-violence embodied in the Jewish Havlaga. This helped to rally the support of the masses, the multiple millions who desperately hoped for an escape from the growing pogroms against them in Europe. Yet leaders continued to formulate designs on Palestine.......

In Palestine, there were other factors tying into the set-up of the State of Israel that many forget. For in the early 1900's, they were also a downtrodden people, struggling for freedom from their oppressors-----the Turkish Ottoman Empire---which had ruled over them for hundreds of years.......though the empire had already begun to crumble when World War I engulfed the Middle East. After the war, as the empire crumbled, the Palestinian people felt the first winds of freedom...and the League of Nations bore their hopes alof further by proposing a plan that would help "subject peoples." Larger, powerful nations would assist weaker ones in establishing their own independent governments....also known as the Mandate System.

The British desired a foothold of power in the Middle East, saw the Mandate system as a great opportunity and secertly made a proposal to Palestinian leaders-----for the British would help oust the Turks...and in return, they would set up a temporary Mandate Government in Palestine with the promise that they would slowly withdraw..leaving an established, independent countery governed by the Palestinians themselves. In desperation, the Palestinian leaders agreed to this strategy---thinking freedom was in sight----and little notice was given to the tiny Jewish agricultural communuties that were sprouting in a seemingly scattered fashion across the landscape.


Once the British Rule was established, however, things got VERY convuluted with political intrigues/double-dealings. For immediately, the British met in secret with the French and Russians to divine the Middle East into "spheres of influence" with Palestine to be governed, not by the people of Palestine as promised, but by an international administration....and this secret agreement was uncovered several years later in 1917, when the Bolseheviks overthrew the czarist regime and could not resist making such "imperalist" duplicity public. Palestinian leaders were dismayed at this news...and at once, delegates to the British were sent to protest. They chose the diplomatic route while an elite began influencing British bureaucrats.

By the year of 1917, the Zionists had allied themselves with Great Britian's Christian Restorationists---a group that believed that they might bring to pass--by manipulating world events and reestablishing the nation of Israel---the Second Coming of Christ. The Zionist ignored the view---but the benefits of the plan were obvious...as they saw in Britain's new hold on Palestine their secret inroad to the Middle EAST.....and thus began their strange marriage between Zionist and Restorationist. In 1917, the British Lord Artur Balfour wrote that the Cabinent "viewed with favor the establishment of a national home of the Jewish people" in Palestine...and in the same letter, he reclassified the people of Palestine----ninety two percent of the population---as "Non-Jewish" communities." Not only did he nrnege on the promise of independence...but it effectively handed over Palestine to the Zionist.

The prime mover behind the British decision was the Zionist leader, Chaim Weizmann...and with Lord Balfour, some say he was acting out of his own religious convictions/love for the Jewish people. That, however, seems far-fecthced since in 1906 he played a major part in passsing the Aliens Act----which expressly sought to exclude Jews from Great Britain. Additionally, HE WAS not oblivious of the political trechery in which he involved Himself. As said in a memorandum to the British Cabinet in 1919:
In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country. So far as Palestine is concerned, (we) have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong,....and no declaration of policy which at least in the letter (we) have not always intended to violate
At once, Palestinian leaders were dismayed...and for sixteen years they continually presented their fears to the British through diplomatic channels, appealing continually to royal commissions while unrest grew throughout Palestine. And the Zionist, funded by international money collected by the Jewish Agency, rapidly settled kibbutzim in a clearer and clearer pattern throughout Palestine...slowly forming the skeletal outlines of the land they meant to declare as their own homeland. Through the 1920's, European immigration to Palestine rose dramatically and the Zionist leaders becamse less guared about their plan. As Weizmann told an American secretary of state, "I hope Palestine would ultimatelty become as Jewish as England is English." Also, as another Zionist leader told British official, "There can be only one National Home in Palestine..and that a Jewish one and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs..but a Jewish predominance as soon as the numbers of that race are sufficiently increased."

Continued in Next Post
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Easy G (G²) Through the 1920's, European immigration to Palestine rose dramatically
[/quote]

Continuning from before as it concerns addressment of other historical factors left out when talking on the history of Palestine and what occurred with its Jewish-Arab population (and to note, saying Arabs were a large majority in Israel isn't remotely the same as saying that Israel was "Arab-Owned" when it comes to the amazing amount of Arabs who were kicked out).

Increasingly, many Zionists themselves were ill at ease with those who insisted on Jewish "predomiance" in Palestine. In example, Yitzhak Epstein---an agriculturist, had warned an international congress of the Zionist Party that they had WRONGLY consulted every political power that held sway over Palestine without consulting the Palestinians peasants themselves. He feared the fact that Palestinian peasants had already lost so much land as a result of Zionist purchases from absentee landlords..and that this loos was sure to breed resentment. He argued that since the incoming Jews were bringing with them a higher standard of livng, they ought to help the Palestinians to find their own identity.....to open to them the new Jewish hospitals, schools and reading rooms that were already in existence or in planing stages. And when institutions for higher education were established, the Jews could stregthen their old fraternal bonds with surrounding Arab Nations by opening these schools to their students. Many Palestinians, aware of Jews coming back to the land, were more than welcome to the idea of helping them out-----for as countless Arab Christians understood alongside other Jews, the Jews and Palestinians are BLOOD Brothers...and are to look out for one another.

Unfortunately, Epstein was severelty opposed...and though his vision of unity between Arab and Jew was overlooked by the Zionist main body, others would take up his cause until Zionism itself was riddled with factions. By the end of the 1920's, a group calling themselves Brit Shalom split from the Partyy, because they could no longer go along with the tatic of disenfranchising the Palestinians from their land in order to set up a Jewish Homeland. Sadly, this group was also largely ignored.....and on the issue, All Jews did not hate Palestinians. In fact, many recognized their brotherhood with them and had come to Palestine with hands extended in friendship.

By the 1930's, with the influx of European settlers rising greatly---and no intervention by the British, with the plan to displace the Palestinian people in motion, the Palestinian people might as well have been mute. No one was listening..and by 1935, port cities like Jaffa had anti-immigration demonstrations erupred into violence...in which both Palestinian and Jewish immigrants pesants died. The following year in 1936, Palestinian leaders again tried peaceful means of protest--calling for a general strike as truck drivers disappeared from their jobs/crippling the economy...though that was brought with bad results as well..with the protests crushed by the end of 1938. Outside of them, I'm aware of other groups that have done much violence/damage. As said before, the Histraduth Trade Union., ESTABLISHED BY the Zionists and led by David Ben Gurion were known for terrorizing Jewish shop and factory owners who dared to employ Palestinians..with it being the case that here and there, Jewish women were attacked in the marketplaces for buying from Palestinian merchants.....and Palestinian fields and vineyards were vandalized.

By that time the Zionist had behind them an overwhelming swell of world sympathy. This was true for two reasons. First, Western Nations were littled concerned with the events in the Middle East since they were fixated on the horror spreading from Nazi GFermany...and secondly, they were appaled at the insane hatred of the Jewish people propagated by Adolf Hitler. Rightly, the Jews wanted/needed somewhere to escape from this madman. But throughout the 1930's. when Hitler's pogroms thrived, no major Western nation increased its quota of Jewish immigrants. For was the tiny land of Palestine expected to absorb millions of Jews, with its inhabitants giving up land and jobs while the large Western Nations were comfortably silent?

To be clear, the terrified masses of Jewish immigrants were never to blame for the tragedy of the Palestinan plighy...as they were dazed by fear, desperate to escape the heinous death camps.....but just as sad is that in this way, they were to become pawns of the Zionist leaders. Upon their arrival in Palestine, they were quickly indoctrinated against their so-called new enemy---the Palestinians.

The second bastion of Zionist power was progradanda....for increasingly, they controlled all news emanating from Palestine...and with the Palestinian leader's voices put on "mute", it was easy to control Western opinion through the press, obscuring the real issues. The protests of 1936-38, were renamed "The Arab Rebellion." Palestinians, who were in any other country being overtaken by a foreign force would have been called "freedom fighters, were "terrorists" and "guerillas."

Hence, why many Palestinans found around the world that they were slandered before they even met others. Other attrocities went down, indicating Zionist POWER IN Palestine....as seen in how the strong Zionist underground---the Haganah----were trained by the British effectively in special brands of violence and then turned against British soldiers/government workers in Palestine. With that being the case, its should have not been a surprise that the Ingrun bombed the King David Hotel...killing over one hundred people.

World War II forced a lull in the struggle for Palestine...but for Zionist leaders, it was never in question. Later, the power push shifted from Britan to the U.S since the British primarly had shown themselves reluctant to impose a Jewish state on Palestine....and were severely weakened, as it was unweildy/expensive to continue governing Palestine...and the Zionist had gained all but total control of munitions factories/industries. As the U.S had emerged as the leader of the Free World--and America had a STRONG lobby of new Zionist supporters..

When President Roosevelt was in office, he had resisted the pressure of Zionists, unwilling to see the Palestinians displaced from their homeland. He felt tremedous compassion for the half-millipn survivors who were expected to emerge from the Holocaust...but he had in mind a wonderfully humatarian plan top open the free world to these victims...offering them passage to any free nation that rallied to his relief effort. However, when his emissary Morris Ernst was sent to sound out international opinion, the mwas was shoched to to hear himself attacked as a traitor by Zionist who by then had raised $46 million to lobby for their own plan.

When Truman took office after Roosevelt's untimely death, the lobbyists pressured the man greatly. They argued vehemently that admission to Palestine was the "only hope of survival" for the Jewish people------despite the reality that milions of Jewish people had been sheltered/protected by free nations during the War....and in fact, Jewsish people throughout the free world moved easily in their societies...enjoying HIGH standards of living in Western Countries.

Truman gave in....and thus the vast majority of the Holocaust victims were never given a choice as to where they would live. Only twenty thousand were admitted to large, free countries like the U.S. in the three years following the war. Thus the exhausted British found themselves pressured by the most powerful office in the world, the White House, even as they watched their Mandate Government in Palestine be blitzed by a campaign of terror. For the Zionist Forces----known as the Haganah, had taken over the munitions factories in the south/were using mortars, bombs and machine guns against Palestinian and British alike.....and while the

Guns, Grenades, Bombs and tanks---all manufactured in factories the British themselves had built----were now used against them. While the U.N had been trying to arbitrate a peaceful solution to the bloodshed, the men of villages in Palestine hoped the powerful nations of the world controlling the U.N would reach a just solution. However, what happened was that Palestined was first "partitioned" in what the U.N. Called a "Compromise."....and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians throughout the land were shocked beyond words that the Zionists were given possession of the MAJORITY of Palestine---fifty-four percent---even though they owned only seven percent of the land.


In five major areas that were being handed over, well over half the people------up to seventy and eighty, even ninety-nine percent---were Palestinians. The "compromise" gave the Zionists almost all the fertile land....including the huge, main citrus groves that accounted for most of the people's export income. It gave away most of the barley and wheat grove in Palesttine....land the Palestinians were forced to hand over despite how it not only produced their livelihood---but had been cultivated by them by their own backs.


Later, the agricultural settlements that were taken over actually began to involve government hiring out Palestinian men and boys---a few at a time and "unofficially"--to work at menial jobs. With many men starving/looking for jobs, A cheap work force was crucial to the survival of their newest kibbutzin, since many of the incoming settlers had lived their lives in European cities and did not know how to far,.........and with many of the landlords hired out from abroad to inherit the land, it was logical as to why soldiers kicked others out of villages/"protected" it against them. Much of it was a shock....but it was reality.

For many, April of 1947 was nothing short of the British abandoning the Palestinians, war-weary and unwilling to lose more young men to defend Palestine from the Zionist Underground and forced to announce the plan to surrender their Mandate in one year. To the world, the Zionist proclaimed that they were fighting a "War of Independence."...and the world, now penitent about the Holocaust, applauded....with countless villages destroyed in the process.

On May 14, David Ben Gurion proclaimed the establishment of Israel....and within hours of its establishment, the U.S officially recognized the new nation of Israel under Zionist rule.

Throughout May-July, almost one-million Palestinians were driven out of the newly proclaimed democracy.....and soldiers from surrounding Arab nations of Eqypt, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon fought to stop the takeover... but were driven back.

Groups such as Irgun had committed COUNTLESS acts of "purification" on villages on the outskirts of modern Jerusalem....as happened on April 10 when it came to machines guns/hand grenades "clearing up" natives in the land. The native Jewish peopl;e were SHOCKED and disgusted...and many protested that such things things violated the ancient beliefs.

Upoin hearing the news about Deir Yassin, Cheif Rabbi of Jerusalem flew into a fury....but it was not enough to stop the milatary machine


In example, more than 130, 000 Jewish people lived in Iraq, forming the oldest Jewish community in the world. Few of them emigrated to Israel.......as the Jews had lived undisturbed in Iraq for a long time. Though that changed when multiple attacks started to occur....with rumors saying it was "anti-Semitic violence" (often with suspicious origins) by "Arab groups planning a Jewish pogrom."

By early 1951, Jews fled Iraq in panic, abandoning homes/property and and an ancient heritage until only five thousand remained in the country. Some fifteen people were arrested in connection witn one of the bombings---and the remnant of the Jewish community wa outraged, as the Haganah (Zionists) were discovered to have smuggled arms caches into Iraq....and who had thrown bombs at their own Jewish people.

It was discovered that their plan was to touch off a panic emigration to Israel......with it being the case that the Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion and Yigal Allon, later to become Foreign Minister, knew ofd the plot------for it was their way of helping the prophesied "ingathering" of the Jews----even if the method was anti-Biblical. And if the world press was given to believe that hateful Arabs were the only ones responsible, it simply bolstered public sympathy for the "struggling" nation....AND WOULD give "incentive" for the Jews worldwide to "come home."

Concerning other Rabbis at the time who called it out, the Cheif Rabbi of Iraq, Sassoon Khedurri pleaded with an inquiring journalist to tell the world the truth about Zionism...for not only had the Jews in Iraq felt sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians....but they too had suffwered at the hands of the Zionists when it came to the demanding that Jews around the world come home. As Khedduri stated
By mid 1949 the big propaganda guns were already going off in the United states. American dollars were going to save Iraqi Jews-whether Iraqi Jews needed saving or not.There were daily 'pogroms' in the New York times and under datelines which few noticed were from Tel Aviv. Why didn't someone come and see us instead of negotiating with Israel to take in Iraqi Jews? Why didn't someone point out that the solid, responsible leadership of Iraqi Jews believed this [Iraq] to be their country? The Iraqi government was being accussed of holding Jews against their will...campaigning among Jews was increased...the Government was whip-sawed....accussed of pogroms and violent actions against the Jews, but if the Government attempted to suppress Zionist agitation attempting to stampede the Iraqi Jews, it was again accussedof discrimation.
For more information, The Jews of Iraq is one place to investigate. What went down on the issue still amazes me.....in light of how many Jews held good positions in Iraq before Israel itself orchestrated the notorious synagogue bombings in Iraq in the 50's.... one at the US Information centre, one at the esplanade at the dar al-badya coffee house and one at Mas'uda Shemtov synagogue. Yehudah Tajjar and 14 others [many from the Hagganah, working in Iraq under differing names, were convicted...and as it turned out, the intent was to panic Iraqi residents of Jewish background into emmigrating to Israel to help bolster the Jewish population.
__________________
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Posted originally by Easy G (G²) Through What went down on the issue still amazes me.....in light of how many Jews held good positions in Iraq before Israel itself orchestrated the notorious synagogue bombings in Iraq in the 50's.... one at the US Information centre, one at the esplanade at the dar al-badya coffee house and one at Mas'uda Shemtov synagogue. Yehudah Tajjar and 14 others [many from the Hagganah, working in Iraq under differing names, were convicted...and as it turned out, the intent was to panic Iraqi residents of Jewish background into emmigrating to Israel to help bolster the Jewish population.
__________________
[/quote]

For reference, one can consider going online and looking up the following documents:
Yigal Allon: The making of Israel's army : Valentine 1970
Ha'olam Hazeh, 29 may 1966 -Yehudah Tajjar testimony
Black Panther magazine 9 Nov 1972- Kaduri salim statements for compenstion of action.
Stephen Helmsley, Iraq 1900 to 1950 Oxford University press 1953
Chief rabbi of Iraq Sassoon Khedurri, via Elmer Berger op cit P 30
I apologize if the information is too extensive----though it seemed necessary to go in depth on....especially seeing how diverse the background is. For when seeing the backdrop of what went down, it makes sense as to why so many reacted as they did. Many Palestinians were revoked of many basic human rights----including education choices when being excluded from universities and made to live as second class. From there came the invention of Fedayeens, WHO Reacted in violence by striking across the borders into Israel from Lebanon, Syria and Jordan---attacking Jewish settlements....seeing how they could never be understandably satisfied in the ghetto-like regugee camps in which they were wasting way their lives......and which, consequently, caused the military to crack down on Palestinian villages with severe measures. The other sad reality is that for nearly twenty years, Palestinian refugees had been trapped in teeming, poverty-burdened camps in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan.......

Trained for nothing else but agriculture, they were resented/viewed as refuse that could never adapt into the complexion of their new societies. Such frustration had birthed the poorly-trained commando groups, whose night strikes across the borders brought only violent reprisals from the Israeli military.

The United Nations strenously urged Israel to assume its responsibility for the plight of the refugees....and Israel was to offer a choice: allow the refugees to come home to their villages...or pay them for the land that was seized. Similarly, West Germany had paid Israel MILLIONS in reparations fees since World War II..so the request seemed fair.

Though the Israeli Premier, Levi Eshkol, wanted reconcilliation, his opponents inside Israel---including an aging Ben Gurion--hated talk of a peace agreement with Arab Nations. Negotians dragged on throughout the spring of 1967...and threats grew harsh.....and then on May 22, Eqypt blockaded the Gulf of Aquaba, Israel's only water route for recieving shipments headed for Israeli ports....and thus began the Six Day War...with more loss of life----agitation of Arabs in general and retaliation....all of it fueling a destructive cycle.....and with Israel constantly being on the "Defensive"/SEEMING as if they are "innocent" when no one deals with many of her actions that led to a logical reaction.

Of course, I do not expect you (nor anyone else, for that matter) to simply take my word for it----and on the issue, if wanting to see sources of study on the information presented, one can go to the following.
-Jonathan Dimbleby, The Palestinians, Quartet Books, New York, 1979, p.86

-Jacques de Reyier, A Jerusalem un Drapeau Flottait sur la Ligne de Feu, Editions de la Baconniere, Neuchatel, 1959, pp.71-76. Cited al Khalidi (Ed), From Haven to Conquest, The Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut, 1971, pp 353-356.

-Chaim Weizmann, Trial and Error, London, 1950, p.115.

-Yehoshua Porath, The Emergence of the Palestine-Arab National Movement, 1918-1929, Frank Cass, London, 1974, pp.56-57.

-Walter Lacquwe, A History of Zionism, Schocken Books, New York, 1976, pp.215-217.

-Morris Ernst, So Far So Good, Harper & Bros., New York, 1948, pp. 170-177.

-Elmer Berger, Who Knows Better Must Say So, The Institute of Palestine Studies, Beirut, p.64. Cited in David Hirst, The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, 1977, pp. 162-163.


If Interested, there's a good book on the issue---concerning more extensive, historical documentation on the issue of the formation of the Middle East Crisis....as seen here in this book:



P00710.png



 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
There can be no recoginised Palestinian state until peace and security are guaranteed- and that means the rejection and dismantling of radical Islamist parties and the de-programming of the victims of their campaign of anti-semitic and anti-West propaganda.
Be it with Anti-Arab views or Anti-Jewish/Anti-Semitic views, the reality is that there needs to be reform on ALL sides of the issue. Otherwise, nothing will ever get done...and it's already the case that others have taken a lot of heat for standing out on the issue.

1674 Israeli Soldiers Refuse to serve in the Occupation
 
Upvote 0

Qnts2

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2012
1,323
111
✟2,056.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Easy G (G²);61895122 said:
There are still a host of things that were left out in the analysis given by yourself when speaking on the issue of occupation and only focusing on certain countries rather than the whole issue.


What follows is the best attempt to give a general overview of the history of what went down before 1948---as the issue is not as simple as many try to make it...and to be clear, much of this is my attempt at transcribing what was said in the book "Blood Brothers."

In 1897, a conference had convened in Basle, Switzwland, to lay the foundation stone of the house which was to shelter the Jewish nation. The director of the gathering was a prominent writer named Theodor Herzl. He had fathered in Europe a new political movement called "Zionism:---an inspiring movement that hoped to rescue the downtrodden, impoverished and humilated Jews in the Big City Ghettos.....and by the end of the conference, the delagates had agreed on two points----a flag and an anthem, the symbols of their unity and purpose. Where there was a split, however, was the location of this homeland that was being pushed by the leadership: Palestine.

Immediately, many disputed Herzl's statement that Palestine was a "land without a people, waiting for a people without a land."..and though Herzl had been unwilling to contemplate settlement in Argentina or Uganda as alternatives. his sights were clearly set on the Middle East. It was to this proposal that many delegates primarily and strenously objected.....for by what right could Zionist expect to create a state in Palestine since it was a land with established borders and, more importantly, it had long been inhabited by people of an ancient, respectable culture. A homeland in Palestine, they declared, with the overtones of a dark prophecy, would have to be forgotten--or else established by force/physical might.

Devout Jews within and without the movement---paticularly the Orthodox--fervently argued that the Zionism Movement was a blasphemy because the elite, non-religous Jews felt that Zionism was the only Messiah that Israel would ever hadve. Such talk incensed the religious, as did the hints of milatarism that had already colored the fringes of th emovement. Other less religous Jews---and pragmatic---believed that Zionism would feed Anti-Semitism since it underscored the long-criticized "exclusiveness" of the Jewish people.....and therefore, to appease the religous consciences, the Zionist leaders adopted the principles of non-violence embodied in the Jewish Havlaga. This helped to rally the support of the masses, the multiple millions who desperately hoped for an escape from the growing pogroms against them in Europe. Yet leaders continued to formulate designs on Palestine.......

In Palestine, there were other factors tying into the set-up of the State of Israel that many forget. For in the early 1900's, they were also a downtrodden people, struggling for freedom from their oppressors-----the Turkish Ottoman Empire---which had ruled over them for hundreds of years.......though the empire had already begun to crumble when World War I engulfed the Middle East. After the war, as the empire crumbled, the Palestinian people felt the first winds of freedom...and the League of Nations bore their hopes alof further by proposing a plan that would help "subject peoples." Larger, powerful nations would assist weaker ones in establishing their own independent governments....also known as the Mandate System.

The British desired a foothold of power in the Middle East, saw the Mandate system as a great opportunity and secertly made a proposal to Palestinian leaders-----for the British would help oust the Turks...and in return, they would set up a temporary Mandate Government in Palestine with the promise that they would slowly withdraw..leaving an established, independent countery governed by the Palestinians themselves. In desperation, the Palestinian leaders agreed to this strategy---thinking freedom was in sight----and little notice was given to the tiny Jewish agricultural communuties that were sprouting in a seemingly scattered fashion across the landscape.


Once the British Rule was established, however, things got VERY convuluted with political intrigues/double-dealings. For immediately, the British met in secret with the French and Russians to divine the Middle East into "spheres of influence" with Palestine to be governed, not by the people of Palestine as promised, but by an international administration....and this secret agreement was uncovered several years later in 1917, when the Bolseheviks overthrew the czarist regime and could not resist making such "imperalist" duplicity public. Palestinian leaders were dismayed at this news...and at once, delegates to the British were sent to protest. They chose the diplomatic route while an elite began influencing British bureaucrats.

By the year of 1917, the Zionists had allied themselves with Great Britian's Christian Restorationists---a group that believed that they might bring to pass--by manipulating world events and reestablishing the nation of Israel---the Second Coming of Christ. The Zionist ignored the view---but the benefits of the plan were obvious...as they saw in Britain's new hold on Palestine their secret inroad to the Middle EAST.....and thus began their strange marriage between Zionist and Restorationist. In 1917, the British Lord Artur Balfour wrote that the Cabinent "viewed with favor the establishment of a national home of the Jewish people" in Palestine...and in the same letter, he reclassified the people of Palestine----ninety two percent of the population---as "Non-Jewish" communities." Not only did he nrnege on the promise of independence...but it effectively handed over Palestine to the Zionist.

The prime mover behind the British decision was the Zionist leader, Chaim Weizmann...and with Lord Balfour, some say he was acting out of his own religious convictions/love for the Jewish people. That, however, seems far-fecthced since in 1906 he played a major part in passsing the Aliens Act----which expressly sought to exclude Jews from Great Britain. Additionally, HE WAS not oblivious of the political trechery in which he involved Himself. As said in a memorandum to the British Cabinet in 1919:
In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country. So far as Palestine is concerned, (we) have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong,....and no declaration of policy which at least in the letter (we) have not always intended to violate
At once, Palestinian leaders were dismayed...and for sixteen years they continually presented their fears to the British through diplomatic channels, appealing continually to royal commissions while unrest grew throughout Palestine. And the Zionist, funded by international money collected by the Jewish Agency, rapidly settled kibbutzim in a clearer and clearer pattern throughout Palestine...slowly forming the skeletal outlines of the land they meant to declare as their own homeland. Through the 1920's, European immigration to Palestine rose dramatically and the Zionist leaders becamse less guared about their plan. As Weizmann told an American secretary of state, "I hope Palestine would ultimatelty become as Jewish as England is English." Also, as another Zionist leader told British official, "There can be only one National Home in Palestine..and that a Jewish one and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs..but a Jewish predominance as soon as the numbers of that race are sufficiently increased."

Continued in Next Post

Wow. In one previous post you reference a group which refers to the Jewish people as terrorists.

This one is at best bad history and at worst questionable in their view of the Jewish people.

Most Orthodox were in favor of a Jewish state. While there was some small amount of argument among Orthodox Jews, the only main group which opposed the state were the Lithuanian Jews, which was a fairly small group.

Jewish people are not a race, and such a statement is highly questionable.

What prompted Hertzel to go for a Jewish state? It was the Dreyful affair which convinced Herzel that the Jewish people would not be safe in any country. After over a thousand years of persecution of the worst kind in just about every country, the Jewish people needed a place to be safe and call home. That place was the country which had been theirs.

Just a quick comment. 'Not only did he nrnege on the promise of independence...but it effectively handed over Palestine to the Zionist.' is a very slanted and somewhat typical of an anti-semitic statement.

From a review of Blood Brothers 'Blood Brothers is a very well told story of personal tragedy which engages the reader emotionally. It is, however, heavily biased politically. Though Elias Chacour claims his book is intended to be a vehicle for reconciliation and peace, in reality his story is part and parcel of the standard Arab-Palestinian, anti-Zionist narrative which charges Israel with, among other things, perpetrating a ‘holocaust’ against the Palestinians, and condemns the Jewish state for allegedly visiting on the Palestinians what they suffered at the hands of the Nazis in Europe. Chacour presents the now stereotypical picture of innocent Palestinians falling victim of systematic ethnic cleansing by the Zionists.'

This to me as absolute propaganda and anti-semitic rhetoric which is typical of the radical groups of Islam. Personally, it makes me want to puke and it lies about the state of Israel which gives humanitarian aid to the innocent Palestinians Arabs caught in this battle. The vileness can not be expressed on this forum concerning the garbage presented in this book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yedida
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Site Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Wow. In one previous post you reference a group which refers to the Jewish people as terrorists.
.
Seeing that other Jewish people have for AGES noted where others in their camp have done terroristic activities and evil just as others have, there's no issue. Philo-Semitism is something that other Israelis/Jews have often noted to be an issue when people claim to be for justice yet support the false ideology that Jewish people who do wrong actions can either never be called wrong on it or their actions labeled as "evil" since the view is that anything Jewish is innocent - and that's not the mindset that Yeshua or the prophets had when it came to addressing issues.

Be it with the work done by many Jewish groups during the era of slavery/their participation in the mess that happened with the TransAtlantic slave trade - or with what happened in other times where persecution was done by other Jewish groups (with other Jews speaking out against it simultaneously/trying to address the matter rightly), there has long been a history of where other Jews have called out issues in their camp. it. There was actually one work on the issue entitled "An Eye for an Eye: The Untold Story of Jewish Revenge Against Germans in 1945" by a Jew named John Sack which details quite graphically the horrible things Jews did to civilian Germans in Poland at the end of WWII. .


Powerful read, although many felt it was controversial since it didn't fit the narrative that others were proclaiming in saying all those who were Jewish were either incapable of doing what was done to them or that they had NEVER done to others what was done to them. There's another good book by an Israeli Jew that sheds some honestly on the subject..entitled "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years" by Israel Shahak (who was a a Polish-born Holocaust survivor and Israeli professor of chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem). Israel Shahak has done excellent work in addressing the many ways that Zionism can be seen as a recidivist movement - and he has also tackled such issues like the anti-Zionist democratic alternative, Palestinian attitudes toward civil liberties, the Israel-South Africa relationship, American efforts for Middle East peace, Israel's Christian supporters, American domestic treatment of Zionists and Palestinians, and Reform Judaism's attitude toward Zionism.

Isreael Shahak
As Israel Shahak explains, Zionism was an explicit reaction against the individualistic Enlightenment and an atavistic attempt to restore the stifling ghettos of 18th-century Poland. Zionism's fathers believed Jews could not live normal lives among gentiles—even in free, democratic societies—and propounded a notion of "Jewish people," rights that rejected the spirit of the age. Zionism, writes Shahak, "can be described as a mirror image of anti-Semitism," since it, like the anti-Semites, holds that Jews are everywhere aliens who would best be isolated from the rest of the world. Moreover, "both anti-Semites and Zionism assume anti-Semitism is ineradicable and inevitable." This attitude among Zionist Jews led to a capitulation to anti-Semitism in Europe, in lieu of a conviction to rally the world's liberal forces against it. Small wonder that some notorious anti-Semites, Eichmann, for example, have been attracted to the Zionist program. The results have been catastrophic. Shahak's paper makes much of the last 40 years understandable. Given Zionism's premises, it is unsurprising that Arabs would have been seen as obstacles to be swept away ruthlessly and that the state of Israel would be run ostensibly for the benefit of "the Jewish people," no matter the cost in the fives and liberties of non-Jews.

THere are others as well, concenring the beautiful work that has occurred between Messianic Jews and Palestinian Christians
This one is at best bad history and at worst questionable in their view of the Jewish people.
Seeing that other Jewish Israelis have noted the same thing for ages, Q - be it former soldiers in the Israeli Defense Forces who noted the corruption happening in much of the military when it came to the Occupation/treatment of others (be it Palestinians or even other Jews), there's no avoiding of histoery. It is what is.
Most Orthodox were in favor of a Jewish state.



While there was some small amount of argument among Orthodox Jews, the only main group which opposed the state were the Lithuanian Jews, which was a fairly small group.
Incorrect, seeing that there were numerous accounts of them speaking out of a creation of a Jewish state if it was done without GOD designing it directly and the Messiah returning when it happens - as their view was that they were in exile for a reason and couldn't force things to occur by the hand of man.

Again, it was never an overwhelming majority of others wanting a Jewish State the way the Israeli state was formulated and the Orthodox Jews have noted that repeatedly. For history is history and there's no need to make up facts on the issue in favor of avoiding others.
Jewish people are not a race, and such a statement is highly questionable.
Who said Jewish people were a "race"? Unless it was stated at any point, there's no need arguing against what was said - as the Jews are a specific type of ethnic group within the Human Race. It's the entire concept behind why people speak of the Jews as a people/group with certain traits.

What prompted Hertzel to go for a Jewish state? It was the Dreyful affair which convinced Herzel that the Jewish people would not be safe in any country.
Doesn't deal with the other realities of people influencing Hertzl who were very racist/not concerned with the Jewish people at ANY point...nor does it change the fact that Hertzel ignored where many Jews were doing fine in other parts of the world and even they noted that there's no justification trying to make a Jewish state at the expense of harming other lives in the process. Others already were speaking out, including other Zionists, who said that things would get worse if trying to create a land for Jewish people without seeing other factors at play that needed to be addressed.

Zionism is not Biblical the way Hertzl practiced it (with his actions in many ways being a covert way of anti-semitism)..and thankfully, other Jewish individuals/groups have long noted the ways that what the man has done actually has promoted more in the way of anti-semitism/more problems for the Jewish people than many wish to admit:



After over a thousand years of persecution of the worst kind in just about every country, the Jewish people needed a place to be safe and call home. That place was the country which had been theirs.
Again, that does not remotely deal with the issue of where other Jews noted consistently that a homeland made for them DOES NOT JUSTIFY doing other acts of evil toward other people that the Lord condemned in the word...and it's what the Orthodox Jews often noted when it came to seeing the Lord establish things rather than man. Wanting a homeland is never an issue - but the means one goes about trying to do that is the focus. The same logic of homeland would not apply to other groups who were harmed and decided to take out one group of people to make room for yourself - as one Holocaust does not mean allowing another.

Should Native Americans be justified in wiping out an area to make room for a tribe because of the years of persecution they went through? And to be clear, even Hitler noted that the same methods he used on the Jewish people were things he learned from examining the ways that U.S treated its own Native American groups.

Just a quick comment. 'Not only did he nrnege on the promise of independence...but it effectively handed over Palestine to the Zionist.' is a very slanted and somewhat typical of an anti-semitic statement.
By that logic, that'd mean that every single Orthodox Jew in Israel or any Jewish person anywhere who actually notes some of the same things on Zionism as a problem must hate their own PEOPLE - and that's not logical. Addressing the issues of how Zionism has often done harm and where things done in the name of Zionism were damaging is a matter of addressing historical fact and one cannot be silent on where other Jewish people have repeatedly noted the same realities as others.


Again, unless one can deal with the extensive amount of Jewish people who've consistently called out the issue of ZIONISM for ages, trying to claim "anti-semitism" is inconsistent.


From a review of Blood Brothers 'Blood Brothers is a very well told story of personal tragedy which engages the reader emotionally. It is, however, heavily biased politically. Though Elias Chacour claims his book is intended to be a vehicle for reconciliation and peace, in reality his story is part and parcel of the standard Arab-Palestinian, anti-Zionist narrative which charges Israel with, among other things, perpetrating a ‘holocaust’ against the Palestinians, and condemns the Jewish state for allegedly visiting on the Palestinians what they suffered at the hands of the Nazis in Europe. Chacour presents the now stereotypical picture of innocent Palestinians falling victim of systematic ethnic cleansing by the Zionists.'


This to me as absolute propaganda and anti-semitic rhetoric which is typical of the radical groups of Islam. Personally, it makes me want to puke and it lies about the state of Israel which gives humanitarian aid to the innocent Palestinians Arabs caught in this battle. The vileness can not be expressed on this forum concerning the garbage presented in this book.

.
One, if you've not read the book, there's no real basis for critique since one is already going for a view that gives its own slant on how it saw things without actually studying material for themselves or following up with information. The same thing has been done in reverse when it comes to others trying to claim "vileness" on the accounts of times Jews were harmed because it went against their ideology or worldview on how things were.and as it stands, seeing that the author of the book has repeatedly noted the need for a Jewish homeland for the Jews (since not all Zionists are the same) and has noted multiple times where humanitaian aid has been given to Palestinian Arabs caught in battle (even though many Human Rights workers have been harmed by their government/noted where it was wrong for their government to hinder their work), anyone saying counter to that in a review does nothing else short of heresay without really dealing with information.

Two, whenever reviews bring out buzz-words like "Standard Arab-Palestinian" and yet ignores what other Jews have said on the issue for ages, it's always interesting to see how "stereotypical" is selectively left out on the equation...and it's not surprising. It's easier to avoid dealing with information as it is by throwing out "Well, that's just what Arabs say!!!!" rather than addressing it comprehensively - and that is something Jewish groups/organizations and Jewish people who actually lived through the Holocaust have repeatedly noted when pointing out that it actually shames the Jewish people in avoiding the ways Palestinians have been mistreated at the hands of the Jewish people who should know better and never have allowed it to occur.

Arguments via emotion can never and will never address what other Jews have said when speaking out on the ways their own government has done harm to others rather than living up to what Israel was really meant to be - and that goes for others beyond the Palestinians, as seen in the multiple ways other Jewish believers/Messianic Jews or other Jewish groups (Ethiopian Jews and others) have been viciously persecuted in the state...in the name of Zionism for the Jewish people. There's simply no way around that and reimagining the past can never deal with that.

Orthodox Jews protest against Zionism
Anti-Zionist Holocaust Survivor...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

yedida

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!
Oct 6, 2010
9,779
1,461
Elyria, OH
✟25,205.00
Faith
Marital Status
In Relationship
On what is this map based given that Palestinians have NEVER had their own state? Also, I find it difficult to believe they were inhabiting all that space when there is desert out there.

Yeah. It is documented by people who travelled to Israel prior to it becoming "Israel" in 1948 that it was nothing but pretty much a wasteland - not at all productive, just dry and barren. At least, not until the Jewish people began arriving and cultivating it. Now it's a beautiful place, bountiful. Of course the Arabs want it now! Who wouldn't? But when they pretty much "had it" they did nothing with it.....
 
Upvote 0