Wednesday, December 2, 2009

VIDEO: Muslim Woman Stabs Jewish Guard

Of course, if a Jewish woman had stabbed a Muslim guard, Muslims would be calling for the death of Israel (oops, they already are). But it's perfectly acceptable for Muslims to attack Jews, since Jews are persecuting Muslims by refusing to hand over the state of Israel. (Note: Muhammad said that he would expel all Jews from the Arabian peninsula, which is perfectly acceptable to Muslims. But if Jews expel Muslims from a square inch of Palestine, it's "Death to Israel.") Is anyone starting to think that Muslims are inconsistent, and that they only care about Muslims?



YNet News--The two-minute video shows the guards checking the woman's items in an x-ray machine. When they shift their gaze from her for a moment, she seizes the opportunity to quickly pull out a knife and attack.

A Magen David Adom paramedic told Ynet on the day of the incident, "The guard was lying on the ground with a stab wound to his lower abdomen, and the young female terrorist was apprehended. The guard was in great pain; he was in a state of shock."

According to the rescue services, the stab wound was 5-centimeters deep (about 2 inches). The guard was treated at the scene and later evacuated to Jerusalem's Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem in moderate condition.

The assailant, a 21-year-old resident of the West Bank town of Ramallah, was taken in for questioning by the Jerusalem Police. Source.

55 comments:

Jon said...

No serious person is asking anyone to "hand over the state of Israel." What the Palestinians request, as does the entire world excepting the United States, is that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories. That's not so outrageous. They were driven into these refugee camps in 1947 and the only request is that they be able to retain control of these limited refugee camps. Instead Israel invades the refugee camps and builds property there, diverting the water away from the Palestinians.

So what happens? People get mad, especially when they are being starved, bombed, and basically required to pass through hours of checkpoints to try and go to work. Don't like seeing soldiers get stabbed? Why not consider some peaceful resolutions to the conflict? For instance, why not accept the international consensus on a two state settlement? This has been available to Israel for 30 years, but instead they choose expansion to peace. Violence inevitably results.

And yet only one side of the violence is told here. I don't see you showing pictures of the rows of Palestinian babies killed by Israeli strikes at the turn of the year. Israel has killed far more children and far more adults than the Palestinians have. Where are your reports on them?

mkvine said...

Jon you're sick...

Apollos26 said...

John 8:44

"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

Tom said...

Actually, I'm hoping to help expand the NATION of Israel. The precious "Palestinian" people have a 'home', known as "Jordan". It is FAR passed time that we help resettle ALL "Palestinian" people - who do not want to be loyal to Israel - and end the nonsense concept of a "two-state" solution. Palestine has a name. The name of ALL of Palestine is "Israel". Hamas must die. Hezbollah must die. Israel must thrive and grow. I'm also LOVING the idea that all of Lebanon would come under the protection of Israel to be a nation for people who believe in the Only Living God - Yahweh. From the video and from the history of Islam, it is obvious that Israel is the only viable civilization that can remain in the region of Palestine. Anyone not loyal to that civilization must go.

Tom said...

BTW, David, ...saw your video speaking to the so called "Tigers for Israel". Dude, you ROCK! If I don't get to meet you in this world, I look forward to trying to out-shout you at the Throne of Grace. Meanwhile, here on Earth, we have MUCH work to do. THANK YOU for all that you and your team are doing! AMEN! MAY JESUS CHRIST BE PRAISED!

The Fat Man said...

WOW what a video, I can just hear some of the muslism response. "Look they beat that poor girl after she was on the ground... See Jews can beat woman"
I have never hit a woman, but if a woman stabs my co worker or comes at me with a knife then all bets are off.

The Fat Man said...

Jon said "why not accept the international consensus on a two state settlement? "

Israel did accept a two state solution in 1948. The Arab muslims rejected it and drove the palastinians from there homes with four arab armies.

The Israeli's did accept a Two state solution at Oslo, the Palastinians rejected it with the second Intifada.

The Israeli's do accept a two state solution they pulled out of Gaza and built a wall seperating Israel from Palastinian teritory. The palastinian's rejected it by launching rockets into Israel from Gaza. Time and time again teh Palastinians prove that they never miss a oppertunity to miss a opertunity.

OumAmir said...

To John:

Dude, seriously, "no serious person is asking anyone to 'hand over the state of Israel'?

Have you ever talked to ANYONE who is Palestinian? Seriously? Even one? I've had very moderate Palestinian friends who have embroidered pictures of the current state of Israel with "filasteen" written in Arabic atop it. Palestinian that argue to a real two state solution are the minority.

The one thing that I have had my fill of is the continual and unceasing blame-shifting that pervades the Palestinian mindset. Nothing that happens to the Palestinians is ever their fault. Nothing. And don't bother trying to pin the whole "oh, oh, you don't ever criticize Israel. . . blah blah blah, on me, because that's just a deflection.

To Tom,
I have no idea of you would consider yourself a christian or not, but if you consider yourself one, have you ever bothered talking to a Palestinian Christian before? Have you ever talked to a family from Hebron who are trying to remove squatters from their family's land while working within the legal system? Are you even aware that there are people like Rami Ayyad who, as a Palestinian, lived and died in Gaza trying to bring the light of Christ to such a dark area? You really want the Israeli government to kick his widow and any other Christians out because they don't care to be Israeli? You'd rather support the expansion of the Israeli state that persecutes Jewish Israelis that come to believe in Jesus as the Jewish Messiah than sympathize with your fellow Christians that have real grievances?

CharlieR said...

Jon are you mocking or do you really believe what you wrote. If you believe what you wrote then your mind has been badly warped by propaganda. Muslims are very very sad people, I pray more missionaries to muslim countries by the grace of Alimighty God.

Jon said...

The Fat Man,

Yeah, the Palestinians didn't like the idea of handing over the keys to their homes just because Israel bribed enough people at the U.N. to barely manage a two thirds majority. At the time Israelites owned 6% of the land, yet the U.N. partition granted them over 50%. The indigenous people weren't going to exit their homes just because of this resolution. They naturally resisted. Is it your view that they were obligated to exit their homes because Israel managed passage at the U.N.? And if so, what of the virtually unanimous resolutions at the U.N. demanding that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories?

Oslo was an interim agreement that required the details to be worked out later. During that period Israeli settlements continued to expand in the occupied territories as did the economic stranglehold. Basically things fell apart. But Israel has a long standing offer of peace if they would withdraw from the occupied territories. These are the refugee camps the Palestinians were pushed into in 1947. They want control of these limited areas. Under Oslo Israel only pulled out of some. The whole world recognizes that justice is better served if they withdraw from them entirely. They can keep the land they stole in 1947. That's a long time ago. Not much can be done about it. Just let Palestinians control the limited refugee camps they still possess. Israel could have peace and accept this, but they refuse.

Yeah, they pulled out of Gaza. They bomb Gaza occasionally with no credible pretext. They cut off food and medicine, limit currency. They produce extraordinary unemployment. A bunch of starving people cut off from the world, and you wonder why occasionally a rocket is fired that almost never kills anybody? Meanwhile Israel is launching GPS guided rockets from F-16's, killing dozens in a single strike and you object to the meager Palestinian response? What opportunity have they missed? The opportunity to sit and starve? Leave them alone. Accept the international consensus on the peaceful resolution. Starve them forever and yeah, they'll probably occasionally react violently (stunning how rare it is really). Until they are wiped out entirely. Maybe that's the real goal.

Ed said...

Jon, you say no serious person is asking anyone to hand over the state of Israel.

Well, what about the leadership of the Palestinians? Maybe they are not serious, but then you've just admitted that the Israelis have no one serious to deal with on the other side. The Palestinian leadership, and huge numbers of Palestinians, have frequently expressed the idea that Palestinians will never stop killing Israelis until Israel is gone. Much of the Arab world gives credence to such "serious" documents as "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," and Mein Kampf. Official Palestinian TV recently had a show for small children in which they were being taught to hate and kill Jews.

Furthermore, you forget the ancient enmity of Muslims toward Jews. For example, in both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the two most canonical hadith collections, are hadiths about how the very trees and stones will tell Muslims to kill Jews:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176:Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.


And when Bill Clinton was in office, the Israelis offered the Palestinians 97% of what they were asking for, and Arafat not only rejected it. He didn't even make a counteroffer! He just walked away from the negotiations and started the next intifada. The truth is that Islamic culture is motivated by a jihad ethos that seeks to spread Islamic law everywhere and place Muslims in charge of governments everywhere. That is in the core texts of Islam, even if Muslim apologists try to hide that fact.

The Fat Man said...

Jon said...
Or I should say "Jon first said"

"For instance, why not accept the international consensus on a two state settlement?"

Then when it is pointed out that they did accept a two state solution in 1948 and that it was the muslim arabs who rejected it and 4 arab armies went in and invaded driving out the palastinians from there homes. He then says in part two.

"Yeah, the Palestinians didn't like the idea of handing over the keys to their homes just because Israel bribed enough people at the U.N. to barely manage a two thirds majority. At the time Israelites owned 6% of the land, yet the U.N. partition granted them over 50%. The indigenous people weren't going to exit their homes just because of this resolution. They naturally resisted. Is it your view that they were obligated to exit their homes because Israel managed passage at the U.N.? And if so, what of the virtually unanimous resolutions at the U.N. demanding that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories?"

So lets get this straight. First you want Israel to accept the "International consensous" of a two state solution.

Then you say the palastinians did not accept a two state solution in 1948 becasue they were not going to exit there homes because of this "International Resolution" of a two state solution.

However they had no problem exiting their homes when there arab muslim brothers invaded to drive the Jews into the sea. Especialy when they were promised all the booty.

Then as if this totaly inconsitent back tracking double talking argument wasnt good enough you resort to just making things up.

"At the time Israelites owned 6% of the land, yet the U.N. partition granted them over 50%."

Have you seen the maps of 1948 partition. Israel did not get 50% of the land, and most of what they did get was desert, which they made into a green paradise.

And finaly the ultimate in Hypocracy. "what of the virtually unanimous resolutions at the U.N. demanding that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories?"

So lets review.

1. You want Israel to accept a international consensous on a two state solution. Even thouh the arab muslims rejected this two state solution in 1948 and invaded to drive the jews into the sea. Causing the palastinians to flee there homes.

2. Then you just make up figures that israel got 50% of the land in the 1948 partionion plan.

3. Then you want Israel to withdraw, from lands they earned in War becasue a international consensous says they should. But the Palastinians rejected a international consensous that would of allowed them to have their own state.

Ladies and gentelmen Jon is proof positive that the theory of evolution is JUST WRONG. 50 Million sperm and his was the fastest.

aussie christian said...

This seems to be a round about argument.

I for one think Israel should have their homeland back. After all, it was taken from them by force not that long ago.

The main problem is this: Islam is a system based soley for war and killing. At this point in time Israel is simply their current focus of attention to kill maim and distroy. Once they kill all the jews, then they will decide to kill all the Christians, then the unbelievers, then the hindus etc.

The actual geographic location of Israel is of little concequence to islam, as long as the Jews exist they will call death to Israel. Simple as that really. islam has no interest in anything that looks like peace. They just want to kill maim and distroy, even if its other muslims.

So the solution to the killings and war, get rid of islam.

Yes this is ultra simplified, but then again some things are so simple you need to say it like it is and stop introducing complications to the subject.

Islam is from satan the devil, plain and simple, at armageddeon satan will use islam as his seed just as the Holy Bible says he will.

As long as we keep a bright light shining like a spotlight upon the seed, it will be limited in its ability to grow and consume the earth, until the Lord Jesus Christ comes and wipes them off the face of the earth and from memory. Don't believe me? read the book of Revelations.

Peace and Love.

Fernando said...

No Jon... you got your mats wrong... the jews were granted only 10% off the antient british palestinian... the arabs got 90%... butt thate was nott good enought... they wanted the all 100% and drive the jews to the sea...

no one wants to destroy israel? well watt aboutte the Hamas charter?

Feel Hamas' love for Israel...

minoria said...

ABOUT ISRAEL AND PALESTINIANS

Wow,alot of posts on this subject.I want to add my view,but little by little.Ok,about the 750,000 or 900,000 Arabs who fled their homes in 1948.

SOME WERE NOT CHASED OUT

There is evidence that 200,000-300,000 left not because they were chased out but following the orders of the Muslims to get out to avoid getting hurt during the invasion.And they did,they NEVER thought the Muslims armies would be defeated.They would be back in a FEW days.But it didn't happen.

LETTING THE ARABS BACK IN 1948

Reality check.Israel had conquered NEW territory.It had NOT been its idea,they were content with the UN decision.The thing for the Muslim nations to have done was ACCEPT the fact Israel had won.Sign a peace treaty but on CONDITION of having the ORIGINAL borders back,and that they would accept a 2 state solution,period.

ALLEGEANCE

Here their failure was crucial.If the Muslims had signed a peace treaty with the Jews in 1948 and stipulated that they would get REAL peace for land and acceptance of the original UN decision then the refugee problem would have been solved.

WHAT IF ISRAEL HAD ALLOWED THEM TO RETURN WITH NO PEACE TREATY?

But the REFUGEES were denied that chance by the Muslims.In fact they were fanaticized into more hatred of the Jews.IF Israel had actually accepted them back in 1948 following the UN decision to let them back in then,since NO PEACE TREATY was guaranteed by the Muslims in exchange for land,they would be letting in people who cared not at all to being loyal to Israel.Who would them make the Muslims the MAJORITY in the new state and be in favor of undermining it.

minoria said...

ABOUT REZA ASLAN AGAIN-PART 1

In his second and last book "How to win a Cosmic War:God,Globalization,and the End of the War on Terror" on page 102 he says:

"Nevertheless there is no question that killing and dying are always easier to justify if they can be framed as ritual or ceremonial acts,which is why Jihadists refer to suicide terrorism as "martyrdom operations".This is not a euphemism but an earnest attempt to infuse death with a sense of cosmic significance.

It seems not to matter that,on the TOPIC of SUICIDE,the Quran is ABSOLUTELY clear:"Do not kill yourself,if anyone does so God shall cast him into hell(4:29-30).

Nor does it seem important that COUNTLESS SAYINGS(hadith) of the Prophet Muhammed refer to the gruesome punishment that awaits those who take their lives:"Whoever purposely throws himself from a mountain,etc."

minoria said...

PART 2

ANALYSIS

I have read the book,he does NOT mention sura 9:111 where those who KILL or GET KILLED for Allan are promised paradise(even saying that the promise is found in the TORAH and GOSPEL).

Notice he is telling us that the JIHADISTS know of the prohibition on suicide in the Koran and the many hadiths where Mohammed condemns it and that they do NOT care.

AUDIENCE

99% of non-Muslims reading his book will think:

1.The Koran and hadiths forbid suicide,so
2.The terrorists KNOW it,so
3.That means THEY are anti-Islam,hijacking Islam.

BUT

Notice he does not mention 9:111.The REASON why they refer to suicide terrorism as martyrdom operations is,according to REZA ASLAN,because it's an "earnest attempt to infuse death with a sense of cosmic significance",or because "killing and dying are always easier to justify if they can be framed as ritual or ceremnonial acts."

NO

The reason is because of SURA 9:111.But his non-Muslims readers don't know it and he as scholar should have said so.But he does not.

Jon said...

And now to The Fat Man's egregious errors.

However they had no problem exiting their homes when there arab muslim brothers invaded to drive the Jews into the sea. Especialy when they were promised all the booty.

Almost none of the fighting that occurred in 1947 occurred on land that was designated by the U.N. as Israeli territory. The Israeli forces crossed the designated borders and began destroying Palestinian towns. The Arab armies fought in those towns in an attempt to stop this, but they failed. 750K people were driven out of their homes, well past the UN partition lines, and into Gaza, the West Bank, and neighboring states.

Then as if this totaly inconsitent back tracking double talking argument wasnt good enough

There's no inconsistency. On the one hand we have a single U.N. resolution which just barely managed to pass via bribery calling on the indigenous people to give up their homes and grant them to a foreign people. On the other hand we have 30 years of virtually unanimous U.N. resolutions, not obtained through bribery, we have world court decisions decrying the Israeli actions as illegal (with even the U.S. justice agreeing). There's an imbalance there. Mistakes of the past are in the past. If you want to believe the indigenous people were obligated to vacate the homes they own and give them over, fine. I think that's crazy, but suit yourself. But right now today the entire Arab world is prepared to offer Israel a peaceful and secure state at the 1967 borders. If they really wanted peace they could have it.

Have you seen the maps of 1948 partition. Israel did not get 50% of the land, and most of what they did get was desert, which they made into a green paradise.

Here's another blatant falsehood. I won't assume these are lies. I understand the propaganda that is disseminated via this website and elsewhere that makes everyone so wrong all the time. Go here.

Jon said...

Well, what about the leadership of the Palestinians? Maybe they are not serious, but then you've just admitted that the Israelis have no one serious to deal with on the other side. The Palestinian leadership, and huge numbers of Palestinians, have frequently expressed the idea that Palestinians will never stop killing Israelis until Israel is gone.

The PLO had frequently offered peace, which is basically why Israel invaded Lebanon to destroy them, creating Hamas. Hamas started out committed to the destruction of Israel, but has since become more mainstream, and while they are still divided they've at times indicated support for the 2 state solution. The statement made by David Wood is about "Muslims" demanding that Jews hand over the state of Israel. The entire Arab world has long endorsed the international consensus for a two state solution. The 2002 Arab Peace Plan goes even further. Not only do they accept a state of Israel within secure borders, they want to normalize relations with the state of Israel. The assertion that Muslims are unwilling to recognize Israel as a legitimate state is not just false but absurd in light of the historical facts.

Furthermore, you forget the ancient enmity of Muslims toward Jews.

I am no fan of Islam and I don't deny the existence of awful hadith. But the facts are that Muslims are sitting there ready to accept a peaceful settlement, despite the injustices that occurred in 1947. You can find obscure awful religious texts and I can find obscure awful biblical texts. I hear lots from Christians about the awful Philistines and how exterminating them is just great, as if the Philistines were the same as the Palestinians. Does that justify violence and refusal to accept peaceful terms on the part of the non-Jewish world towards Jews?

And when Bill Clinton was in office, the Israelis offered the Palestinians 97% of what they were asking for, and Arafat not only rejected it. He didn't even make a counteroffer! He just walked away from the negotiations and started the next intifada.

I've seen many blatant falsehoods so far on this website and this is another one. Watch Scarbarough make the same embarrassing assertion and Brzezinski's response here. In short Arafat did not reject anything. Negotiations proceeded to Taba, Egypt where Israel called an end to them when things were very close.

Fernando said...

Deffinatebely Post Traumatic Stress... deffinatebely... whate else?

Kirk said...

Again, we see a declared Israeli army, uniform and all, fighting unidentified combatants. This is always the case.

Though I don't agree with Israel's every policy, I will say they are courageous in a dark place to put on a uniform, unsure of who might be the enemy.

I have a quiz that might mean something... to others might not.

What country, in the middle east, is most attractive to western societies, societies mostly based on tolerance and equality? (I do not presume that western society is the savior of man, or at all the best system, but it does give the most freedom available to the individual person. Freedom paid with blood.)

I came to this thought while watching a sidewalk rally in my city, where many young and old persons held signs saying "Stop Israeli Fascism". This rally was during the Israeli raid last year. (You know the one were they gave Gaza warning before entering. Who does that anyways, giving warning...) It made me ponder where these people, protesters, would most be welcome with the freedoms they have and un-appreciatively lavish in.

Ultimately, in regards to children and innocents dying in war. It is terrible. I think this statement reigns true: Children inherit the sins of their parents. The only way children will avoid death is if their parents stop offering them up to the false god and prophet as martyrs.

Fernando said...

Jon... the site you presented is soooo biased it even does not deserve any consideration... for a start itt startes from the wroong assumption thate the Palestianian territory thate was divided between muslims and Jews is the actual geographical state of Israel + the (hopfully) futur state of Palestianin... it was not!!!
just see:

Maps of Israel / Palestiniahttp:

so... speakking off propaganda... Jon... grow upp...

The Fat Man said...

Brief history lesson for Jon Part 1
Jon just went to your website what a great work of fiction. Its almost as good as The Lord of the Rings.

I loved the first sentence "Historically, the land of Palestine was populated by a people known as the Palestinians"

Only one small problem with this sentence is that its Wrong. Historicaly speaking the land was first occupied by a group of people known as the Cananaites. Thats why it was called the land of Cannan. With in this large grouop of Cananites there were also other tribes. Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites.

After the Exodus and the Isrealite inhabitation of the land of Cananan another group of people invaded along the Medeteranian coast. They are known as the Philisteens. These peopel were sea fearing people beleived to be phenocian, possibly greek etc...

The tribes of israel faught them back, and formed a kingdom. After David's son Solomon the kingdom was divided into two kindgoms. Israel in the north and Judea in the south. Israel was destroyed its people carried away and scatterd into the world.

Then Judah was conqured by the Assirans its ihabitents (JEWS) were taken into exile only to return years latter to rebuild the temple. This is known as the second temple period. Not the first Alaqsa mosq period or the Dome of the Rock period.

During this time Judeah was never self atuomous state but a always under control of a forgin power. From the Persians, to finaly the Romans. During this time the land was known as Judeah.

After the Roman exiled the jews in 70 AD they completely destroyed the Temple (not the Al Aqsa Mosq, or the Dome of the rock) and in its place they built a Temple to Jupiter. They then renamed the province to "Philistia" I belive lossely translated from Latin meens "Land of the Philisteens"

Either way from this time on it was a Roman Province. With the legalization of Christianity the popluation obvioulsy became majority Christian. Jews imigrated back and fourth during this time as well.

After the Sarcen conquest and the destruction of the Temple of Jupitor. The Occupiers built on the spot "the abomonation that causes desolation" The Al Aqsa Mosq and the Dome of the Rock".

During this time different parts of Philistiea changed hands between the Saracen occupiers and the last vestiage of the Roman empire, the great liberators known as the Cursaders.

After the Libeartors where finaly driven out, Philistea changed hands between different Muslim Occupires. Until the destruction of "The Sick Man of Europe" the Ottomon Empire at the end of WW1.

It was during this time that the British were given a mandate by the League of Nations to manage not only "Philistia" wich had now become known as Palastine. But of the entire Ottomon Empire.

After WW2, the now United Nations, renewed Britians mandate, and the proccess of Partition really began.

It was during this time that the Arab League rejected partition for a number of reasons. Egypt wanted a piece, Syria wanted another slice, Lebanon had its hand in the pie as well as Jordan. Either way there was never any serious discussion about a "Palsatinian" homeland. As a matter of fact very few native muslim arabs living in the region identified with the idea of palastinian national identity. They either identified as regional arabs, local tribal identities, or with the new emerging national identities of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and even the new Heshimite Kingom of Jordan.

It wasnt until Yasir Arafat, came on the scene that a Palastinian National identity begame to take shape.

The Fat Man said...

A brief history lesson for Jon part 2

The Egyptian Yassar Arafat was born in Cario Egypt, in 1929. He was latter raised with family who lived in the "Moorocan Qurater" of Jerusalem. It should also be noted that one of these relatives was none other then "Mohammad Amin al-Husayni" The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. Who saught refuge in Nazi Germany and was a Nazi supporter.

Yasser became a "Arab Nationlist" smugling in weapons during the time of the British Mandate.

He latter faught along side the Muslim brother hood during the Arab Israeli War of 1948. After God drove out the invading Egyptian, Saracen and Ishmalites. Yasar Arafat went back to his homeland of Egypt to return to studing civil engeneering.

During the Suez Cannal crises Yassar Arafat was called into service for his Egyptian Homeland, although he never saw any combat.

After the Suez Cannal crises Yassar Arafat imigrated to Kuwait were he became friends with various other arab imigrants to form what latter became the PLO. There mandate was to succeed where other arabs had failed. And that is to drive the Jews into the sea.

Fernando said...

Brother The Fat Man...

just a correction: its not the Heshimite Kingom of Jordan, rather the Heshimite-Palestinian Kingdom of Jordan or Palestinian Heshimite Kingdom of Jordan... they do not likke to heard thate, butt thats the truth: it was created uppon the division off the british palestianian...

Jon said...

Fellas, it doesn't matter if the link I provided contains biased claims. I provided the link to show the UN partition line map, which directly contradicts Fat Man's false assertions. Fernando, you provided your own link to maps, but when I click on the link showing the UN partition lines it doesn't work.

So let's summarize. Ed is wrong to say Arafat walked away from a sweet heart deal at Camp David. Fat Man is wrong to say that Arab's left there homes in an aggressive effort to drive Jews into the sea, because the facts are the Jews are the ones that crossed the partition lines and drove Arabs from their homes. Fat Man is likewise blatantly wrong in his assertion that Jews did not get 50% of the territory as a result of the UN partition.

Distractions to bible based history lessons or charges of bias against the link I provided change none of this.

laix said...

When you steal my Country expect me to come at any of you with a knife to defend what is mine and take back what you have stolen......no matter how long it takes Palestine will be free from Israeli Occupation. It is just a matter of time, and we have time and demographics on ourside....what do all you land thieves have?

David Wood said...

Laix,

So you would say that the Jewish woman who poisoned Muhammad did the right thing? Right? After all, he had killed her people.

Now how about this one. Muhammad expelled the Jews from Medina (apart from the ones he murdered). Following your reasoning, the Jews should conquer Medina to regain their land.

Free, free Medina! End the occupation!

The Fat Man said...

Jon said...
Fellas, it doesn't matter if the link I provided contains biased claims.

So it doesnt matter that his site is biased and in its very first sentence staes ""Historically, the land of Palestine was populated by a people known as the Palestinians"

A sentence that is clearly just wrong.

The Site has a map so therefore the map must be right even though the site is biased and its opening statement is just wrong. To be honest i didnt really look at the map so I dont know if it is a map of Israel before or after 1948.

Here is a link that has a map of Israel before and after the UN partition plan, as well as a map after the 1967 WAR.

You can clearly see that the majority of Israel given in the partition plan is in the Negev wich is a desert.

http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/maps/1900s/1947-67israel.jpg

minoria said...

Laix:

80% of Israeli Jews are SECULAR and polls show MOST Israelis are in favor of giving up the occupied territories but in exchange for REAL PEACE.But Hamas and Hizbullah don't want it and so it would be crazy to unilaterally leave.

SOUTHERN LEBANON

Israel left it hoping peace wpuld ensue and Hizbullah just continued throwing rockets,what a lack of maturity.

GAZA

Israel left it also and Hamas kept attacking Israel.

DarLin|{ said...

As an Israeli, I would like to thank all sane people on this blog for supporting my country, dispelling the lies and believing in Israel's future.To the likes of "Jon" I would say this: Following Gebbels's principles of propaganda will get you nowhere.Jews of Israel do not have to ask anyone's permission to live and prosper in their homeland.Jews survived things far worse than vicious lies.We refuse to be the victims,we refuse to get down on our knees and do your bidding.We will endure and prevail, while your socialist ideas crumble to dust.We will fight again and again lies and wars forced upon us, as long as it takes and we will come victorious.

Fernando said...

Jon, I'm sorry... try this now:


Maps of Israel/Palestinia

Fernando said...

May YHWH bless you DarLin|{... and feel free to post your coments around here anytime...

Fernando said...

Jon... lets try to explain this ounce again step, by step...

1) Whate WAS called "Palestinia" in the time off the British mandate is not the geographic equivalent off whate was latter called "Palestinia" (Israel and the territory given to the "palestianians"...)...;

2) Thate british "Palestinia" was much bigger: it had whate now is known as Jordan and territories off the actual Lebanon, Syria and, iff I'm right, Egipt...;

3) Thate british "Palestinia" was divided between arab people and non-arab people in the following proportion: 90% to the arabs and 10% to the other people...;

4) the actual "Palestiania" is, therefore, the 10% given to non-arab people and, more or less, the same amoutte off territory given to creatte an arab state in thate new "Palestinia"...;

5) the arabs were nott OK withe giving 10% off the british palestinia to the jews (equivalent to 50% off the actual "Palestinia");

6) there was never a "Palestinian" identity... there was no flag, no hymn, no nothing... no one, att the time, saide they were "palestinians"... they were jews, Christians and mani arab tribes living in british Palestinia...;

7) the problem was thate the arabs never accepted thate 10% given to the jews... they invaded thate territory and FORCED arab people on the territori given to the arabs in the actual "Palestinia" to be evacuated to arab countries... thats whie in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan there exist many "palestinian" people (the arabs thate lived in the territory given to arabs in the "actual Palestinia") who do not have any rights so they feel angrie aboutt there situation and whantte to return to the territory given to the arabs in the actual "Palestinia";

8) is this anu clearer Jon?

Fernando said...

laix...

who stolle your country? there was no such thing as "your country" before the creation off Israel...

more: withe your logic Egipt, Lybia, Tunisia, Argelia, Marroco, Mauritania, Sudan, Jordan, Turkey, Irak, Iran, Apheganistan, Indonesia, and many other "countries" were occupied bie the barbaric ordes off blood seeking muslim...

laix... grow upp and start libing in the real world, and nott in the intoxicated and mythological world creatted bie islamic propaganda always full off lies, intolerance and hatte...

Jon said...

Darlin, invoking the Holocaust in order to justify Israeli repression has been done to death. Should we look the other way when Israel bombs Gaza with absolutely no credible reason simply because of the Holocaust? Should we ignore the fact that Israel and the United States stand virtually alone in their rejection of the two state settlement? Should we ignore the fact that Israel invaded Lebanon and killed 20,000 civilians with no credible pretext because of the holocaust? If anything it is because of the Holocaust and the lessons we learn from it that we should not remain silent when Israel engages in this violent behavior.

David Wood said...

John says the Jews shouldn't bring up the atrocities committed against them in order to justify anything they do against the Palestinians. This coming from a man who repeatedly glosses over Muslim atrocities by saying, "But look at what's been done to THEM by America!"

Some have suggested that Jon is an undercover Muslim. His inconsistency confirms this charge.

aussie christian said...

To those who claim that Israel has occupied arab areas, and also claim that there is no time limit to taking said land back by the sword, knife, bomb etc.

I only have this to say: The jewish nation of Israel owned all of what is claimed to be palasitinian areas long before mohummad existed and long before islam existed.

As islam and the muslim nation invaded and occupied Holy Israel Jewish lands, the nation of Israel has the God given right to re-enter their stolen lands and take back said lands by any means at their disposal, and islam should now leave the Jewish occupied territories.

And on their way out they should stop at every home and appologise for 1800 years of murder and thieft.

And while we are at it, mohummad admits to invading the arab peninsular driving Jews and Christians from their homes, so as no time limit exists for the return of land, mecca and medina should now be returned to their rightful owners ie: Jews and Christians. Who owned this land and much more before the invention of islam and muslims.

Now if our islamic posters wish to continue to use such arguments, then they will be in dire straights due to the fact that Israel and Jews and Christians where around far and long before islam and muslims.

Peace and Love.

Fernando said...

Professor Wood saide: «John says the Jews shouldn't bring up the atrocities committed against them in order to justify anything they do against the Palestinians. This coming from a man who repeatedly glosses over Muslim atrocities by saying, "But look at what's been done to THEM by America!"»...

yep... weel saide Professor Wood, butt Jon is onlie a voice between many post-modern relativists "leftists" (and this is nott a political statement)...

The Fat Man said...

Jon said ...
"Darlin, invoking the Holocaust in order to justify Israeli repression has been done to death. Should we look the other way when Israel bombs Gaza with absolutely no credible reason simply because of the Holocaust? "

No credibale reason? Hmm what about the Rockets fired into Israel on a daily basis? Oh thats right these rockets only killed a handfull of Jews, and those rockets dont have actual war heads, and the rockets were made in people's basements. SO really the Israeli's should not respond to Muslim Arab Naked aggression.

Jon go sell crazy someplace else man, we are all booked up here.

Jon said...

Jon go sell crazy someplace else man, we are all booked up here.

I'm sure you'd like that. Then you would have nobody that would challenge your many false assertions. Like your claim now that Hamas was firing the rockets on a daily basis. In fact Israel's recent assault on Gaza, which is what I'm referring to, the one that killed about 1400, was completely unprovoked. For proof go here.

The pattern here is repeated over and over. You with the false assertions. Me with the proof rebutting them. You then avoiding dealing with your errors.

Fernando, the link works, but when I click on the UN partition line map I get redirected to an irrelevant place. Still, the link I provided was sourced, so what's wrong with the info I showed (once again showing another error yet to be dealt with). If you don't like my website, go to the UN website. The info is the same.

Sepher Shalom said...

David,

I agree Jon is likely a Muslim (a "revert"). In fact, I think I recognize him from PalTalk. If it´s who I´m thinking of, Nakdimon already embarrassed him in a debate there.

Of course, my Jedi skills are a little rusty lately so I could be wrong....

Fernando said...

Jon saide: «If you don't like my website, go to the UN website. The info is the same»...

no it is not... they foccus only on the territory thate is Isarel and the nowadays "Palestinia"... they are nott interested on focusing on the larger picture off the former "Palestinian" tahte was reparted... thats the point dear Jon; thates teh point...

minoria said...

PART 1

Hello:

I will like to add my bit again.I am glad Darlin things we support Israel.It is being attacked.Sometimes we don't agree with every decision of X party in power there but there are things that are just too much from the other side.

NEW INFO

It is always good to know new info to ty to understand things.

THE JEWS IN PALESTINE IN 1948

There were 600,000 of which 450,000 were FOREIGN-BORN,many of them REFUGEES from Nazism.Most of the 150,000 native-born were direct descendants of European Jews.

THE SITUATION

Let us say the 450,000 would have had to leave in 1948 as mere foreigners.Could they go back?

COMMUNISM IN EASTERN EUROPE

I think most were from Poland,Russia,Ukraine,some from Germany.Going back to Germany,even West Germany,after what the German Nazis did would have been grotesque.And in the COMMUNIST regime human rights were suppressed,private property was under attack.And on top of that the ECONOMY was BAD and the Poles,Russians,etc considered the Jews there to be foreigners also,not one of them.Judeophobia.

minoria said...

PART 2

ALGERIA IN 1962

There were 900,000 PIEDS NOIRS(descendants of Europeans but born in Algeria) and 120,000 JEWS in ALGERIA then.It became an independant country.All of them left because they would have been discriminated and mistreated by the Muslims(as had been done by the French)The French army had killed 1 million Muslims(though some say 400,000) and the Jews and Pieds Noirs have been for France,they considered themselves French.

The most famous one of them is ALBERT CAMUS,the great French existentialist writer who wrote THE STRANGER and won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1960.

FRENCH CITIZENSHIP

The 120,000 Jews went to FRANCE.Why?Because they had French CITIZENSHIP.If they did not,they would have gone to ISRAEL.

WESTERN EUROPE IN 1948

Italy,France,UK,Germany were in ECONOMIC WASTE.It took decades to recover from WW II.They did NOT want to accept REFUGEES,even Jewish ones,for economic reasons.The US then had very strict laws and getting in was difficult.The reason France took in 1 MILLION from ALGERIA was because they were FRENCH CITIZENS.

THE 450,000 JEWS IN ISRAEL

Most had no American,Italian,French,British citizenship,those countries did not want them and so they had no choice but to resist Muslim rule over them in 1948 in a war.It was that or to be discriminated.

BAD PRECEDENT

You must remember that the GRAND MUFTI or Jerusalem,the Arab leader in Palestine,their boss,had been a supporter of Hitler and knew of the Holocaust.He has even organized a MUSLIM BOSNIAN army group in Bosnia that killed 90 PERCENT of Bosnian Jews.Of course HE would have started killing Jews if the Germans had conquered Palestine.

LATER

He escaped after the war.He was in danger of being tried and exexuted.And he was given PROTECTION by the Muslims in Egypt.So then is that not good reason for the 450,000 Jews of foreign birth in Palestine to be against Muslim rule?

Jon said...

6) there was never a "Palestinian" identity... there was no flag, no hymn, no nothing... no one, att the time, saide they were "palestinians"... they were jews, Christians and mani arab tribes living in british Palestinia...;

If true, why does this matter? They were the indigenous people. Maybe they didn't have an organized government like ours at the time. But they had been living there for hundreds of years, they owned their homes and property. Why is it right to drive them from their homes without compensation?

7) the problem was thate the arabs never accepted thate 10% given to the jews... they invaded thate territory and FORCED arab people on the territori given to the arabs in the actual "Palestinia" to be evacuated to arab countries...

Are you saying that it was the Arab's that invaded and deported the indigenous people in the region in order to create animosity against Jews? If so, this is an unbelievable re-write of history. Do you believe this? Do you read any serious history? What about the 400 towns crushed by the Jews as the pushed their way into the designated Palestinian territories. This had nothing to do with the refugee's? Not even hard core Zionist Alan Dershowitz would assert such a preposterous claim.

Jon said...

For the record, I'm not saying that if anyone has long dead ancestors that had a claim on territory then you're obligated to grant the claim. There's no point in white Europeans evacuated the States for the Native Americans at this stage. But the fact is much of what was done by the colonists was wrong, and had I been alive at the time I think the right thing to do would have been to object to those wrongs.

The Jews were present in AD 70 and were driven out at various times by various empires. Much of that was wrong. But that's centuries in the past. They can't use that as a justification to expel the now living people that live there. Those people had nothing to do with the Ottoman empire or the Roman empire. If you want someone else's land the right thing to do is to buy it from them, not drive them out at the point of a gun.

Fernando said...

Jon saide: «They were the indigenous people. Maybe they didn't have an organized government like ours at the time. But they had been living there for hundreds of years, they owned their homes and property. Why is it right to drive them from their homes without compensation?»...

yes they were... and those indeginous people were given the chance to live into 3 countries: an arab one (Jourdania more or less, Israel -- 10% off the global terrirory-- amd the new Palestinain state)...

a) Israel accepted non jews on its territory;

b) muslim countries invaded Israel and forced many, many muslims from the "new" Palestian territory to inmigrate to Lebanon, Syria and Jordania to use them as reffugies and demonize Israel...

c) muslim countries deported jews to Israel...

so: who drove who for whate?


you saide: «Are you saying that it was the Arab's that invaded and deported the indigenous people in the region in order to create animosity against Jews?»...

yes, thats porecisely whate I'm saying... and this is not re-writting history, rather pointting out historical true... or do you deny thate this happened in many cases? not in all, obviously, butt in many... and who creatted the conditions to the refugge problem? was Israel that did nott accepted the 90%-10% partition? or was the arab invation thate creatted the humanitary problem thate creatted the mental willing to go to the arab nations? hummm...

hey... I'll enter violentely in your house where my wife works as a domestic worker; you start fighting withe me; my wife runs away to my house to seek for security; I'm expeled from your house withe my wifes belongings...

now: who started the conflict? did you not have the right to not want my hiffe back working in your house? did you not hade the right to putt her belongings out off your house? hummmm...

Jon said...

yes, thats porecisely whate I'm saying... and this is not re-writting history, rather pointting out historical true... or do you deny thate this happened in many cases? not in all, obviously, butt in many... and who creatted the conditions to the refugge problem?

Seriously Fernando, what is the basis for your claims that it was the Arab's that drove the Palestinians from their homes rather than the Israeli armed forces?

Fernando said...

Hi Jon...

just some evidences from whate I saide:


"The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live.”

— Palestinian Authority (then) Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) (Falastin a-Thaura, (March 1976)


“Since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave. Only a few months separated our call to them to leave and our appeal to the United Nations to resolve on their return”

Haled al Azm - The Memoirs of Haled al Azm, vol. I. Beirut, 1973, pp. 386-387...

Jon: I'm glad thate you allowes me expressing this historical trues here in public since many people wantte to obliterate them...

Jon said...

Those are interesting quotes, Fernando. I'm not sure the first one proves anything though. The Arab's were defeated and had no choice but to abandon them. And as refugees they likely weren't treated well. Nobody likes a bunch of homeless foreigners invading your country. Nobody would want to see a bunch of people from New Orleans after Katrina to come to their neighborhood.

Your next quote says "encouraged them to leave." That may be, but don't you think that was perhaps because Israel was flattening their towns and basically killing them in droves? The primary cause of the refugee problem was not the Arab's who treated them poorly as they fled to Arab states. It was the Israeli weaponry that was killing them and destroying their towns. If I kill your family and torch your house and you run to the neighbor and the neighbor doesn't treat you great, is the neighbor to blame?

I think the only debate about the cause of the refugees is whether it was by design of Zionists or if it was an unintended consequence of war by the Israeli armed forces. There used to be claims that Arab's had encouraged the natives to leave with radio broadcasts but that has since been debunked.

I think your re-write of history is still irrelevant though. The Palestinians and Arab states stand ready to agree to the international consensus for the two state solution. Assigning blame for past sins is interesting, and I think you're way off the mark in your view of history, but in the end we don't have to agree on that. Why not accept the peaceful settlement right now regardless? Blame the Arab states if it makes you feel better. Why is that grounds for ignoring the peaceful agreement that's been available for the last 30 years?

Fernando said...

Hi Jonn... iff you do not recogniza Haled al Azm, he was Syria's prime Minister after the 1948 ware...

Fernando said...

Oh Jon, Jon... Oh Jon, Jon... when someone says something you jump in the aire and stard saying: «that's false»; then thate person presents evidence for its claims; then you say somethingue like «eben withe those clear ebidences they do not mean nothing and I'll stick withe my unconsustanciated theories»; then, finally, you jump again in the air and poin another, and another point not realizing your inconsistencie... to sad Jon... you're lost in your intoxicated world... I won't continue to plau thate same and old children's game withe someone who clearly is always playing the same old broken record in all these threads eben after many people debuked your false arguments over and over...

butt just somethingue for a thought: since the creation off Isarel who have been those who have rejected more times the two state solution? Do you habe a single clue aboutte thate? Do you? After reading your last commente I know you do'nt; and one thingue is for sure: neither the so called palestinians neither theire arab emprisioners agree withe the original "two state solution"...

minoria said...

The way I see it is this:yes the UN in 1947 decided to give the Jews a little bit of territory but it gave them no help to defend it,no UN army was organized to maintain peace.NOBODY thought in 1948 that the Muslims would lose the war.It was assumed the Jews would be defeated,the UN proved useless as many times.The Muslim armies were simply too great to be defeated.

TIBET

It was assumed what would happen was what happened to TIBET,a total defeat.I think that is exactly what the UN expected,so it gave no help really.

AGAIN

The same thing in 1967.All expected the Muslims to win that time.Again it seemed Israel would be conquered.What happened has happened many times before:quality is more important than quantity( a Latin saying).

EXAMPLES

Look at the battle of GAUGAMELA where DARIUS,the Persian king,had and army of 140,000 against 47,000 Macedonians of ALEXANDER the GREAT.He was defeated.And Alexander became king of the Empire.

Or the Polish king JOHN SOBIESKI who in 1683 with 30,000 Poles defeated 90,000 Turks and saved Vienna.

Jon said...

Minoria, you are mistaken to think the Arab's were expected to win. As soon as weaponry from Czechoslovakia started pouring in the game was up. The Arabs could not withstand it.

The same is true of 1967. It's usually true that you don't initiate hostilities if you are expected to lose. This is another case of Israel initiating hostilities, as they do so frequently. You don't normally do that if you expect to be defeated.

Egypt in 1973 was an exception maybe, though they did surprisingly well and ended up motivating Israel to relinquish their occupation of northeastern Egypt.