The Promised Land - As Promised in the Three Holy Books

That's some interesting stuff you've pulled up there, and I have to ask myself, why was i born in the fourth covenant? All the other ones seem much more interesting, this one just ends in Judgment Day.

Okay, every time the covenant was broken in the past, it was renewed by a group of people saying that they're following the true religion. Until that had happened, didn't each of them also think that the breaking of that covenant would be Judgment Day?

So couldn't the same thing happen again, (and again?).

Depends on what you believe is holy.

Good stuff.

Thanks for the comments, Rohit.

Well, that's an argument for another day, but each have their own definition of what's judgment day. As a matter of fact, there are very many different definitions of what is judgement day, over the Jews, Christian and Islamic thought.

But the issue is very tightly tied up with what you believe in. In other words, if you are a christian, you obviously wont believe in the islamic judgement day. Which is very confusing for me (as a non jew/christian/muslim) as how can the same god have 3 different dates (well, primary ones, there are zillions of other dates!).

Which ties back to who believes which covenant is broken, obviously the jews and christians dont think as the muslims do.

cheers

bd

BD, well done. Good on you for pulling this out.

Btw, the issue of God's covenant with the Jews is a bit more complex given that according to the OT, the Jews keep "breaking" the Covenant, and incurring punishment.

There is an interesting theological point here because the "scattering" of the Jews from Israel - dating back to the Roman era - has been understood for over 2000 years as a "punishment." Even today orthodox Judaic scholars do not agree with a "human formed" state of Israel and have opposed Zionism since its inception on the ground that it contravenes God's wishes.

For a very insightful but hilarious look at this - check up on David Plotz's Blogging the Bible series at www.slate.com. Just the "covenants" of the OT are enough to make one's mind boggle. Oh and the boundaries of the land granted in this cosmic transaction also change...

As a non Jew/Christian/Muslim, I have to say the whole bloody thing is a bit daft! :-)

Bd,

Hmmm... Please allow me to direct you to the website of Sheikh Abdulhadi Palazzi to see what he has to say. He is a Sufi scholar.

My knowledge of Islam is limited, but I do know a little bit of Judaism, or perhaps I should say, the religion of 'Am Yisrael. First of all, the Torah, the first five books of the Tana"kh (the Hebrew Bible) describe the nature of the covenants between G-d and the Children of Israel. The Book of Joshua describes the partial conquest of the land, the books of Judges and of Samuel describe the breaking of the basic covenant (the agreement to worship only one G-d) and the punishments because of this, the rise of the united Hebrew Kingdom of Israel. The book of Kings describes the fall of this kingdom, first its split into two, and then the gradual deterioration of the two Hebrew kingdoms in the face of Egypt in the west, and varying powers in the east, and finally the fall of first the kingdom of Israel, and then the fall of the kingdom of Judah, and the destruction of the first Temple.

The major prophets are the source of how we look at the future in terms of what we expect G-d to do.

1. Isaiah, in addition to foreseeing judgments on various nations, also sees a reconciliation between the Children of Israel and the Children of Ishmael [Isaiah 60:7-8].

2. Zechariah and Ezekiel both foresee war in the region that will be extremely destructive. One could read some of Zechariah's prophecy to include descriptions of a nuclear strike and counterstrike.

3. There are strong correlations between the Islamic and Jewish vision of the world, as can be seen at the Root & Branch website.

Anyway, I hope these two sites can be of some help to you.

Cheers,
Reuven

my comments seem to vanish! weird

Ruvy, which bit in the sufi site did you want me to review?

cheers

bd

beady

sis is fine! (extend this ... interesting possibilities)

:)

as for ...as how can the same god have 3 different dates ..

this is the 64 million yuan query bud:)

these gods are our construct

why should anyone believe in jew's god or christian's god...or any god?

faith is personal

in politics we should look and judge:

justice, occupation, bantustisation (ghettoisation), apartheid

the ground reality is more important and relevant than hermeneutic rumblings

in pain,

t

t

for what its worth, I agree that man made god in his own image, its like the bd modified arthur c clarke quote, any technology- sufficiently advanced - is indistinguishable from magic - God.

But justice is a funny old word, mate. I have found that it is not absolute, its relative and like ugliness, depends upon the eye of the beholder.

The ground reality IS important, but the past history is equally important if justice is to be served. reality is nothing but a snapshot of a series of continuous experiences and if one looks at just a snapshot, then one runs the risk of not resolving the situation! :)

In normal cases of dispossession, the history is small and usually religion ain't involved. In this knotty case, the history is very long and religion is definitely involved! Whether we like it or not, we have to deal with religion to resolve this issue, I am afraid.

cheers

bd

beady:

glad we can agree substantively:)

Whether we like it or not, we have to deal with religion to resolve this issue, I am afraid.

not in this instance, i too am afraid!

the child is out of the womb and it is too late to discuss the merits of birth prevention tactics NOW

to reiterate:

justice, occupation, bantustisation (ghettoisation), apartheid are the issues we should be concerned primarily with NOW

Temporal,

Did you take lessons from Cato the Elder? I didn't know you were that old. You repeat yourself endlessly, as did he at the end of his speeches to the Roman Senate - "Cartago delenda est!" "Carthage must be destroyed!"

Sounds like some of my more distant cousins... "ItbaH al Yahud! Al Yahud klabna!" Slaughter the Jews! The Jews are our dogs!"

So, it is clear you do not believe in the divinity of a human construct. So, we need not waste time discussing the issue. But those of us who DO believe have a very different world view from you. I include my Moslem cousins in that group, even though I may disagree with them as to the details...

ruvy jersualemwala:

i am older than the oldest sunshine:)

today is february 20, 2007

we live in today

we should be cognizant of today

since some may be comprehension challenged it is worth repeating this:

justice, occupation, bantustisation (ghettoisation), apartheid are the issues we should be concerned primarily with NOW

as for gods - whose god are we to believe in?

Bd,

"Ruvy, which bit in the sufi site did you want me to review?"

There is an awful lot at his site. These just skim the surface of some of the issues involved. Sorry that *I sould not find a piece that was directly on point. I'll keep looking. In the meantime, you can try this in the Jerusalem Post, check out this article on Sheikh Palazzi by Sharon Hes, and finally, considering the comments above on the nature of G-d, this speech on that subject given in Kuala Lumpur six years ago. You may have to sit down with a cup or two of tea for the last reference. It takes a while to get through.

BD.

I must say excellent analysis!!

However, I am confounded a little by the different English translations of the Koran.

I would agree with you that it is indeed necessary to understand the religious perspective of the conflict. Having said that two points come to my mind

a. Religiosity is itself on the decline in Israel. There are data points that seem to suggest this
b. Anamika's point about orthodox Israelis (the Israeli nuts who attended the Holocaust conference in Teheran for example)

Lastly while religion is very important in the conflict, the conflict is publicly portrayed as a group of people fighting for regaining their dispossessed land. Of course it is no coincidence that they are muslims.

Cheers

Have you guys read this?

http://www.india-forum.com/articles/169/1/FACING-THE-CHALLENGE-OF-AMERICAN-PLURALISM-ON-THE-FUTURE-OF-THE-NRI-COMMUNITY

Chandra,

a. Religiosity is itself on the decline in Israel. There are data points that seem to suggest this...

This reality is better examined in the data points in this article on "Religion by Choice", by Moshe Feiglin of Manhigut Yehudit, the faction of the Likud Party I belong to.

This won't be found in Israel's secular Hebvrew press, which is devoted to delegitimizing Judaism in this country, but the reality of Jewish identity can't be denied, no matter how hard the secular media huff and puff and try to cut it out of this people's heart.

chandra:

a simple but not insignificant query:

are there any divine rights?

and only if your answer is in the affirmative:

how should they fare up to THIS ?

t

I realize I'm not Chandra, but your question is ridiculously simple to answer.

A declaration of human rights is subsumed by divine rights - unless there is indeed no divinity.

One cannot prove a divinity. One can construct a working hypothesis that allows for the existence of a divinity, but it requires faith to get to believing such a divinity actually exists.

But, unlike you, bd seems to recognize the reality that religions cannot be dispensed with. From my own point of view, religion is a matter of destiny. My Moslem counterparts who actually believe in the religion seem to agree.

Palestina delenda est.

ruvy:

yes you are no chandra:)

the declaration of rights respects freedom of religious practice

but

it is also above religion and covers all inhabitants of this world regardless of their faith

____________

as for faith - that is a personal thing

there is no compulsion

and since you did answer the simple query not addressed to you how about responding to #87 (and #92 while you are at it ) that are addressed to you here?:

http://desicritics.org/2007/02/10/053519.php

salam

Temporal, I understand your insistence on emphasizing those other issues,

But let those of us who take delight in the past, indulge in it, as we will.

Especially in today's world where it's extremely important to understand a precedent before approaching the issue.

rohan:

"indulge" all you want - nothing wrong with it:)

the issue here is only with those who claim a divine right to real estate and unabashedly displace inhabitants of a land occupying, subjugating, terrorising, ghettoising and re-living the despicable acts of hitler today

Rohan - there are many of us who love history and the "past" but use it constructively to make sense of a world. Use of RELIGIOUS DOGMA is not history and is nothing more than fanaticism (in its varying shades) and irrationality at its worst (especially when it leads to killing and oppression).

Chandra: quick point, it was US orthodox rabbis who attended the Holocaust conference in Teheran. Btw, they did not deny that the Holocaust HAD happened - something that the conference did not either despite Western media reports; it did include views of people who are CLASSIFIED as Holocaust deniers in the West though - which could go into the entire area of free speech and which was basically the ironic point being made.

They DO question a man made state of Israel as opposed to a divinely created one, and chose to present that view.

Btw, there is a fabulous line in Eytan Fox's Walking on Water (see the film - romanticized but recommended) where the head of Israel's secret service order the assassination of an old Nazi who is in any case on his death-bed (and about 90) saying - "we will prempt god."

Thats Zionism for you in one sentence. :-)

T

I think ignoring religion is a very good exercise but hardly practical, my friend. Who, in their right minds, will dare take out religion? specially in a region where there is more religion than people? lol

chandra

had an interesting debate with tbs over the different translations of the quran, and that's interesting. On one of the lists, there was this huge debate around whether a prophet can be female or not, and then something about rasul. I was chortling away, it was like "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" kind of debate!

but its important in terms of having divergent views on this putative word of god!

T

about the universal declaration of human rights. You do know that each and every article in that declaration can be drawn back to the OT/NT? and that is one of the reasons why the OIC went for the islamic declaration of human rights? And you would note the crucial differences in the wording around the freedom of religion.

Now one might well as ask, both are fine, both rely on different philosophical foundations. Who is to say which is right? From a theoritical perspective, it doesnt matter.

But from a realistic matter, the foundation does matter so religion does matter, mate.

"divine right". Its a tough call, to distangle history from religion, mate. And knowing the state of historiography, where do you draw the line between religion and history, specially in a country like israel?

take for example your point about justice. which justice do you mean? whose laws? ottoman laws? jordanian laws? UN laws (which are mainly christianity based?)? muslim sharia law? shia law? etc. etc. Justice is a relative measure, mate.

Take it further. If by justice you mean judgement by peers, who defines the peers? can I challenge the peer selection? which court? its a tough one. For example, take slobodan milosovic's trial. Would you say that his trial was fair? there is a good body of debate which will say that it wasnt, mate :)

cheers

bd

thanks, Levy, it will have to wait, lol, weekdays are a bit tough, but will try to get to it this weekend! :)

but I am curious why I havent heard about any dissenting notes to my argument. ah! well :)

cheers

bd

Chandra,

The "Jew expert" on this site would have you believe that these "rabbis" from the United States were "orthodox." What they are is members of a rebel sect called the Neturei Karta who have been thrown out of Judaism several times by the other rabbis of the faith in America. They have no standing as Jews and the only reason they have not been officially kicked out of the religion is that there is no religious court of sufficient standing to do so. These are the pigs that the PLO keep on the payroll, pet "Jews" to show how tolerant they allegedly are. The rest of us have no use for them.

Frankly, they are the worst kind of trash to stand in solidarity with a would-be Hitler like Ahmadinejad.

T, Levy

you guys need to remember godwin's law! :) you have now been warned! :)

cheers

bd

i hear you beady

and this is the second time you have expounded on "justice" which was one out of four or five points i put in bold

what do the gods have to say on the others?

:)

justice?

you pick any fair court of justice

the issues are there

:)

ruvy

how about the second part of #16?

eagerly waiting

salam

"the issue here is only with those who claim a divine right to real estate and unabashedly displace inhabitants of a land occupying, subjugating, terrorising, ghettoising and re-living the despicable acts of hitler today..."

Hmmm... Let's see, the people who scream "itbaH al Yahud, al Yahud klabna," who build bombs and blow themselves up on buses and in restaurants, who fire at people waiting to tramp a ride in Jerusalem, who piss on Jewish gravestones and desecrate Jewish holy places like Joseph's Tomb, who do what they can to destroy artifacts of Jewish existence like the ancient temples of our people on the Temple Mount, who have driven Jews out of their homes in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, who kept Jews in a stinking ghetto in Yemen until they were liberated in 1949, who will refuse entry to a Jew in all of "Saudi" Arabia...

I'm pleasantly surprised, t. I never thought I'd find an ally in you...

Live and learn.

more on #23

today's date!

the application of UN's declaration of human rights for everybody?

(particularly wrf to the combatants)

and yes - putting divine rights in the library

:)

ruvy:

thank you for finally acknowledging that the occupiers of palestine are all that and more for the ghettoised palestinians

salam

ps: her shaakh per ullo baitha hay
anjaam e gulistaan kiya hoga

(above just to show if you break out of english into tasmanian, hebrew or any other language so can i- cheers as beady says;)

Bd,

Who is Levy? I haven't seen his comments here that you answer them...

Ruvy

"destroy artifacts of Jewish existence like the ancient temples of our people on the Temple Mount"

uhmmm, last I read it was the not the Palestinians who are digging on the Mount trying to find a temple and maybe damaging the Aqsa mosque, the poor magharba gate has been already damaged, oops, accidentally ofcourse, so what will be next?

lol, t, ok ok, lets go for it

1. occupation

This article itself gives ONE (out of thousands) views on occupation. Occupation, by itself, is based upon somebody displacing somebody. Yes? Now, this is a question which you might want to ask. On what basis are you going to judge the right of the displaced to the displacee? Let me give you an example. Say I come and displace you from your home and then I get displaced myself by another. Given the fact that possession is 9/10th of the law, some major questions come up relating to which law structure will you use, which time frame will you chose, whether rights/duties/ownership can transcend generations and law systems, etc.

Furthermore, your point about occupation is right. So from where shall we start the process? Who was the original inhabitant? Do we start the process from 1967? 1973? 1984? 1990? 2001? or do we go back to 1948? or shall we try 1896? How about the 13th century? Or how about the roman time?

2. bantustans

This, my friend, is a totally artificial construct. Let me ask you some counter questions. What do you think the Vatican is? The US Mexican border? Have you seen the compounds in KSA or other Gulf States? after all, the first illustrates that size or enclosed size is not necessarily bad. Or keeping people IN is equal to keeping people out. So when you talk about borders, my friend, the question is, when does it go bad. For what its worth, I believe the treatment of the occupied territories is wrong, and that way is destined to failure. As I mentioned earlier, any country that is based on religion will necessarily collapse due to the inherent complications around individual rights, minorities, etc.

As for aparthied, chuckles, why are you looking at Israel and Israel only? what makes you think that there isnt discrimination elsewhere and even more blatant and stronger than in Israel? Yes, its bad, but I dont see anything that is earthshattering enough to go all wooly about it. Discrimination is built into our bones, my friend, you do it, i do it, the world does it.

cheers

bd

you mentioned a "fair court of justice". Ok, solomon temporal, i ask you, tell me the fair court of justice that you will setup to adjudicate the israeli palestinian argument :)

1. which law will be used?
2. where would it be based?
3. who will be the judges?
4. who will enforce the judgement?

and fairness in my book means that both sides will agree to the answers to the above :)

cheers

bd

whoops Ruvy, my bad, I did a typo on your name, my apologies.

I meant you and temporal on the godwin law :)

cheers

bd

actually

I must be precise here, there are not just 2 parties in israel, there are the druze, the armenians, the catholics, the jews, the bahai, the secular palestinians, the fatah, force 17, hamas, islamic jihad, egypt, lebanon, syria, jordan...... :)

fair to all of them? I might as well as go about trying to resolve the problem of global warming!, lol

bd,

fairness in your book, grins, which book would that be?

;)

Once again Ruvy decides "who" counts as "real" Jews as opposed to allowing people to determine their OWN identity.

BD: Here go some suggestions, although these are by no means prescriptive or definitive:

1. which law will be used?

How about the series of 20th century international laws including the various UN resolutions (that includes the MANY that have been blocked by US as the sole dissenter in favour of Israel).

2. where would it be based?

The Hague as the centre for IJC. Or Geneva as a neutral space? In terms of the actual borders - reverting to pre-1967 is a relatively equitable idea. Of course Israelis would not accept this - NOT for religious reasons but REAL geostrategic reasons including water resources of the West Bank (few people talk about it in the media but its been amply covered by environmental groups, NGOs and UNDP).

3. who will be the judges?

An international coalition that is acceptable to BOTH sides and represents a mix of Western and nonWestern countries. It could include the Group of 4 and ALSO the various Arab states and the other members of BRIC (specially Brazil, India and China which have little immediate stake).

4. who will enforce the judgement?

See above.


Just ideas!

Btw, I agree with TBS - what book are we talking about? :-)

"To your descendants I have given this land..."

As Muslims, Jews and Christians are all the descendants of Abraham, I take exception to the idea that Palestine is for Jews alone. I'll bet it's not an idea that originated with Muslims and Christians.

JD, please dont take it out on me, mate, as it so happens, its God who gave the land to the Israeli's, as evidenced in the above mentioned argument. I suggest you take your exception to Him :)

But seriously, the descent from abraham or adam (as the case might be) is not in doubt. The question is who was what given over to? Think about Saudi Arabia :), its only for muslims, no? :)

tbs and A, my book is work in progress, its tentatively titled as "the current testament of BDRAN" :)

I cant see why Mo, Jesus and others can have all the fun! :)

Anamika, we are going to fall over on the first bit itself.

The United Nations Resolutions, the ones which you refer to, are not binding as per the chapters they are under. Also, under the Oslo agreement, the prior resolutions are null and void. We can debate that for a long time, but lets get back to more important stuff. If we are looking at land claims, for example, there are land claims emanating from ottoman times, french mandate times, british mandate times, jordanian times, israeli military law and israeli civilian law and finally PA law. At this moment, there is NO corpus of law which can handle a situation like this.

So we need a directive from the UNSC under chapter 7. Assuming that it goes ahead (and that's a big IF), then a court has to be called in with adjudication abilities. What you normally do is to utilise commercial services, for example, and yes, the Hague can be used (although I cant see the Israeli's ever trusting any European court, I wouldnt!, frigging idiots, lol). You have already identified the other reasons why the israeli's wont accept such a legal structure and wont consider it to be fair. And finally, I am not sure who will enforce it? A court directs "somebody" to enforce it. Who in their right minds will send in policemen? The Europeans? no way. The Americans? They arent trusted by the Palestinians. The Arab League / OIC? not trusted by the Israeli's. The AU is a joke. The BRIC? Brazil possibly, but count out India, Russia and China.

So the conclusion that we draw (as so many people have drawn before), it is not possible to find a "just" "fair" solution which appeals to all parties. So what now? What would you suggest be done? In a situation like this, you have to IMPOSE injustice on SOMEBODY to provide JUSTICE to SOME OTHER BODY.

So, to go back to T's point. If you provide justice to the palestinians, you will also be asked to provide justice to the Israeli's. While you might be able to get the secular and left wing israeli's and some right wing israeli's over tyo your side, you wont be able to get the (1) Hamas hot heads nor the (2) israeli hot heads over to your side because of their maximalist position. And if you are really independent, you wont be able to do so.

So, what then happens to Justice for all?

and tbs has promised that there is a sura/quote about how the hijaz has been promised to the muslims, she is currently after the reference :)

that's the problem with tbs, she dribbles out these pearls of wisdom so carefully!!!! :(

and she comes through!, here's the bit which the saudi's use to keep the infidels away from the hijaz

9:17, 9:18, 9:28.

so go figure, mate.

As it so happens, this is also the religious basis which Osama Bin Laden used in his fulminations against the americans and other assorted infidels who dared to sully the fair soil of KSA.

cheers

bd

Bd,

I'm not taking issue with you because you appear to be the typical non-religious writer almost taking the side of Israel.

But, "its God who gave the land to the Israeli's," is just plain wrong.

While I do appreciate the balance in your writing, I really do wish you would get your definitions straight. In these ruminations upon the destiny of the People of Israel, I set forth several definitions that give some clarity to the issue.

Put simply, the Biblical text states that G-d gave this land to the Children of Israel, the descendants of Jacob, the son of Isaac, who was the son of Abraham. JEWS do not get mentioned at all in the Tana"kh until you reach the Book of Esther, which describes Mordekhai as a "Yehudi" (Jew) from the tribe of Benyamín. The story of Esther takes place AFTER the destruction of the Temple of Shlomo, and the destruction of the Kingdom of Yehudá, which was ruled continually by descendants of King David.

Just for your information, there are still families in Israel who can trace their descent from the royal house of Davíd. From one of these families will emerge the future king of Israel, the messiah promised in prophecy.

Ruvy...Thanks..I have never seen this data before.

Temporal...No I dont believe there are any divine rights!!!

Having said that, we are not talking about me here, but about a group of people who probably do so. When it comes to conflict resolution one needs to start with what the two parties believe in and try to find middle ground rather than force fit what I or anybody else believes...

rgds

The following is an excellent piece of analysis on Hinduism. You may agree or disagree, but quite interesting.......

www.cultuurwetenschap.be/DOWNLOADS/AKingdomofAnotherWorld.pdf

Ruvy

you are right, I should be more clear, but my response to JD was more in jest than seriousness!

cheers

bd

BD - totally agree with the problems and constraints. The problem of course is that Israel has stopped considering the two-state solution, and over time (since the naqba and specially since the first intifadah) the Palestinian stand (note: that is DIFFERENT from an "Arab" (sic) stand) has hardened too.

To be Gandhian about it, SOMEONE has to break that descent into violence and genocide, and it has to come from the two parties involved. The reality is that the strong should take the daring step - something that Israel would have to do in this case. Unfortunately I don't see that happening at any point in our lifetimes.

Going back to land being promised to people by god: just how absolutely ridiculous human beings can get!

I love the fact that Shiites have the "hidden" imam who will "re-appear;" the Sunnis have the "dar-ul-Islam" that will one day be established; the Christians have the "rapture" and apocalypse; and the Jews have their "messiah" being born from the "line of David" (read note from Ruvy above - but there is other evidence too).

Frankly the three deserve each other! Or should we say revelations of irrationality all around!

A

The phrase you are looking for is "a pox on all their houses!!!" :)

But here's something to consider. Take the post WW2 period and look at ALL the instances where refugees have been created, dispossesion occured and somebody took over somebody else's land. And there have been tons of situations like this. Whether you are looking at Bangladesh, Vietnam, East Timor, etc. etc.

As you said, somebody has to give way. You say Israel as the stronger should give way. The problem is, Israel doesnt see itself as the stronger. And there are good arguments to believe that.

Ah! interesting times indeed! :)

The phrase you are looking for is "a pox on all their houses!!!" :)

The bard said it best! Yes indeed! :-)

ruvy:

#16

?

bd (various)

see the hornet's nest?;)

am sure pretty soon we will be discussing reforming the UNSC!

the issue of justice is not a pandora's box nor is it an idealistic rambling

while ana has made sensible suggestions in #40 it is still a long shot

meanwhile

we can consider a small but significant step forward by considering ways to encourage the state/s (occupying, representative or unrepresentative but de-facto powers nevertheless) to enforce the UNHR's Bill in full for every person in their state regardless of their religion or status

that would be a step forward in providing ultimate justice

and needless to say this "encouragement" should be backed by all the legal and moral "force" the international community can bear on such state/s

I love hornet's nests! :)

But I cant see your last point happening. I mean, why would it happen? lol, each and every permanent member of the UNSC is by itself guilty of the same, so why would they do so????

And as for the religion, lol, can you see Poland, Saudi Arabia, or Israel doing so? come on, mate.

beady:

understand your disillusion!

but poets (and fools) are not daunted by a 'single step' in the right direction

if we give up on the devi of hope we will end up glowing in the dark - from their problem it will become ours

Dear Mr. T,

Please light up a candle, get out of the sad poutry spouting ritual, go out of the damn room and start seeking justice for millions of non-muslims minorities suppressed and killed in muslim countries. Start out with raising questions about the hindu minority in pakiland and bangladesh.

Do please save your breath on Palestine. You might get go heartattack.

Palestine is not about the issues you raise like a jungle drumbeat: justice, occupation, bantustisation (ghettoisation), apartheid.

It is more about bankrupt and morally corrupt oil states funding jehad against non-muslims.

Do please chew on this article in your free time:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359796269&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

Have fun dude.

Oh! yes, glowing in the dark, lol, well, it will certainly have an interesting conversational piece.

on the other hand, perhaps the palestinians might want to do what the others did, accept defeat and slink away :). that's also another way! :)

cheers

bd

durgesh:

if it is in the kindness of your heart (surely you have one?) then please forgive me for not discussing other minorities in this thread

however

now that you have raised these important issues please understand that i favour justice and all that flows from it ... like equality before local law .. the UNHRB etc. for all minorities everywhere - and that includes bangladesh, india as well as the army occupied pakistan

and will have to disagree with you on this:

to wit - occupied palestine is about justice, occupation, bantustisation (ghettoisation), apartheid

ps: only beady's threat to invoke goodwin prevents me from mentioning the moustachioed ex subaltren

;)