In 2004, Israel assassinated Hamas leader Ahmed Yasin. All members of the UN Security Council except America approved a resolution condemning Israeli raid.
In 2005, police of Saudi Arabia, a major US ally and weapons buyer, arrested forty Christians in a private house in Riyadh for non-Islamic worship. The Saudi action caused no official condemnation.
For if the nations of the world should say to Israel, "You are robbers, for you conquered by force the lands of the seven nations [of Canaan]," they will reply, "The entire earth belongs to the Holy One, blessed be He; He created it and gave it to whomever He deemed proper When He wished, He gave it to them, and when He wished, He took it away from them and gave it to us." Rashi on Genesis 1:1.
It is simplistic to imagine that Olmert rushes for Palestinian statehood. Olmert is a master of political intrigues and unfulfilled promises. He repeatedly promised to remove checkpoints, but most are still in place. He also vowed to remove the outposts, but preserves them for two years now. He faces a powerful peacenik lobby of self-hating Jews bent on destroying the Jewish state. They strive to give the Temple Mount to Muslims and effectively relinquish Israeli control over the Old City of Jerusalem. Divesting of the Temple Mount has nothing to do with helping the Palestinians, but with crushing Jewish nationalism. The unnecessary destruction of Gush Katif was the first step. The defeatist camp successfully destroyed a huge community of Jewish zealots; until now, most cannot recover from psychological trauma and have no place to live in. Giving away the Temple Mount, the Old City, Hebron, and Judea will extinguish Jewish hope for returning to the Promised Land. Tel Aviv beaches lack biblical significance. Jews conquered Jewish land and gave it away; no nation can recover from such a shame for generations. The leftists need to give away the Temple Mount to assure their continued rule over demoralized, ideologically emptied Jews.
What is the alternative? Palestinians won't sign a peace deal with us unless we give them the Temple Mount. Fine, forget the Palestinians; why do we need peace with that primitive crowd? An alternative to peace is pacification, and Israel has enough tanks to pacify the hostile mobs. Palestinians fight for the Temple Mount; conservative Jews can fight, too. With the similar methods. More efficiently. The Knesset members who consider voting for relinquishing Jerusalem to Arabs must understand the resultant mortal danger to themselves and their families. Police won't protect them forever, and cannot protect thousands of their relatives and associates. Voting for relinquishing Jerusalem to Arabs should be a suicide, literally.
But we cannot rule the millions of Palestinians indefinitely. Nor do we need to. The number of Palestinians is vastly exaggerated both for political and economic (UN subsidies) reasons. The real number is closer to two millions. Polls indicate that at least a third of them want to emigrate, including 70% of the young. Leftist Israel actually impedes their emigration instead of wholeheartedly encouraging it. Being helped with visas and resettlement bonuses, young Palestinians would leave the West Bank and Gaza an aging society, dying out in the matter of a generation. Blockades and curfews, limited water supply and closure of Israeli markets would force working-age Palestinians to emigrate.
Even now, one percent of Palestinians live on the 58% of land in Judea and Samaria. The land is empty, prone to Israeli annexation without significant dislocation of the Palestinians.
But the world, what would it say about Israel? It will keep saying the same things Jews should have gotten used to during the two millennia.
what about labeling policies of surrending to enemy forces or not taking action as a treachery act?
that could work for legal meanings..
Yes yes yes yes!
These are the words of truth right here! Every person who considers himself Jewish, or a friend of the Jewish people, should embrace them wholeheartedly.
Fight back, and take what is ours! Let no traitor or enemy feel safe as long as the land is still occupied.
There must be some private organizations that will assist arab emigration. We cannot count of the current Israeli government to do so.
If there is not an organization, certainly one or several should be created immediately!! I would donate!
I agree.
Arabs out of West Bank! It is not their heritage land. It has been promised to the Jews.
Jerusalem is not the capital of arabs either. Jerusalem is the capital of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and David.
Ehud Olmert thinks he is doing right. But he is doing deadly wrong.
George Bush thinks he is doing a smart and right thing. But he is not doing right. The giving away of the God given land to the enemy of God and God chosen people is wrong, and even more, it is sin.
I think that Palestinians will have their state. But this state will not last long.
The Christian prophet Ray Aguilera has prohesied that God will destroy the Rock of the Dome. When that happens, the Jews may build their temple on its rghtful place.
Bush will have also his judgement from God. A Canadian Christian prophet Thomas S. Gibson has prohesied that Bush will not live to the end of his presidency.
Jouko: Why wait for god? Let us destroy it ourselves so he will see that his flock still cares about him enough to fight.
Yes, I'm being simplistic, I know. It is the thought that counts.
somehow this nonsense of rushing the peace process without checking the balance is ludacris there will be no peace with an arab occupation.
I agree.
But because the Jews do not have the guts to do it, God will do it.
Sorry, but this is the situation now.
Jouko: No need to be sorry. I agree with you.
Obadiah wouldn't need to make a rally call like this if the Jews would be doing the right thing.
Personally, seeing the dome of the rock blown to pieces would make me shed a tear. The heretic swine that desecrate the remains of the temple should have been purged decades ago.
The muslims understand such behaviour. They do it all the time - They built the dome as a sign of occupation. Now the temple mount should be liberated of that occupation, and the mosque replaced with something else.
Maybe the removal of the Rock of the Dome will happen by the earthquake.
Anyway, I am sure that some day it will be destroyed.
The West Bank and Gaza will be annexed with Israel also after a shortlived Palestinian state.
After that many areas beyond the Jordan river will be annexed with Israel.
A greater Israel will be the bright future of the people which has been through more sufferings than any other people on this planet.
I am split about demolishing the mosques on the Temple Mount.
First of all, as far as I know, they Muhammadans did not build the mosque. They just converted a church to a mosque just like the Turks did with the famous Greek church in Constantinople.
Secondly, not withstanding whoever built it, the structure is beautiful. As far as I know it is also ancient, going back more than 1000 years.
So I am thinking that there should be a better solution than demolishing it. Though another part of me screams: “Just get rid of it, does not matter how old and beautiful it is, it stands for oppression”.
There was a similar situation in India. Where the Muhammadans built a mosque right on the site of the most sacred Hindu temple, the birth place of the Hindu god Rama, in Rama’s ancient capitol of Ayodhia. In 1992, Hindus destroyed the mosque, and my heart was happy for them. Then riots issued, unfortunately the Indian government is just as cowardly as the Israeli. They have not given the Hindus permission to rebuild their temple there.
The history of the Ayodhya mosque is instructive.
Between it’s building in 1528 and it’s destruction in 1992, Hindus fought 76 armed conflict for regaining the place. An estimated 300,000 Hindus have sacrifice their life.
The only time when there was peace between Hindu’s and Moslems was when Hindus were allowed to establish a platform for worshiping Rama right there on the compound. This was done under the great and wise king Akbar. No other Muslim ruler was so wise.
I wonder if we can learn something from that?
Doesn't matter. If an earthquake destroyed it, the arabs would just claim that Israel caused the earthquake. It would just be one more conspiracy theory.
The fact is, as you have all recognized, the arabs are unsatisfiable. That tends to put a damper on any "negotiations", especially if that party has nothing to negotiate with, anyway.
I have always been for Chetzi-Transfer. They must clear out of the West Bank. They can have Gaza, until they make too much of a threat of themselves (as they are doing now in Gaza) and then 5 mile buffers will be taken each time they cause problems, until they either behave like civilized people or are flushed into Sinai.
The Dome of the Rock was built by a muslim Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 691 AD.
So it has been a muslim mosque from the beginning.
A few questions.
1) How many people in Israel think like Obadiah, in percentage? Is it possible to know? Any polls? Any guesses?
2) How many of those who are supportive are Jews, Christians, atheists, arabs, just secular people or something else? Or is this something you have no idea.
3) Does any political party in Israel support Obadiah's thoughts?
4) Is Obadiah an active member of any political party in Israel?
5) Is Obadiah strongly opposed or even persecuted in Israel because of his opinions?
6) How many people are subscribed to this discussion and read Obadiah's writings? About.
7) What is your goal in doing all this?
Before the Dome on the Rock was built, it was the "Church of the Holy Sepulchre"
This is horrible business, but securing the emigration of a significant portion of the Palestinian population is Israel's most important goal. No one should be under any illusion this can happen well. The view of all the important people in the world (that is the western nations) is effected by the suffering of the Palestinians, not Mosques and Temples.
Olmert and Barak recently brought up the Pallys accepting the Jewish nature of Israel as a prerequisite to any agreements. This is the kind of thing Israel needs more of - Arab style intransigence. Bush is too weak to stand up now, the perfect time to get something on the permanent agenda that says to the Palestinians, "we are just playing at negotiations". Then let them start more intifadas. They raise the emigration rates nicely.
Ray Bright wrote: 'Before the Dome on the Rock was built, it was the “Church of the Holy Sepulchre”.'
This is not the case. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre has never been located on the Temple Mount or on the same place as The Dome of the Rock.
The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is located quite near and inside the walls of the old city, but it is a different place and that church is still standing there.
Why do you still insist on Giving legitimacy to "Palestinians"? There is no such person or people. They are Arabs, Bedouins and Jordanians. Call them what they really are. You can use the words "so called Palestinians" but I would encourage you to stop legitmizing them.
Or Palestinians could be called Philistines, those who always opposed Israel in ancient Biblical times, because the root of the word is the same and the evil spirit is the same.
My text above was not from France but from Finland.
I suppose there is no possibility to make corrections here.
Danny: There is some bug in the commenting system. We always see an empty post by 'anonymous', and the Country, city textfield is filled with the wrong location. Possibly of the person who commented last.
Jouko: There's a problem with identifying these Arabs with the Philistines, because they use that (false) connection as a claim to the land.
So if we'll be using it too we're just validating that lie.
Actually ethnic cleansing is the only option if you resist a Palestinian state, because incorporation would lead to an Arab majority in a few generations. But the problem is that Palestinians are not migrating themselves, on the contrary, they breed, for example around 60% of jerusalem residents under the age of 16 are nowadays Arabs, whereas it was only around 30% 2 decades ago. So if you want to get rid of Arabs you have to force them out, by making their life miserable or just killing them. However I think it would make Israeli as bad as the nazi's, and I would be ashamed to be Jewish. I also know that such a policy would lead to the end of American support, and without US-support Israel will go trough very rough times. I also don't agree that Jews who don't agree to your radical policy, I love Israel but I believe in a two-state solution. I think a two-state-solution will lead to peace, eventually, while your policy will make Israel a state of oppression and murder, as bad as the Arab neighbours or the instigators of the pogroms of Odessa and Kisinov, to be ashamed of. It will also lead to the destruction of Israel. I dont need or want Gaza to be part of Israel, led the palestinians have it, same for Ramallah, etc.
Constitutional Law is the highest martial art and King Solomon as well as Jesus Christ were both masters of it…humanity has first to understand that it will never win by war what cannot be won by constitutional law. Defining identities constitutionally would help a lot.. I add up a text I wrote to be more explicite because what is a Christian in terms of Constitutional Law what is a Jew in terms of Constitutinal Law and what is a Muslim in terms of constitutional Law?
Comment to the idea of a Last Fanatic promoted by the Israeli Initiative
This is quite possible when the constitutional identity of Islam and its role worldwide is translated and protected into United Nations organization i.e. its bodies as well as the Christian and Judaic identity in terms of historical legal development .i.e. what did Jesus bring to the world in terms of being a constitutionalist versus Solomon, Solomon was about making laws always more just and Jesus was about making sure that the national culture would support those laws always being more just… Islam is about supporting the world legal developments of those Messengers and in case of disagreements to remain peaceful till we arrive at the scientific conclusion satisfactory legally to all.
The US had a Bill of Rights thus a law that was just even by our second millenium standards but its justice… its fairness was diverted by a Southern subculture of segregation. So sometimes the national Laws are just but diverted of their true national objectives as written by the constitutional legislators.
When Jesus came on earth he could see with his own eyes the aftermath of humanity 's dealings with the constitutional archetype of the wisest man ever to be on earth(King Solomon), for humanity had no constitutional culture… this is what the Bible means when one reads that of the kings following the Era of Solomon one would undo the reforms of the other.
Jesus thus implanted a constitutional culture with his first commandment so people would see the distance in justice in between the law and its application.
The monotheistic spiritualities may have been rooted in different Eras but they all deal with constitutional Law and as long as this constitutional law is not translated very clearly into the UN bodies with special emphasis in UNESCO and in the Security Council their complementarity won't be fully exposed to humanity… This is why humanity is falsely led to believing in a clash of civilizations where in fact it is a problem of scientific vulgarization humanity has been facing.
There cannot ever be a conflict in between being secular and religious from the point of view of the righteousness of the Laws because to be always more just a society's legal progression evalutation draws from the Biblical statement that "All men are brothers"
Islam did not renegade on its role of protecting the Jews up till the Nazi Era and if Islam would have been understood and translated constitutionally in the League of Nations, Islam could have opposed itself to the Holocaust even on the ashes of the Ottoman Empire instead it was made unoperational…. while Christianity was deformed and Jews murdered all over Europe… Islam would also have been fully protected against Nazi ideology and the Mufti of Jerusalem would have been tried for his collaboration with Hitler. The Mufti definitely threatened the historical rights as well as lives of the Babylonian Jews deforming everything which is basic to Islam with his coming to Irak in the early forties.
Proportionally to world history this is as great a tragegy nothing less than the Palestinians being displaced… for the pogrom that accompanied his visit was something unheard of in the Jewish Babylonian community which otherwise was at peace with Islam.
Islam in its approach of the Palestinian situation must also confirm its role as Protector of Monotheism and cannot eradicate the terrible legal dilemma of the Babylonian Jewish community direct descendant of the Biblical Jerusalem Jews deported to Babylon. The Babylonian Jews had no desire for dammages to their Arab brothers but could their Arab brothers humanely expect the Babylonian Jews to stand still seeing their Jewish brethen being eliminated when historially the Babylonian Jews maintained the flame of Judaism in those Jewish communities in Europe fulfilling their Biblical duty of fostering Judaic laws into nations? Judaic Laws mean the obligation to make laws always more just… and Jesus who was mastering already the Law as a child as demonstrated by his discussions with the rabbis in the Temple was to constitutionally make sure that the purity of the Law given by God to humanity would be upheld for Judaism is about keeping the Law of God. This is what is meant when Jesus says 'Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword'?(Matthew 10:34)
Jesus thus could not have been anything else but Jewish by destiny . Islam must recognize the Judaic identity of Jerusalem as a Jewish destiny amongst nations and Islam is the protector of Monotheism i.e. the protector of the legal developments brought by the Messengers as world constitutionalists.
Karole du Pont
David — There is a two-state solution already in place, the second state being the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Karole — I always feel that you are just about to make a good point when you go into obscurities with which even the alchemists would have trouble. Can we not define our terms a little better? What do you mean by "constitutional"? A written constitution such as the US has? Or "constitution" as in a physical body's constitution? If the radical Muslims could agree on a "constitution" of any sort, it would be alot easier to converse with them. But their "constitution" is the Koran, and they do not agree among themselves what it means. There is no Muslim "Pope". I think everyone would agree that if the Muslims would just be "cool", we could get along. But perhaps that argument would be better made to the Muslims themselves, rather than Jews and their supporters.
.
==
Also, if you broke your posts up into paragraphs, they might be a little easier to follow
I have grown into Canadian constitutionalism where the main objective is to be Judaic in Law and if you study the elements of our culture in Quebec and by extension in Canada you will see that the constitutional identities of all groups are transposed into constitutional instruments this is why we have First Nations whether or not there are 5000 Natives left to a particular tribe or 200,000 or 1,000,000. Their way of life came historically from nature( fishery and hunting) thus they have rights and thus each time their way of life is endangered it means also we are attacking their philosophy of life which is one must protect God's creation… Nature and man is also part of this otherwise they would do as the Palestinians do… they would be bombing us instead of using the highest martial art .. constitutional law. Constitutional Law is about justice to the rights and identity of everyone. Our Natives have First Nations rights we know they are not 20 millions of them so if a a few bands or one band decide to block our roads. WE have to know it means enough and at the same time solve the problem and protect them. SO historically if you look at Canadian constitutional law from an American angle yes I can say it looks as alchemistry and if I go on studying the identity of French Canadians transposed constitutionally in the Canadian Constitution of 1867 from an American angle it would look even more as alchemistry since the British started by confirming their rights by the Quebec Act of 1774, an Act that gave full religious rights to the French Canadian Catholics an abobination to the British colonies of New England… So dealing with identities … different languages and peace de facto is really constitutional alchemistry from the American angle…. But consider where we are today legally… because we did transpose the identity of the different groups constitutionally we don't feel endangered because of numbers but strictly if those constitutional identites were not respected but then again they are enforced by Law…and have grown into a gloanl Canadian culture
NOw it is time to enforce Solomon and Jesus as constitutionalists worldwide so we won,t have to debate on the peaceful roles of Christianism or Judaism anymore and Islam so no one can deform their constitutional identity. If Jews were not humans but flowers we would all know where they all originate… and no historian or politican would have tried to erase the Babylonian Jews from the history of Jerusalem
correction read: they have grown into a global Canadian culture
you enforce Solomon and Jesus as constitutionalsits through scientific legal study at UNESCO as much as the Pyramids are to the world of architecture and science a world marvel… and attacking what Solomon and jesus stand for in terms of legal principles is definitely something the UN Security council should approach as we have seen historically with the disasters of the world wars and notably with the WWII where there was to be a new order reducing humanity to a slavery state
Karole — I'm really trying to follow you here, but the Constitution Solomon followed was the Torah. Jesus was not a constitutionalist, he was a mystic who tried to prepare people for the afterlife by being kind to each other in this life.
==
Can you please explain your plan in one or two clear sentences that do not use the word "constitutional"? The fanatical Muslims want to kill us all. It would be nice if they followed Solomon or Jesus, but they do not. So, now what?
How do you measure social justice in a country if not by drawing from " all men are brothers". So yes we got the commandments from God to Moses but these are not a measure of social justice amongst nations. Jesus gave the law measuring social justice… and this law can be transposed constitutionally… even equalization payments amongst our Canadian provinces flow from that law…
Solomon wanted to be able to build a house for God and he could not do it in war; this by itself is already self-descriptive in terms of humanity's duty towards God thus he asked help from God so God gave Solomon the greatest wisdom, breadth of understanding and discernment on earth.
This means that he understood the nature of all nations which obviously others preceding him did not. He could thus make laws solving the identity equation of each national group and thus makes laws always more just.
Again what is a Native in Canada…. a member of the First Nations whose cultures and rights… are individually protected inside Canada whatever their numbers and this constitutionally. Now you have to understand that treaties outside a national constitution remain constitutional instruments… a country has an history and a proportional historical growth constitutionally by different legislations or acts which constitutes a national constitutional legal archetype.
WE did not have Charter of Rights in Canada enshrined in 1867 but it does not mean that the constitutionalists did not approach and treat the subject inside that constitution but to be able to grasp this you have to be able to transpose the national cultural equation of the French Canadian most important cultural and constitutional value in reading the constitution of 1867. NOwhere will you see it stated clearly such as in the French one that states Liberté, Fraternité égalité. SO Solomon was more than just reading the Torah… he was a constitutionalist.
Lord grant me patience.
==
One coherent sentence, Karole, just ONE, that articulates your meaning without the word "constitutional"! Is it impossible? Don't tell me about the Canadian arrangements with the Indians. Don't tell me about Solomon's "constitutionalism". Just say, in 20 words or less what the JEWS need to do to get along with the radical MUSLIMS (or vice versa)! Can you do that?
==
I have sat through hundreds hours of rock and roll parties and in any one hour of psychedelic ramblings have gotten more coherent statements from chemically influenced mystics than I have gotten from any of your posts. Kumbaya, baby. Just TRY to make ONE logical point, man. I know that you can do better than "Liberte, Fraternite, three hour work day!"
==
Soloman was not a constitutionalist — he was a King in a Theocracy. And there is no way in this world that the Jewish people are going to accept a "constitution" forced upon them by the United Nations.
==
Let's all take some vitamin B and let the effects of the party wear off and get back in the real world.
We can see how much you are interested by what is meant in breadth of understanding… you are the one who limits the scope but funnily enough when you pray God in Hebrew what is he? Ha melech ha olam… Actually you do not sound like most Jews whose mind is extremely opened to scientific investigation as Obadiah demonstrates to be. Now since you know so well about the duties of constitutionalists… tell me how you know constitutionalists did a good job?
Karole — I guess you were addressing me? I'm glad you appreciate my humble attempts at humor — I find it more useful than antagonism when people are actually trying to reach an understanding.
==
But I'm not Jewish and have only recently begun to study Hebrew, so you have me at a disadvantage in traditional terminology. Thus, I am unlikely to sound like "most Jews", "open-minded" or otherwise. I am, however, a constitutional scholar of some 40 years, including the US Constitution and what passes for one among the Brits, the Soviets and the Communist Chinese, as well as the UN. This is why I ask for specificity in terminology.
==
But while I admit the gaps in my knowledge of Talmud and Mishnah, I feel confident in my understanding of the "Constitution" of the Torah as best as a well meaning gentile can. And I am very familiar with the Koran and Sharia law.
==
My question to you remains — what exactly do you propose the Jews or the Muslims do to bring about peace? I will make the question more liberal: Can you give an answer articulately in 50 words (excluding the word "constitutional")?
==
I have sadly found that the constitutionalists of all stripes have proved themselves, for the most part, to be a bunch of eunuchs.
Actually Joseph, the USA were what was the furthest from such an evil theocracy…as Solomon you say was…can you realize how Godly is a culture that is fighting to maintain slavery on humans if you did not understand what the American civil war was all about… Now you know why our most proeminent constitutionalist did not put a Charter of Rights in our Constitution of 1867 because obviously it was not doing the job and even after the Civil War… your Bill of Rights was not doing the job since you had racial segregation in the South. So you had what something like 100 years at least in absence of true judicial review in your country…Aren't presidents supposed to make sure constitutions are applied? So now you know why you have this funny feeling when I mention the word constitution and why you don't want me to talk about Canada.
I mean with all this story on your division of branches to insure independence and review… it took you 100 years to get to segregation… Imagine the French nuns in Nouvelle-France were sitting the Natives with the French kids in school in the 1600's…. Sure don't inquire about Canada …
Man, it is analogous to Teretz Sybdrome — you really can't not say "constitution", can you?
==
Theocracy — society ruled by God — is evil?
==
Willing slavery is the natural state of 90%, at least, of humans. They want to be fed, clothed and given a warm bed with a female in it, and just have a job.
==
In the pre-civil war US, the black slaves in the South lived a much more pleasant life than the wage slaves in the industrial North.
==
In America as well as the collapsed Soviet Union, girls choose to be sex slaves rather than waitresses or putzfraus.
==
Democracy is an occasional anomoly. Totalitarianism is the rule. A Theocractic Totalitarianism is always best.
The problem however is one of pragmatics. There are at best 14 million Jews and a good third of them are at best ambivalent, if not downright self hating…
You have then, less than 10 million Jews who even really care what happens in their own homeland.
Then on the other hand ypou have more than 1 billion Muslims who hold the Temple Mout to be their 3rd Holiest site.
If either of the 2 mosques (al Akhsa and Omar) are even kicked, those 1 billion Muslims will run rampant and there will not be any land for the Jews to even begin rebuilding.
One must face reality, do as Arik said, build the Wall, set the borders unilateraly, close the door behind us and lock it tight. Anyone comes near the wall? Rip them to shreds. This is the only true way.
Oh…and as for the Holy Selphucre, it is not on the Mount as others have already said… The story is this: When the Khalifa Omar rode up to the Mount and looked out at the city, the prettiest building he could see was the Selphucre and he asked his attendants what the building was.
Told of its nature, he delcared that no building should outshine an edifice of Islam and this is why you have the Mosque of Omar, and later al Akhsa sitting on the Jews' Holiest of Holies.
What could be farther apart than Jews and pragmatics? Pragmatically speaking, Jews cannot be there after 2,000 years of persecutions, and couldn't win 5 wars against Arabs.
As Kahane used to say, we used to believe in Burning Bush, not in George Bush.
Muslims would have a problem with demolishing the Aqsa? Recall that they were numbering its stones in 1967 to move it to Jordan when Moshe Dayan stopped them.
The reality is, we cannot "lock the door tight". There are 1.5 million of Arab enemies on our side of that door, and they are breeding fast.