Obama holds Netanyahu at “gunpoint”
By Ted Belman
Before forming the present government PM Netanyahu stood for the following
-
- no two state solution
- no Shalit trade as was then being negotiated
- no construction freeze and
- no presentation of an Israeli plan for its borders
Since taking office he violated all these supposed red lines. He gave a speech in which he accepted “two states for two peoples”. He made the Shalit trade he previously had opposed. He imposed a 10 month freeze for nothing in return and in many ways imposed a de facto freeze.
And now, it appears he has agreed to present, “comprehensive proposals” for resolving key aspects of conflict within three months.
By agreeing to this and not rejecting the peace process, Israel is accepting negotiations which aim to bridge the gap. Netanyahu has thus crossed another red line.
Bibi had insisted on negotiations without preconditions. But with this latest report that Israel has agreed to present a Plan before negotiations can start, he has accepted the precondition of presenting a plan before negotiations start.
Netanyahu inherited the Shalit negotiations and once complained that he was dealt a lousy hand as though he couldn’t have started all over again. Similarly, he is not prepared to start all over again on peace negotiations and is prepared to play with the hand he was dealt. It too is a lousy hand.
By Netanyahu formally agreeing to present such proposals, he confirms that he is following Olmert and Barak. This is something Bibi has repeatedly said he would not do just as he has always said he is against the Shalit deal.
This goes way beyond playing rope-a-dope to buy time. This shows a seriousness about negotiations and an intention to really negotiate along the dictates of Obama and his proxy, the Quartet.
Netanyahu has to ask for more than he expects to get, yet on the other hand, if he asks for too much the Quartet will say he is not serious and penalize him/Israel for it. Not for a moment, do I believe that this was his idea or that he willingly went along.
The article Knesset visitor blasts Obama and Netanyahu advises that MK Eldad accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of buckling under intense pressure from President Barack Obama, who wants to prevent any Israeli retaliation against the Palestinian Authority in its bid to win recognition as a state from the United Nations.
-
He (Eldad) charged that Obama was holding Netanyahu “at gunpoint” – the gun being the U.S. threat to go back on its promise to veto the Palestinian statehood bid in the UN Security Council.
Specifically, Obama has demanded that Netanyahu and Israel’s supporters in the United States pressure Congress to abort two pending resolutions to penalize the Palestinian Authority (PA) if it pursues its bid, Eldad claimed.
One would shut off U.S. aid funds to the Palestinians and a second would support Israel’s right to annex the West Bank. The legal justification for such actions, cited by many Israeli officials, would be that the unilateral statehood request would be a direct violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords.
The inescapable conclusion is that Bibi felt he had no choice but to agree with the Quartet’s new Plan in which they proposed that the parties meet for a month and then prepare proposals within the following three months. To my mind the Quartet would not have come out with their plan, at that time, had not Bibi agreed to it.
The Palestinian request for recognition is still with the UNSC and will not be voted on or vetoed until Bibi presents his plan. So Eldad was 100 % correct.
Diplomacy being what it is, the Quartet will do its utmost to get Bibi to better Olmert’s offer. Abbas had offered to allow Israel to keep much less land. Abbas wanted to keep Ariel and much of east Jerusalem including Maaleh Adumin. When Netanyahu formed his government he made it clear that in no way would he match Olmert’s offer. I don’t see how he can avoid it.
When the Kadimah government proposed convergence, there was great opposition to expelling 125,000 Jews. Olmert tried to lessen this number by keeping Ariel and Maaleh Adumin. If he had succeeded, I think as much as 75,000 would have needed to be expelled.
Haaretz published the details of Olmert’s Plan
-
Olmert wanted to annex 6.3 percent of the West Bank to Israel, areas that are home to 75 percent of the Jewish population of the territories. His proposal would have also involved evacuation of dozens of settlements in the Jordan Valley, in the eastern Samarian hills and in the Hebron region. In return for the annexation to Israel of Ma’aleh Adumim, the Gush Etzion bloc of settlements, Ariel, Beit Aryeh and settlements adjacent to Jerusalem, Olmert proposed the transfer of territory to the Palestinians equivalent to 5.8 percent of the area of the West Bank as well as a safe-passage route from Hebron to the Gaza Strip via a highway that would remain part of the sovereign territory of Israel but where there would be no Israeli presence.
When his offer, made at the end of his term became public, the Israelis were outraged. It is for this reason that Bibi said he rejected it.
It is clear that Olmert was negotiating swaps. Swaps were first mentioned by the Saudi Government when it presented the Saudi Plan in 2002. The Bush administration insisted that this plan, as amended in the Arab Initiative, be included in the Roadmap. Olmert thus had accepted the idea of swaps even though Res 242 did not mention it or require it.
The Haaretz article indicated that Olmert’s Plan followed up on negotiations in Annapolis, though it was expressed there, that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. His plan was also discussed with the Bush administration who had agreed to finance the development of the Negev to accommodate the expelled Israelis.
And we must not forget that Res 242 allowed us to keep some of the territories and to have secure borders. Oslo was founded on it. Although Bibi flat out rejected Obama’s framework for negotiations last May, by agreeing to present his plan he is in effect accepting it in deed if not in words. It irritates me to be fighting over inches i.e. whether we give them 97.6% of the land vs 100 %. The negotiations should center on whether we give them Areas A and B representing 40% of the land or perhaps 10 or 20% more. The Obama proposal makes a mockery of Res 242.
The Atlantic Mag recently published a report Is Peace Possible and I reported on it here.
This report, like the Geneva Initiative before it, was clearly intended to narrow the gaps and produce a settlement between the Olmert and the Abbas proposals. This is what Obama and the Quartet envisage for a settlement. It most certainly will be based on the ’67 lines with swaps and will require Israel to get less land than she wants and to give more land than she wants. Amb Daniel Kurtzer was one of the advisers on this project and we all know that he is against the settlements and always has been. I believe that the Obama administration, the Israeli Left including Yossi Beilin probably had input as well.
I question some of the population numbers quoted in the Atlantic article. The 500,000 figure for settlers, quoted in the Atlantic may have been right early in the Kadima government but it no longer is. The Jewish population increases at the rate of 6% per annum in the territories and therefor would be well over 600,000 today, five years later. Recently, MK Ketzela said it was closer to 700,000.
Finally it is not by chance that just this week Abe Foxman and David Harris launched their Pledge of silence to minimize opposition to what is going on.
And I haven’t even mentioned the so called right of return and Jerusalem. Both Olmert and Barak have offered to take in a “token” number of “refugees” (perhaps as many as 100,000) and to share or internationalize Jerusalem.
Rest assured that the Golan is next.
There is no way that the Quartet would allow Bibi to get away with drawing up a plan where we get to keep Area C as our opener as an example and there is no way Bibi is going to do that with the gun to her head.
Someone once said that when the Israelis vote in a labor-left government that is what they get but when they vote in a right-wing Likud government what they still get is a left wing government.
The only way Eldad could know enough to be able to charge this with such specificity is if BiBi or an aide TOLD it to him directly (tho under condition of anonymity, etc) — as a means of getting the info out to a supportive public, while maintaining an outwardly “arms’s length” relationship.
If he has the sand for it, he could go in “over the horns” and warn BHO (thru channels) that he will assert full rights under the Mandate, as well as UN Charter Article 80 (which his father had a direct hand in drafting) and annex the territories. This would mean that any proposed Security Counsel Resolution on Pali statehood would itself be subject to charges of flagrant illegality.
I realize the world wouldn’t much care about that, but the US linkage to the Mandate under the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 — together with the invoking of estoppel in re earlier US support of the could be made the subject of a grassroots, US campaign that Congress would support.
Howard Grief’s remarks on the applicability of estoppel to the post-Mandate situation:
“This doctrine prohibits any state from denying what it previously admitted or recognized in a treaty or other international agreement. In the Convention of 1924, the US recognized all the rights granted to the Jewish people under the Mandate [whose text the Convention incorporates verbatim and in its entirety], in particular the right of Jewish settlement anywhere in Palestine or the Land of Israel. Therefore the US government is legally estopped today from denying the right of Jews in Israel to establish settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, which have been approved by the government of Israel.
“In addition, the US is also debarred from PROTESTING the establishment of these settlements, because they are based on a right which became embedded in US domestic law after the 1924 Convention was ratified by the US Senate and proclaimed by President Calvin Coolidge on December 5, 1925.
“This Convention has terminated, but not the rights granted under it to the Jewish people.
“The American policy opposing Jewish settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza is a fit subject for judicial review in US courts, because it violates Jewish legal rights formerly recognized by the United States, and which still remain part of its domestic law.
“A legal action to overturn this policy, if it was to be adjudicated, might also put an end to the American initiative to promote a so-called ‘Palestinian’ state which would abrogate the existing right of Jewish settlement in all areas of the Land of Israel that [would] fall under its [i.e., the contemplated ‘Palestinian’ state’s] illegal rule.”
[http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/02-issue/grief-2.htm
Howard Grief, “Legal Rights and Title of Sovereignty of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel and Palestine Under International Law,” NATIV Online: A Journal of Politics and the Arts, Vol. 2, 2004]
This is all “game playing”. We know that the Arabs will never accept the “two states” solution. Abbas can never appear softer than Hamas and Hamas is adamant in rejecting it. Israel’s best ploy now is to keep delaying things until after the next U.S. Election and hope for a change in the presidency. In the meantime Irael has certain realities to deal with, specifically the supply of arms, etc, from the U.S. There is no harm in talking, and talking, and talking — as long as there is no giving. With skill Netanyahu can delay things until after next November when he will know morecexactly what he may face for not a few months but for four more years. Right now talk but give nothing.
I agree with your desires Ted but there is a time and a place for the real hardball decisions to be made and that time is not now. In the meantime we, in truth, hold the best cards.
And if they did? Actually they did in Oslo Agreements and the Road Map agreements, what they are opposed to is recognizing Israel as a Jewish State.
What if they lie to the world and do recognize Israel as a Jewish State? Big deal!! Who cares what they call us? They can always change their minds afterward and what ever excuse they would conjure up will be accepted by all of the worlds governments. It’s our self inflicted trap just waiting to be sprung and it will.
A-Do you really believe Obama would dare do anything now to make Israel a campaign issue with him facing what seems like an uphill battle for re-election? What makes you so secure that any Republican candidate will be more supportive of Israel than Obama. B- Obama is not worse for Israel than Bush if anything he is even weaker. Bush followed Obana’s policy re: Israel quite closely and if there is a difference it’s cosmetic.
May I remind you that under Bush we gave up Gaza, Allowed Hamas to take over Gaza, were forced to give up control of the border between Egypt and Gaza. Were forced to withdraw from Lebanon and forced to accept UN so called Peace keepers who allowed Hezbollah not only to rearm with missiles and rockets they now have 3 times as many and ones that can hit any target in Israel. America allowed Hezbollah to actually take over Lebanon under Bush. America is still sending advanced weapons to the Lebanese Army controlled by Hezbollah. Supplied Gulf states and Saudi Arabia with 30 billion worth of advanced American arms. Nuclear technology to Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Forced us into suicidal Road Map, accepted the Saudi Plan, and not only pressured us into ceasing building in Jerusalem and the West Bank but deducted from our aid packages the dollar values of our building where they didn’t want us to. Do you want a list of what came to be known as confidence gestures by Israel to the Palis forced on us by Bush?
I am always amazed how short peoples memories are especially when blind American political partisanship for either the Democrats or Republicans replaces truth facts, and logical common sense.
I can’t recall more than a few so called pro Israel commenter on this site who criticized Reagan or Bush for their anti-Israel policies.
I think I’ve tended to criticize you more than Bush, Yamit; though I’m sure “W” didn’t escape my criticism. I criticized you because you seemed to have nothing BUT criticism to offer. Bush was our only alternative: If Kerry had gotten elected, we would still have had Bush; he would just have had a different name. I also spouted off other inane things, which I can’t remember, as did you. Through it all, Laura remained faithful not only to “W” but also to Richard Nixon. Wherever she goes after death, I imagine she’ll be surrounded by Republicans.
The thing that makes Obama worse for Israel than Bush, is that “O” is putting the kind of pressure on Israel during his re-election bid, that Bush didn’t dare do until he was safely into his second term. We have a real choice before us now (ha ha): Romney promises to keep his hair combed and keep on smiling, no matter what; and Herman Cain promises us a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, and a free pack of cigarettes with every pizza.
I put more faith in the “Occupy” movement, than I do in the next election. Has anyone noticed that Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel was in charge of incarcerating hundreds of protestors? Those energetic young people are as good news for Obama, as the Antiwar Movement was for LBJ. Those antiwar folks demanded CHANGE! and gave us Richard Nixon. Meanwhile, America was so distracted by all its internal turmoil, it was unable to devote enough “attention” to Israel. The latter had to fend for herself, and beat the socks off of all her enemies. Maybe we can get a repeat.
Joseph,
Shouldn’t Israel be more concerned about their historical roots
and the fate of previous Prime Ministers who attempted to give away
portions of, “THE PROMISED LAND?”
There is no such thing as a historical right. Ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Rome, and Turkey learned that painful lesson about the same land. American Indians don’t rule their country now. 44 years of occupation since the Six-Day war, coupled with the indigenous population’s abandonment of the land and de facto Israeli sovereignty, is Israel’s much more valid argument.
Israel appeals to some Christians by recalling Israel’s biblical right to the land, forgetting that most Christians believe they themselves replacements of the Jews as the New Israel. In any case, the land is destined for some Israel, whether old or new, and not for Muslims, who make a religious point of oppressing Christians.
Serbs and Bosnians are still enemies after six hundred years. It takes only a few hotheads to stir people up. Palestinians will always remember what they perceive as Israeli injustice. The most expedient solution is to expel the Palestinians, disperse them, and pressure them into assimilation with other Arabs. Jews preserved their national aspirations in diaspora because of Jewish distinctiveness.
Jews are not settling our historical lands now. The historical lands are exactly the “occupied territories.” The Jewish state was there while the sea coast was dominated first by Philistines, then by Greeks and Romans. Jews held it only for short time, and it was largely a pagan area.
Jews demonstrably have a stronger historical connection to Europe than to Palestine: Jews have lived for 1,900 years of our history in Europe, much longer than in the Lands of Israel.
Cleansing the land G-d gave us is a major commandment. It is arguably the major political commandment. Jews must drive away the inhabitants of the land. There can be no coexistence. Amalekites, Canaanites or Palestinians, who would never be loyal citizens of a Jewish state.
A Jewish state populated by Arabs is impossible.
There is a single reason for Jews to conquer and settle this land: G-d has told us to do so.
This is a good point. The Torah warns Jews that if they allow the nations to stay, “they will be snares in your eyes and thorns in your side.” That warning has been fulfilled to the letter.
The notion a Palestinian Arab state will bring about peace is a lie. People in Israel don’t want to see the Aeabs’ true nature any more than the ancestors of the Jewish people wanted to face who the Canaanites and Philistines were.
There is no courage in Israel today and “every man does what is right in his own eyes.” That is the reality today and until Israel obeys the Torah to the letter, it will never know peace and security in its own land.
Absolutely….G-d gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people…every bit of land attest to that….as does the Bible…
Not too sure about that “most” part, Yamit.
In the US the fastest growing segment of self-identified Christians are the Evangelicals, and they overwhelmingly reject Replacement Theology.
The RCC is the largest existing component of Christians, and their magisterium has been in the process of progressively abandoning more & more of the Supersessionist stance since Vatican Two.
Worldwide, it’s harder to tell where Christians are at (as to Replacement Theology), they’re so much in flux as a group. For example, Europe is rapidly losing its Christian persona altogether, while the African continent (subSahara) is rapidly acquiring one.
True Christians have discovered that Replacement Theology is a Catholic doctrine and have rejected it, just as they have rejected other Catholic doctrines such as these:
Catholicism at its foundation is not Christian. It is Babylonian and Mithraic. Early Catholics murdered true Christians. Early Christianity was Jewish. Constantine, the sun pope, required Christians to deny their Jewish roots or be murdered. The Pope may be Catholic but he is not Christian. As in other secret societies such as Freemasonry and the Illuminati, there is a small elite group at the head that knows what is going on and they deceive their followers who they regard as goyim or cattle. That is from their own Catholic documents. Think about it ~ G-d blesses His own and curses those who are false and don’t keep His commandments. The countries which have been blessed have a Protestant Christian foundation. Those who are cursed have a Catholic foundation which only enriches the few at the top. You can tell who is false by their fruit. Pedophilia identifies the Catholic Church as false.
This is, in any case, off-point, Teshuvah, as to Yamit’s comment. He wasn’t addressing the question of what is or isn’t “truly Christian,” but, rather, what he perceives the majority of self-styled “Christians” (of whatever stripe) as believing regarding God’s election of Israel, and their own ‘replacement’ of the Jews.
It’s hard to say where it’s at, where those NUMBERS are concerned.
TO dweller: Then his perception is wrong. Most Christians support Israel and think Replacement Theology is a lie. Most Christians believe G-d is returning the Jewish people to their land, Israel, and support that. Probably most of Israel’s supporters are Christians. Many Jews do not appreciate the support of Christians and continually make unkind statements about Christians. Yeshua said, “Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Lu 13:35. He was referring to Himself but by extension to His followers. Anti-Christian behavior delays the coming of the Messiah. I know that is a red rag to a bull, but some Jews seem to support Muslims more than they do Christians who support them. They whine about antisemitism but are in fact, anti-Christian. That isn’t even logical.
My feeling is that the so-called “palestinians” have no right to a damn thing from the Jewish state. Let their arab brethren accept them into their own countries where land is plentiful. That is what the west should be demanding. The west should be demanding that the arab countries absorb them. That is the only real solution.
As for Abe Foxman, we will not be silent regarding Obama’s anti-Israel policies. It has become clear that the ADL’s agenda under Foxman has been more about shilling for the democrat party rather than as a Jewish advocacy group.
Obama is not going to be around long enough to do any such thing.
Israel has no legal or moral right to build settlements in areas they have admitted are “negotiable” and therefore may not be theirs. They have proven this by dismantling the settlements in Gaza. They should have annexed these areas in 1967 when they acquired them while defending themselves which would have made settlements legally defensible.
They have been honest enough to document this in their founding charters, but no one in the UN, US and Israeli leadership uses this documented evidence in their discussions of this subject.
I’m glad to see someone put “The Promised Land” in quotes because this is a religious faith belief that means nothing in geopolitics. In fact, the “Promised Land” was “unpromised” for centuries until the Ottomans were defeated in WW-I.
I would have agreed with you except that successive Israel governments have accepted the premise of “the so-called Palestinians”.
Israel could have made this part of the status quo in 1967, but unfortunately did not. Now, if they develop a spine, they should still do so at the next opportunity to defend themselves.
Sadly, about 45% of American Jews are still shilling for the Democrat Party.
I don’t think Netanyahu needs intense pressure to buckle. In fact, he is all too eager to buckle if he thinks he will be able to get around the objections of nationalists in his party and in his coalition. He knows what bones to throw alright!
It’s raining Missiles herein the South…Payback for freeing Shalit..Hamas and the other Terror organizations feel empowered. So far 15 kasams and Grads have it Israels South.
BB deciding how to respond. Consensus here is response will be measured so as not to escalate. Hoping it will stop raining by am tommorrow.
Lots of damage besides a school 8 cars went up in flames when a Grad hit a parking lot in Asdod.
Ashdod School, Apartment Bldg Struck by Rockets; Three Injured
Gaza Arab terrorists fired at least three Grad-style Katyusha rockets at Israel on Saturday, one of them hitting a school in Ashdod.
Two Israelis lightly hurt as seven rockets strike southern Israel
Gaza rocket hits residential building in Ashdod, wounding one man; other rockets explode in Gan Yavne, and west of Be’er Sheva; IDF kills five Islamic Jihad militants just hours before rocket attack.
Rocket from Gaza lands near home in Ashdod; 1 injured
Extensive damage reported as rocket lands in parking lot between 2 residential buildings; 11 rockets fired at South in total; passer-by in Gan Yavne hit by shrapnel; 1 rocket hits empty school in Ashdod.
Moshe Ami. The first victim of the “deal with the devil.”
When Jews subvert justice and enable evil, the nation gets punished.
Hamas is nothing more than a tool in the hands of G-d to test Israel’s resolve. It was found wanting.
And Israel’s weakness cost a family its husband and father. I liked to say those who defrauded widows and orphans will see themselves be made widows and orphans. It gives me no pleasure to say I was right!
The country should turn now from its evil ways and live before evil consumes more of its children!
That would be correct assuming that the Israeli leadership have any such things…
Rocket fire rocks south; injuries reported
South under fire again in wake of IAF attack in Gaza: Alarm sounds in various southern communities. Man hit by shrapnel in Gan Yavne; rocket hits school courtyard in Ashdod. Second barrage targets residential building, one injured. Islamic Jihad claims responsibility
Southern Israel on high alert after Grad explodes near Ashdod
Saudi Price offered today 1,000,000 dollars to any Palis who kidnaps another Israeli soldier.
The terrorists believe with their long range Grads and threats of more kidnappings that they now have deterrence and are saying that Israel and the IDF are afraid to enter Gaza, or come near the border.
This can all be laid at the feet of our cowardly PM BB and his merry band of pygmies. Hamas now have Grads that not only can hit Tel Aviv but much further North.
Tonight there is to be a Large social justice demonstration, organizers won’t cancel because they don’t care about the South and there is no solidarity with a third of the country under attack in bomb shelters. Schools in the south will be closed tomorrow. They should be demonstrating to make Gaza into a GIANT PARKING LOT.
Stupid Jews!!!
I like the parking lot idea. Urban renewal!
Today we read Caroline Glick’s latest article generally addressing the Barak-Netanyahu styled “idf” … prowess… No need to repeat what is in her article as most of you will receive it.
And the majority know the facts.
Bottom line is that the the “idf” is not a National Defense artifact under those two and their cadres control. One must disregard
In fact they are only geared to attack Jews and destroy Jewish properties or fabricate “plots”.
“Jewish terrorists” It is and old misnomer used by the PTB here to harm Jews they target.
As all have noticed ALL, w/o exception, Jewish so called terrorist detainees ended up being released due to lack of evidence. But not before the unJews formed the famous “files” that wi haunt those braded for as long as teh “combina” remain in power.
Most likely all the so called Jewish “terror” acts, including mosques and “idf” stored vehicles attacks are either planned by the “Jewish Sektion” aka “yevsektzia” since Stalin years, or by the “idf” hit gangs themselves.
Listening to ghastly “commanders” speak, there can be no doubt about it.
The condition is such that Jews must start considering to prepare for self defense in earnest against all enemies, regretfully including much of the idf general staff, the “yevsektzia”, police special troopers, etc.
They will attack Jewish families, collaborate with the islamic enemy which actions that are common fare since the Rabin_Peres years, destroy homes and fabricate files or falsify “invetigations” to cover up for their islamic “partners”.
BEWARE and PREPARE!
Shy Guy would agree with you.
The nation has yet to repent.
As long as Israel allows its enemy to breathe, it rebels against Heaven and rejects G-d’s gift.
More Jews will surely die until then. I have no joy in saying it at all! It is just the truth.
Time for Feiglin…..
where is Feiglin????
I was in Israel for three weeks, didn’t hear his name once. Not in the news, not in the minds and mouths of Israelis, most of which don’t even know who he is!! His written articles in Makor Rishon are useless!! I was never even able to buy the paper from a newstand, most don’t even carry it!
A bright man, with lots to say, lost in the wilderness! where is Feiglin indeed!
Moshe Feiglin is here.
Since his son was a victim of one of those “accidents” that regularily seem to affect the families of true leaders in the making, we have noticed that Moshe Feiglin has substantially slowed down…
Shmuel,
Are you suggesting that Feiglin’s son was deliberatly targeted to slow down Feiglin???? Ridiculous!
He has slowed down since the accident, for sure. That’s my point, he’s become irrelevant.
Tshuva proves my point. Other than his website, he’s nowhere to be seen. And who knows how many people have access to or knowledge of it.
The first article I ever read by Moshe Feiglin was just after 9/11 entitled “Why America Has Already Lost the War” and is a MUST READ. It was earlier posted Israpundit but has been pulled. I consider it a classic and Moshe brilliant. Life’s trials and tribulations come to test us. Moshe wrote here about his son’s accident and how it changed him, meaning Moshe, not his son:
Abraham took his son Isaac to the mountain and came back changed. I would love to hear how Moshe was changed. Certainly he isn’t now a peacenik, is he? Netanyahu deserves opposition. Lots of it.
Dismantling the Gaza communities “proves” NOTHING — and illustrates nothing (except the capabilities of corruption in the Israeli political system).
Moreover, what the govt in 1967 SHOULD’VE done is irrelevant to this discussion.
They did what they deemed politically possible and desirable under the circumstances they confronted.
Furthermore, permitting areas to be “negotiable” does NOT indicate — or presume or imply — that the areas “may not be theirs [Israel's].” The most that can be said about that is that they are areas over which a decision was made, by the govt in power at the time, to not fight.
The legal reasons are not implicit in the decision.
More significantly though, a policy like you posit would invariably tie the hands of every government that ever followed previous ones.
Except in specific, very narrowly circumscribed conditions — e.g., the creation of a Consititution explictly delimiting govt powers, etc — what one govt does a successive one can UNDO.
It happens all the time throughout the world.
In the absence of an international treaty — where legal rights are confirmed by all pertinent parties — it’s to be expected.
In any case, that’s the LEGAL configuration, and it was a LEGAL judgment that I quoted — offerred by International Law Attorney Howard Grief — that your comment responded to.
The MORAL configuration was not part of Mr Grief’s remarks as I quoted him [above] — and is, at all events, not apparently a fit subject for discussion here anyway, AE, since (as you’ve stated on myriad occasions) you don’t personally acknowledge the authenticity of the written record of the Author of all “moral right.”
Accordingly, you’d be better advised to confine your discourse to the legal side of this matter.
There really will not be a two State solution. There will be one State with the Palestinians in charge of that State. It appears that the Israelis have “given up the ghost” and want no part in governing their own land. When one country allows another country to bomb and send rockets in at will and does nothing to stop it, means that they already have given up the fight.
In case you are wondering, this morning I changed the title to the article and polished it somewhat.
I like the changes but my remarks about the old heading still applies…
That is further shown by the the backboneless, (I also polished it… LOL), items fully depending on the Egyptians to “shah-shtile” things.
Some say that the latest rocket attack dead, wounded and damage are part and parcel of the Shalit “deal”. Time will tell who is correct on this. Not a long time either.
maybe the jews should support Cain and repudiate obama. If he does not veto then annex judea and samaria.
Bibi has either been bought or eaasily blackmailed since Wye. He has no spine and his word is worthless. We need to change the present political system in Israel to a District representation for the Knesset. The ‘Supreme ‘ court needs to have its members voted on by the Knesset. They should have NO standing on National Security matters.
Why aren’t Israeli leaders treated like grown-ups? They are always cast as school boys being bullied by the USA. Of course, this serves the purposes of these “leaders” because then they can cry “the USA made me do it” when they make a calmitous mistake. I doubt things will change until the Israeli people hold their officials liable for the decisions they make and stop giving them a ready-made excuse for failure.
How far and how low Western civilization has sunk that Obama, his administration and non-Muslim Western ruling elites DEMAND that Israel submit to Islam and surrender to global jihad. There NEVER was an Arab state of Palestine and Jerusalem was NEVER the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. All Palestinian Authority maps show the new state of “Palestine” covering all Israel. It is well known that the Muslim goal is conquest of Israel and a Second Holocaust of Jews.
It is immoral and a huge violation of American and other taxpayers rights that they are forced via their taxes to finance the PLO/Palestinian Authority terrorist organization bent on Jewish genocide.
Not one inch of land to barbaric enemies!
Gaza recently acquired weapons and rockets from Libya. The rockets fired on Israel are from Libya. One of the many evil fruits of the illegal, immoral joint US/NATO/Al-Qaeda/Hezbollah terrorists war.
For some who live in their own little dream world, there is no “proof”, only illogical emotion. To everyone else, dismantling the settlements in Gaza said that they should not have been built in the first place and, along with the unilateral withdrawal, emboldened Hamas and Fatah as well, since it set a possible precedent for the settlements in the West Bank in their eyes. Then, the disproportionate release of Schalit, emboldened Hamas even more while also providing them with more cannon fodder from those who have vowed to become “martyrs”. These unfortunate actions go hand-in-hand with the Israeli position in the West Bank where everything is said to be “negotiable”, which means the setlements may be on land that will not belong to Israel.
Only in your own little dream world.
No one gives a crap about what one self-serving lawyer thinks.
Faith beliefs belong in your heart and mind and in your churcehes and synagogues. No one in the real geopolitical world gives a crap about your self-serving faith beliefs.
Maybe? After all the harm that Obama has done, you are still not sure?
I never allow the cry-babies in this forum to blame US leaders for the decisions made by Israeli leaders. Only after Israel becomes the 51st. US state will US leaders be held responsible for its actions.
This is only because the Palestinians did not accept Israel in 1948 and since. If they had there would have been a Palestinian state alongside Israel.
This is true and has been documented in the founding charters of all the Arab organizations that dominate the Palestinian community. Yet, no one in the UN, US and Israeli leadership uses this documented evidence when discussing the conflict or debating solutions. I have no idea why. It’s as if this evidence does not exist.
I agree. The reason was to try and maintain some influence to compete with the influence of Iran. The US should stop financing these terrorist organizations who have no intentions of making peace with Israel and let the other Arabs finance them if they wish. Save the money for use in the coming wider conflict when the time will come to re-set Iran and some of the others if they wish.
In Israel, “red lines” are like the lines in hop scotch — they’re for jumping over. A sequel for “Find Waldo”: “Find an honest politician.” Naah — too hard to play.
Israel should reject any plan negotiations with Arabs based on the war conditions and Arab aggression from the Gaza. Furthermore, these acts of war are proof of real aggressive intentions of Arabs and opposite results of current “peace” negotiations, i.e. – war.
Israel should have own preconditions for negotiating with Arabs, refuse negotiation on Yerushalaim, refuse any racial ethnic clearance of any territory from Jews (by principle of UN and opposite to Nazi policy crimes) and demand guarantee for peace from Arabs, otherwise any deals become void. Meanwhile, Israel should repudiate/cancel Oslo accord since it was broken recently and many times before. Israel should warn that any state that vote for PA Arab new state should be ready be held responsible financially for dis-functional PA state, including electricity, water and supply.
All I can say is that it frustrates me to no end that it is Israel’s land that countries are fighting against. There is coming a day in the not to distant future, that the whole earth will realize that Israel is God’s land, and when He calls the shots, I do not want to be on a side against Him.
THE BEST THING TO DO IS GIVE THE USA THE BIRD. THAT WILL CREATE A SITUATION THAT WILL PUT CONGRESS AT ODDS WITH LENIN-CARTERii. GUESS WHAT? YOU NOW HAVE A GOOD FORMULA FOR LENIN-CARTERii TO GO DOWN IN DEFEAT, IF IN FACT, THE KING OF THE USA ALLOWS THE ELECTION TO GO FORWARD IN A LEGAL MANNER.
It is the intent of the NWO globalists to destroy the U.S. G-d gives dreams and visions (Joel 2:28) and many people have had dreams and visions of the destruction of the U.S. but first prison camps, foreign invaders, mushroom clouds, bombs falling, planes strafing, etc. The great last days question by G-d is “What will you do with Israel?” Those getting the wrong answer G-d shall seek to destroy. The U.S. is Great Babylon of Jeremiah 50 & 51.
Rev. 13 speaks of two “beasts,” the first the whole world will worship and the second forces people to worship the first beast. The U.S. is that second beast. The RC Church system is that first beast that controls everything else and set up the NWO. The first beast stretches back to the paganism of the Tower of Babel and instituted a system of signs and symbols so they could communicate among themselves and the regular goyim will not understand. Among its many creations are Freemasonry and the Illuminati (globalism). The most popular definition of Freemasonry states that it is ‘a unique system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols’. Why are all the leaders of the world Freemasons and why do they flash their hand signs to each other? G-d confused the languages at the Tower of Babel but these occultists are trying to subvert that confusion and say that they are in charge. Even BB is said to be a 33rd Degree Mason.
You escaped from your padded cell again???
As a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason and a member of the Order of African Architects, I personally take offense at the remarks concerning Freemasonry.
To Georg: You know not what you worship.
See the article on the page at the Source above about the Babylonian origins of Freemasonry. The G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is NOT Lucifer/Satan appearing as the hermaphrodite horned Goat of Mendes, Baphomet! You cannot serve two masters. Do further research at the site above.
Catholicism is Mithracism which has the same Babylonian origins.
I suppose Netanyahu could come up with some sort of Olmert-like border proposal, and say, “Here’s our border proposal. But they only get this IF they recognize Israel as a Jewish state – and amend the PNC accordingly – AND formally renounce ROR.”
Then, he’s still, in effect, “running the clock”.
Not that I agree with this. I don’t. I’d rather he says, “Formal recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, along with formal abandonement of ROR from the PA, then we talk about border, security, etc. Till then, WE DON’T TALK ABOUT ANYTHING”.
And if the Quartet makes a stink, if Obama makes a stink, if the UN makes a stink, tell them to go to hell.
Let’s see Obama go back on his pledge to veto the PA’s UN gambit in an election year. What a shallow bluff! And even if he is not bluffing, Netanyahu points out that in light of the flagrant violation of both Oslo and UNSCR 242 this represents, the UN has no authority to recognize the PA’s “state”, and Israel certainly is under no obligation to give such a development any credence at all.
At this point, Netanyahu declares Israel a nuclear power.
If the Palis use the UN as an excuse to launch Intifada Three, Israel crushes them mercilessly At the same time, Israel makes very thinly vailed warnings that she ain’t Libya, in case Samantha Powers gets any ideas.
That’s what I’d like to see. I’m not holding my breath.
My extremely powerful suspicion is that something big is brewing concerning Iran. Maybe in a few weeks…maybe in a few months. But before the 2012 election here in the U.S. Bibi needs international support…they don’t want action against Iran – and the likely collateral conflagration, effects on the global economy, etc. – to turn Israel into a pariah state. I think it is this sort of support, or threats to withold the same, which represent the REAL “gun” being held to Bibi’s head by Obama. It ain’t the UN vote. It’s Iran. And, this one is particularly hard to “run the clock” on…Iran doesn’t care about the timing of U.S. elections.
We’ll see. If I’m right about Iran, that would explain a lot.
Yes Iran could be key.
But every time Israel does something with reservations, everyone soon forgets the reservations. So no matter how Israel pre-conditions its offer, only the offer will be remembered.
Bibi has always maintained that there be negotiations without preconditions and lately Obama has agreed with him. To my mind to be required to present a Plan prior to negotiations is a very serious pre-condition. Negotiations won’t start without it.
Bibi’s position has always been not to discuss borders before knowing what he can expect in return from the Palestinians on issues such as refugees, Jerusalem and recognition of a
Jewish state.
Blair explained in his interview that the Quartet was trying to get detailed proposals from Israel and the Palestinians on borders and security, to gauge how wide the gaps were, and whether there was a basis for negotiation. He makes it sound innocuous which it isn’t. More like ominous.
I agree with you, Ted. Like I said, I don’t want any offer on the table for the PA, reservations shmeservations.
I want the PA delegitimized. I want both the leaders of Fatah and Hamas feeding fishes in the Med.
Walking a tightrope, Bibi is. Surely, he is aware of the issues we raise here. How could he not be?
Iran may well be the whole crux of the matter. Maybe to him, this transcends all else, and pressure regarding the same is forcing him to play fast and loose in ways that he otherwise would not.
He’s got till January 20, 2013; that’s time enough
– if he dares.
Nor yours.
You need to be reminded, AE, that it was YOU — not myself — who raised the issue [above] of “moral right” — and that was WHY I said that moral considerations here are not a fit subject for discourse.
You speak only for yourself (and not very well, it seems): What you mean is that YOU don’t “give a crap” about Grief’s remarks — because they conflict with your own, tired, axe-grinding position in this matter. I daresay, in fact, that it would be more accurate to say that you HOPE “no one gives a crap” about what Grief has written.
What’s more (and for the record), Grief is hardly what I’d call ‘self-serving.’ He gave up a very lucrative legal practice to make aliyah [immigrate to Israel] and re-establish his practice in Jerusalem.
That would be most emphatically, then, yourself, Eagle — because notwithstanding all your TALK of being “logical,” you are easily one of the MOST emotional posters on this site. For illustration (and I could offer several others as well), somebody who — like yourself, as you’ve acknowledged — can’t see that electoral politics (even at its most optimal) ALWAYS comes down to the lesser of two evils. . . . very clearly doesn’t have a very hard head. It’s your own emotionalism that drives out reason in you, and with some regularity.
So now it only “said” something. Backing away from claims of “proving,” are you? — Smart.
You’re certainly on safer ground using “said” instead of “proved” — but then, the “everyone else” that you refer to can readily be assured of SAYING whatever it ruddy-well suits them to say. And saying isn’t ‘proving.’
Also in the world of international jurisprudence.
Quite so. I said, long ago — in fact, as soon as Sharon announced in 2004 his intentions to evacuate Gaza & No. Samaria the following year — that it would embolden the enemy. But this is a different issue altogether. It has no bearing on the law or on Jewish rights to the areas.
“Precedent” is a legal principle. What does or doesn’t happen “in the eyes” of a couple of terrorist organizations (or anybody else without standing in a court-of-law) has no legal bearing. And Legal Precedent as to them is utterly immaterial, let alone “possible.”
Moreover, while Precedent is an established principle at English Common Law, this is pertinent only as to domestic law (and only in those countries which inherit the Common Law system of jurisprudence). It is inapplicable in INTERNATIONAL Law — this for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that there are many countries whose legal systems do not recognize the principle of Precedent (or other Common Law precepts such as “sitting on [viz., failing to assert] one’s rights,” etc.) as having binding effects or implications.
That is an inaccurate description. His son’s injury kept him on the sideline long enough and he still has to deal with that and other family health issues. However, the problem, as everyone in opposition parties knows, is that the Likud led coalition is simply holding up and is nowhere near as fragile as previous government coalitions have been.
Most of Manhigut’s work is inter-parliamentary, so you won’t know or hear about it. In addition, there has been a major outreach effort in the last year+ to university students and young households.
Ugh. Of course not!
Subscribe to Manhigut Yehudit’s English email updates.
The problem created by Libyan anti-Semitism exemplifes the problem of the Jews living north of Jerusalem in what is called either the West bank by the local Arabs or Samaria by the local Jews. While driving in that area last week I realized that the much talked about and dreaded “settlements” or new colonies are simply small Jewish villages some of which, like Shiloh, have been there for over 2000 years. There is no reason why the Jewish villages and the Arab villages which are situated on alternate hills facing each other, cannot live together in peace and form a new country, except for the anti-semitism of the Palestinian Arabs and their supporters. Once the quartet and Bibi realize that the source of the Middle East conflict is same Muslim religious bigotry which affects the Christian Copts of Egypt, the Armenians of Turkey, and the Arab Christians in Lebanon and Bethlehem, they will be well under way to solving the problem.
In a dream world, anything is possible.
I KNOW no one gives a crap about Grief’s opinion because it does not feature anywhere in the discussion by those who count – the leaders of Israel and the US and UN.
It is not emotion but simple common sense that knows that dismantling the settlements in Gaza sent a message to anyone with more than half a brain that the same could be the fate in J&S, where everything is “negotiable” according to the Israeli government.
This is between Israel and the Palestinians not international jurisprudence.
Not true. It also applies to those with common sense.
“Leaders” are typically the LAST elements of popular opinion to ever settle on a given stance or understanding. Generally they tend to adopt (or alter or abandon) a position only when it becomes politically safe (i.e., expedient) to do so — but that does not mean the ideas making up that position haven’t been percolating from below for some time BEFORE they do adopt them.
When you see a surfer skillfully riding a wave at the beach, do you say to yourself, “He certainly can push that wave around”?
– or, RATHER, do you say, “He’s very good at shifting with the wave action”?
“Leaders” rarely make the wave.
Almost always, they merely RIDE what’s there.
What we — all of us — talk about on this site contributes, in its own small (but not-inconsiderable) way, to the generating of that wave.
I told you already that I knew — and had said (loudly, bitterly, vociferously & incessantly) — that the withdrawal was most unwise, that it would most definitely embolden the enemy. What does “embolden” MEAN if not tempt the enemy to push for the same thing elsewhere?
The point is that, while withdrawal was terribly ill-advised (and you’ll have a hard time finding posters on this site who would disagree with that observation), it simply is not true to say that this means, or indicates, or proves, or implies that “Israel has no legal or moral right to build settlements in areas they have admitted are ‘negotiable’…” “Legal or moral right” is a separate matter from what may/may not embolden.
Emboldenment is purely about what somebody suspects he may be able to get away with.
That’s manifest nonsense; it is ENTIRELY about international jurisprudence.
Were it strictly between Israel & the soi-disant “Palestinians,” Israel would’ve squashed them like a bug, and long ago.
If you mean, as I said above, that having gotten away with something once may EMBOLDEN somebody to try more of the same, fine; but it will not, of itself (if at all), improve their LEGAL position — and the whole movement of the world (conscious or otherwise), where Israel is concerned, is to manoeuver Israel, by hook or by crook, into legally conceding Title to her patrimony; that’s the prize it’s got its eye on.
Both of you, partly right.
Both, partly wrong.
The reality is, it isn’t the one OR the other.
It’s very definitely both.
There IS a very powerful US influence — it’s absurd to deny it — money talks, bullshit walks.
It’s EQUALLY undeniable, however, that Israeli leaders DO like to fall back on that excuse whenever it serves their own political ends.
No. Early “christians” (they wouldn’t even have known what that word was) were Jews who abandoned their Judaism for a dead dude. Kinda sucky, dontcha think?!
Actually their mainstream, paint-by-the-numbers Jewish neighbors didn’t think they’d abandoned anything
– as the historical record pointedly & unambiguously confirms.
What’s more, they certainly did know what “that word” was
– since the broader, gentile community in Antioch, needing to distinguish them from others, used it (i.e., the Greek rendering of it) to refer to THEM for purposes of identification,
though it was not a name they originally chose for themselves.
To do so would’ve been unseemly
– and presumptuous.
Try reading your own gibberish in Acts 4, 5,7 8, 12, 21, 24 and many more texts therein for what the tales are worth.
Josephus tells us of James and others trials and executions by Ananus, the Saducee High Priest, in around 62.
Read “From Jesus to Christ”, by Professor Paula Fredriksen (herself a convert to Judaism, if I’m not mistaken), Chapter 8: Responses to the Resurrection.
Greece is the word.
I’m not talking about people having enough of a Greek vocabulary to know what the Greek word for “mashiach” – “anointed one” – is. The use of the term in reference to your dead guy and the people who believed in him is an adaption/adoption which took place decades after the story tales were supposed to have taken place.
The Christian Cult and it’s Deceptions
The Catholic Church’s Response to Our Critique of Christian Credibility
ENJOY!!
Your first statement [above] is correct.
Your second is less clear, Teshuvah.
What I said to Yamit I repeat here for you:
Oh, come on, Teshuvah, to say that is to presume on the very integrity of God. You can’t force His hand
– let alone, move the hands on His clock.
He will send Mashiakh when — and only when — it suits Him (and His purpose) to do so. Not a moment earlier, not a nanosecond later.
Not especially illogical from a given point of view.
Most of those Jews you refer to are among those who have personal, or extended generational, history in the Christian world; all told, it’s not a happy history.
Published long before the Holocaust, indeed a dozen years before the opening shots of the Second World War, Harry Emerson Fosdick’s Pilgrimage to Palestine (Macmillan, NY, 1927) observed that “the treatment of Jews in Christendom makes one of the most appalling stories of truculence and bigotry that history knows.” [p. 275]
It’s left those Jews gun-shy as to self-styled Christians.
If they appear to support Muslims more than they do Christians, it’s probably more a matter of not having the same kind of concrete family history in the Muslim world that they do in the Christian world. So for them, Islam is more an idea than something they relate materially to, in memory.
For Mizrakhi Jews, however, as well as North African & Turkish, Sephardic Jews (viz., those whose family history IS in the Islamic world), the attitude is likely to be quite the reverse — and for the same reason.
Nonsense. The potential to expedite the redemption up to us Jews. We wear the Ruby Slippers. We just don’t want to click.
Not for “abandoning their Judaism.”
As I understand, James the Just [brother of Christ] was condemned by Ananus II, who simply took advantage of the lack of imperial oversight (the procurator, Porcius Festus, had died & not yet been replaced) to assemble a council of judges who condemned James “on the charge of breaking the law” (without ever specifying WHAT ‘law’), then had him executed.
Even so, a Jew may break a law (even a Jewish law) and still be a Jew.
And actually Josephus reports that Ananus’ act was widely viewed as little more than judicial murder, and that it offended a number of “those who were considered the most fair-minded people in the City, and strict in their observance of the Law,” who went as far as meeting Albinus as he entered the province to petition him about the matter. Their agitations led to Ananus being deposed as high priest.
In any case, though, I was talking about the Jewish people when I said their “Jewish neighbors didn’t think [the Nazarene Jews] had abandoned anything…” I wasn’t referring to a crew of phony, Zadokite ["Sadducee"] priests: stuffed-shirt, ruler-up-their-ass, Roman appointees, whose objection to Christ had been more political than religious.
The Jews of Judea considered the Nazarene Jews to be Jews
– weird Jews perhaps. But Jews.
Provide the actual, specific quotations/excerpts that you believe support your contentions — not just the citations — and I’ll respond.
I’m more than happy to take you on, Shy — any time — but I will not expend unnecessary chunks of time (which, regrettably, is a luxury for me & quite limited) on a wild goose chase. You’ve done this before, and I wouldn’t accommodate you then either, for precisely the same reason.
Really? — What’s your evidence for that?
And if that were so, why WOULDN’T Jews “want to click”? Every Shabbat service (and some others as well) includes a prayer of supplication for the coming of Mashiakh; it’s absurd to say Jews wouldn’t “want” it.
But we’ve been over this ground before, Shy. Jews are no more capable of ‘forcing’ the hand of God than anybody else is, and it’s the height of presumption to suggest otherwise.
See :” “The King Messiah”
See: my links #32
What you offer is no more of a response to the above request, Yamit, than what Shy threw at me.
Quote the actual, specific excerpt that you believe shows that my response to Shy’s assertion is wrong. Don’t just hand me a cite or a link to an essay which may-or-may-not contain your evidence. I haven’t the time to wade thru it; that’s YOUR job (if you want to make your point).
Shy had said, “Early ‘christians’ (they wouldn’t even have known what that word was) were Jews who abandoned their Judaism for a dead dude.”
My response to that had been, “Actually their mainstream, paint-by-the-numbers Jewish neighbors didn’t think they’d abandoned anything…”
If you think you have evidence that refutes my response, fine: quote me the actual words, THEN add the cite or link, so I can follow up & verify or clarify, if I want to.
ON THE ORIGINS OF CHRISTIANITY
http://mordochai.tripod.com/WHY.html#top
The christianity cult first appeared in the early part of the 4th century CE. That remark may well raise some eyebrows, because it differs markedly from what you have almost certainly always believed to be the case. All the history books say the earliest christians were 1st century Hebrews, don’t they? Well they would say that, though: this is what the churches want everyone to think. And never forget, the churches controlled all publishing and printing for centuries: even into the early 20th century in some countries. But, like so much else about christianity, it just ain’t true.
Let me enlighten you about the real origins of the cult. To understand how, when, and why the new “religion” was created, a little knowledge of Roman history is needed. In the year 306CE, the emperor Constantius I (“Constantius Chlorus”) was on campaign in Britain, but he fell ill and died at Eboracum (modern York). His son, Constantine I, was proclaimed emperor by the army, but there were many other contenders competing for the Throne and it was a long time before he was established as sole ruler. The link just given describes the political situation in some detail and, although it embraces the usual christian myths about how Constantine was “miraculously converted to christianity”, the historical details are reasonably accurate
http://mordochai.tripod.com/yeshu.html#top
A “messiah” is someone who has been “anointed” (and this word does NOT have a double-n). “Anointment”, or smearing with the “Oil of Sacred Anointment” (see Sh’mot 30:22-33), was the ceremony that took place at the coronation (or enthronement) of a Hebrew king; this compound of spices and olive oil cannot be separated from “anointing” because even its name—??????? ???????????????? shemen mish’h?at kodesh (by which the oil is called twice in Sh’mot 30:25 and again in 30:31, and also with slight variations in Vayikra 10:7 and 21:12) uses the word ???????? mish’h?ah, which is effectively the same Hebrew word as ????????? mashiyah?, a “Messiah”. The new testament writers are strangely silent on this point, not even trying to pretend that it was ever done to their Yéshu character. So christianity’s “anointed person” never was actually “anointed”… in other words he was not, in fact, an “anointed person” at all—christians get around this inconvenience by simply inventing different “definitions” of what the words “messiah” and “anoint” mean—but they are hard-pressed to supply Scriptural texts to support their phony, artificial “definitions”.
There is also not a single prophecy that uses the word “messiah”. There are numerous prophecies of the restoration of the Hebrew kingdom, and of the king who will reign at that time—who will be a blood-descendant in the male line of the ancient Royal Family—but none of these actually call him a “messiah”. It is to be assumed that when God revives the Hebrew kingdom, the ancient practise of “anointing” the king will also be revived, so that the king who reigns at that time will be a “messiah” (in the true sense), but none of the Prophets calls him explicitly by that title.
Well, you did at least provide the specific words for attention this time (and for which I thank you), but as I suspected would be the case, Yamit, they fail to adddress the specific issue in contention at the point-of-departure noted in the exchange you blockquoted above:
[S]: “Early ‘christians’… were Jews who abandoned their Judaism for a dead dude.”
[D]: “Actually their mainstream, paint-by-the-numbers Jewish neighbors didn’t think they’d abandoned anything…”
So far, neither you nor Shy have offerred any evidence to explicitly refute my response.
While I don’t personally subscribe to the Jesus myth for the sake of argument I submit that the Hebrews of that period where versed enough in the theology and traditions of Judaism to recognize a fraud and charlatan.
some examples: From the links you refused to read!!!
Can a hypocrite be a “messiah”? Yéshu was a hypocrite, and a particularly nasty, vicious-tongued one too. It is obvious to anyone reading the “gospels” that he did not get along at all with the “Rabbis” of his period, who were known as P’rushim at that time. The authority of the “Rabbis” came from God Himself, who ordained that anyone deviating from their judgements and enactments in even the slightest detail should suffer the Death Penalty (D’varim 17:10-12), and the first Synhedrion (Supreme Court of 70 Rabbinic judges) was convened by Mosheh himself, again on God’s instructions (B’midbar 11:16). Yéshu acknowledges the Divine authority of the “Rabbis” in Mattai 23:2-3…
“The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Mosheh’s seat; therefore you must do and observe all that they tell you.”
…but this is followed immediately by a vicious attack on them, and just a few verses later (23:23-33) we read this:
What a vicious, totally unjustified attack! And how dishonest, because he makes no specific charge against any named individual, just a vague, generalised attack on an entire class of people. This is prejudiced stereotyping of the worst kind and, after he has himself acknowledged that the “Rabbis” (or “Pharisees”) “sit in Mosheh’s seat”, exposes him for the hypocrite he was. And that was a “messiah”?
More to follow:
There is an incident in Yéshu’s life that gives a glimpse of his true character, for those whose eyes are not blinded by “faith”; it is reported by Mattai at chapter 15, verses 22ff.
22 Just then a Canaanitish woman who was from that region cried out to him “Take pity on me, master, David’s son! my daughter is mentally ill, and she is suffering terribly!”—
23 but he completely ignored her. His students came and begged him “Get rid of her—she keeps pestering us”,
24 and he replied “I was only sent to the house of Yisraél’s lost sheep”.
25 Then she came again and bowed in front of him, saying “Please help me, master!”—
26 but all he said was “It’s wrong to take the food from one’s own children and throw it to dogs”…..
The poor woman came to him begging for help, and he at first ignored her and then, when his followers begged him to do something for her just to get rid of her, he called her and her sick daughter dogs! This disgusting, appalling show of racism against a Canaanitish woman who was from that region is in stark contrast to what the Torah teaches, which is that the “foreigner who lives among us” is to be treated with exactly the same respect, and love, as any native Yisraélite (Vayikra 19:34). As always, Christians try to “explain away” this glaring character-flaw in their hero, but the facts speak for themselves: he was a narrow-minded, cruel bigoted racist.
More to follow:
Postscript: The significance of the “heart” in the Scriptural context
One of the many accusations frequently made by christians about Hebrews is that we have book knowledge but do not understand “with our hearts”. We do not have “circumcised hearts”, they sneeringly mock (a crude misrepresentation D’varim 10:16 and other passages). But christians who say this are falling into a trap of their own making: they assume that references to the “heart” in Scripture refer to the seat of the emotions, just because the heart is seen as the seat of the emotions in their culture.
But in ancient Hebrew culture—and, hence, in the Scriptures—the heart was not seen as the seat of the emotions… it was seen as the seat of wisdom and the intellect. There are so many verses that demonstrate this; here are just a few—
“…speak to every wise-hearted man…” (Sh’mot 28:3)
“…Adonai never gave you a heart to know, eyes to see or ears to hear until today…” (D’varim 29:3)
“…please grant to Your servant an understanding heart so I can judge Your people and distinguish right from wrong…” (M’lachim Alef 3:9)
By contrast, in ancient Hebrew culture—and, hence, in the Scriptures—the seat of the emotions was considered to be the liver. This is evidenced by the prophet Yirmyahu’s tragic poems lamenting the calamitous events that occurred when the Babylonian armies over-ran Y’rushalayim in 587/586BCE—
“…my eyes are blocked with tears and my stomach churns—my liver is poured out onto the ground—because of the rape of my people’s daughter; because children and suckling-babes are dying of hunger in the city’s streets…” (Eichah 2:11)
So christians who claim Scripture has to be read “with the heart” are completely missing the point: in the Scriptures, the expression “the heart” doesn’t mean “the emotions”, rather it means using your brain—your intellect—in other words, thinking and reasoning rationally and logically. What they need to do is what God commanded Yisraél to do in D’varim 10:16—”circumcise” their “hearts’ foreskins”. To “circumcise” means to cut away something that is unwanted or undesirable, and the “heart’s foreskin” are the unwanted and undesirable parts of their minds that incline them to “believe” that God has a “son”, leading them to worship their three worthless idols papa, junior, and casper “the friendly ghost”.
Addendum: “Mister Sayten”
Like all control cults, christianity needs its fear-element, which takes the form of the “devil” or “Mister Sayten”. This character is totally fictitious and does not get even a single mention in the Hebrew Scriptures. I am sure that this statement will make christians start jumping excitedly up and down and feverishly turning up their perverted “translations” of the writings of the prophet Z’charyah and the Parable of Iyov, but those two isolated passages refer to an Angel that is called by the title “THE satan” (pronounced with both A’s rhyming with “cup” and the emphasis on the second syllable), not to a person or entity named “Sayten” who spends his/its time going around “deceiving” people. It is also evident from both of those passages that “the satan” has no authority to take any action against a human being without God’s express command or permission. It also appears from the passage in chapter 3 of Z’charyah, incidentally, that “the satan” was very much a part of God’s Heavenly “Court” at that time, and Z’charyah’s writings are dated “in the 2nd year of Darius I” (Z’charyah 1:1), i.e. about 520 BCE; which is imposible to reconcile with the christian nonsense about “Mister Sayten” having been “cast out” of Heaven because he/it “rebelled” against God.
The truth is that, in common with its pagan roots, christianity promulgates the pagan notion of two “warring” gods… a “good” one and a “bad” one. Obviously they deny this and, while it is true that they never call Mister Sayten a “god”, that’s just a matter of semantics… “Power of Light” and “Power of Darkness”… “good god” and “bad god”—what’s the difference? Hebrew culture does not have a “bad god” or a “Power of Darkness”; as strange an idea as it might be to grasp, Y’shayahu says this:
“I form Light and I create Darkness, I make Peace and I create Evil: I am Adonai and I do all these things” (Y’shayahu 45:7)
Certainly not with a lot of them, apparently not with most of those of his day. He regarded them as largely phony & superficial, but not because they were “Pharisees” [peroushim], rather because they failed to live up to the high calling that the people were entitled to expect of them.
Nicodemus & Joseph of Arimathea (both Peroushim) were notable exceptions, among other, less prominent ones.
Oh, sweet Jesus!
(excuse the expression. . . .)
There’s no mention of “Rabbis” in scripture — and even if there were, I hardly think that God would have established anything on the order of an “apostolic succession.” It’s a dumb, myopic proposition when the RCC does it. And it would’ve been infinitely dumber had the Almighty himself ordained it. The potential for abuse; the instrumentality for rigid social control (to say nothing of mind control); corruption etc. Look at what became of Eli’s sons. And Samuel’s. Don’t even go there, Yamit, you’re stepping off of a cliff.
He was saying they know what’s right — but they fail to do it. Hence, as role models, they tend to suck.
Not at all ‘prejudiced’ or ‘stereotypical’ if in fact most of them were as he asserted.
Quite the contrary, exposes THEM for the hypocrites they were: they talked a good game.
Gotta run. Library’s closing. Tomorrow’s another day.
Shavua tov, one and all.
What they say in this regard is often true, but hardly peculiar to JEWS.
Quite the contrary, in fact, it’s common to all men — and it sure-as-blazes applies to self-styled “Christians” as much as to anybody else. In fact, in a sense, it’s the price that any scripturally-grounded faith pays for survival beyond the first generation or two after its founding. As a means of dealing with their religious obligations amid the pressures of life swirling around them, people tend to relate to the printed word in a rote, routine, non-conscious way — as if they were dealing with the items on their grocery shopping list — which takes them out of the eternal Present.
No Yamit, I know this is a favorite trope of yours, one which you revisit from time-to-time; but you (and apparently Prof. ben-Tzion) are barking up the wrong tree.
It’s true that the “heart” doesn’t refer to the emotions; you got that right.
But it doesn’t specifically have to do with the intellect (or any other faculty) EITHER.
A reference to the “heart” is a reference to sincerity; it’s not about ANY particular faculty, per se). Your (or ben-Tzion’s) three quotes –
– are, each of them, about WISDOM (not about intellect), as wisdom is the natural fruit of consistent sincerity.
After today’s comments from Barry Soetoro and the French Midget, what other proof do you need that Israel is hated by this administration? Today’s comments about Obama’s disdain for Netanyahu should be evidence enough for American Jews that their president has no interest in helping Israel.
What surprises me is the number of self-hating Jews who continue to support a president and his party who has the interest of the Palestinians at heart and who hold Israel in such low regard. It’s time for American Jews to walk away from the democrat party.