well ask any Evangelical Christian of the millions in America and all over the world and he/she’d say anyone who doesn’t believe in the sacrifice of Jesus is going to hell as well
so cut the double standards smith!
It’s not a double standard; I live in Israel, not America.
Avram May 26th, 2009
3:31 pm
uuuh maghi, but he didn’t see that billboard in Nazareth … did he?
Harvey May 26th, 2009
5:50 pm
Sorry Maghi 85 but your analogy doesn’t stand up.
Israel is by its constitution a Jewish homeland with other ethnic and religious minorities in the same way that the US is a Christian country and Saudi Arabia is Moslem . The reaction would be the same if Muslims were to hold a like banner in America or if Christians held up an evangelical banner in Riyad [ some chance ] .
Gabriel May 26th, 2009
7:05 pm
I wonder why it’s in English. My natural response to the sign was to sing “even the losers get lucky sometimes”.
Settlements have nothing to do with this in the least, Gert, but as always, you had to say something about those you hate.
Muslims and Christians proselytize, and with some degree of variance, claim that those who disagree with them will suffer in the afterlife. However, the sign is in Israel, where proselytizing for the sake of conversion is illegal. Jews do not proselytize, and do not believe that all non-Jews are headed to an eternity of fire and brimstone. I am not calling for it at all, but then again, if Jews had actively pursued proselytism 2-3,000 years ago the world would probably be a very different place today…
“[...] you had to say something about those you hate.”
Consumed by victimhood, you have to bring the word ‘hate’ into it.
My point is simple. The settlements are an enormous obstacle to peace. Religious settlers know that, that’s why they create these facts on the ground (they state this policy very openly), even if some of these outposts are nothing more than shacks or a lonely caravan. These actions, though, have far more impact on the I-P situation than a stupid Muslim sign.
The poor dears think G-d gave them the land. In reality they can’t even tell the difference between G-d and the IDF, go figure…
Avram May 27th, 2009
5:19 pm
“Consumed by victimhood, you have to bring the word ‘hate’ into it.”
Since you’re that someone who brought ‘hate’ into it when trying to figure out a reason why Gabriel disliked Galloway, does that mean you’re also consumed with victimhood?
Address my point instead of polluting the world’s servers with a rather far-fetched ‘you do it too’.
I don’t hate the religious settlers: I just think they need to get a life rather than re-enact a Biblical fantasy.
They’re total hypocrites: disobeying the laws of the land (Israel’s common law), all the while relying on the army of the country for which, frankly speaking, they show such disdain…
Avram May 27th, 2009
7:38 pm
Gert:
I was addressing your hypocrisy, which seems to pop up time after time.
Many religious settlers would leave their homes in the West Bank, if the govt passed a notion, as they did with Gaza. That you like to paint ‘religious settlers’ with the brush of a few thousand idiotic fanatics only highlights again how biased you are with the Israelis.
Let’s also correct you slightly further … The amount of ‘religious settlers’ that serve in the army is very high, and most of them are in combat positions. So I’m not sure if you get this disdain from the few sick stories from Hebron (most of those idiots served in the army too) or some ‘We hate the Zionist Entity’ website.
The funny thing is that your attack on HP’s comments re: Alex’s last piece were spot on. But you are the exact same thing with pro-Palestinian allegiances …
Sam May 28th, 2009
3:58 pm
That verse would be more interesting if you included the one before it [3:84] :p
paatchu May 28th, 2009
4:56 pm
No surprise.!! They are masters to turn Holy Q’ran to teach hatred.Kashmir was said to be the ‘Paradise on earth’…Now it became a hell since pakistan is sending the trained terrorists to teach hatreds in Indian controlled Kashmir.
Sam May 28th, 2009
5:03 pm
What does Kashmir have to do with Nazareth? I would say that Palestinians feel some degree of hostility when they are considered as interlopers in their own lands. And I find it mildly amusing that Alex finds the sign worthy of note. According to his bio, he is an English born Jew who is partaking of religious privilege denied to ethnic Palestinians who are refugees. Apparently, religious privilege is only a problem when its stated, not when its actually practised.
“Many religious settlers would leave their homes in the West Bank, if the govt passed a notion, as they did with Gaza. That you like to paint ‘religious settlers’ with the brush of a few thousand idiotic fanatics only highlights again how biased you are with the Israelis.”
The first part of your comment is pure speculation: you don’t know how easily they’ll go or not. Quite a few resisted very strongly in Gaza. Some now pledge to never leave. It’s wishful thinking on your part.
The second part is a straw man. I’ve dedicated one or two posts to them, one post using a video they disseminate through the ‘Women in Green’ website. Nuttiness indeed, no bias needed to see it.
Gert – you love claiming everything you don’t agree with is a straw man. Every time you do that when it isn’t such an argument (almost always) – that argument itself is a straw man.
Anyway, there are about a quarter million Israelis who live over the green line – most people have misconstrued notions about them. Women in Green, however nutty you may think they are, do not represent the majority, or even close to it. One mistake many have is thinking that all are religious fanatics, etc – when, in fact, the majority of “settlers” are secular.
Nevertheless, I was extremely surprised to see I actually agree with you on something. While many would probably leave their homes, the resistance any “Disengagement redux” would, most likely, surpass what was seen in August 2005, probably to a degree that would make any real withdrawal nearly impossible without causing violent divisions within Israeli society.
Avram May 28th, 2009
6:30 pm
“Quite a few resisted very strongly in Gaza.”
How many? Do you remember?
“I’ve dedicated one or two posts to them, one post using a video they disseminate through the ‘Women in Green’ website.”
Right, I forgot – ‘women in green’ = the mouth piece of all settlers. Sheesh, how stupid of me to have forgotten, **slaps forehead**
What’s sad is that I’d laugh at someone’s face if they painted all Palestinians as ‘radical Jew haters’ because of Hamas. You’re doing the exact same thing with all settlers.
Sam – all I’ve done is post the photo; I haven’t put any commentary by it. I don’t know where you get the idea that I have no problem with the implementation of religious privilige.
It’s no surprise you feel the need to vehemently disagree with me, as you create straw man upon straw man, then attack these arguments I’ve never made.
I’ve never said the religious settlers are representative of all settlers or the mouthpiece of the settler movement.
I note however that they exist (as so Palestinian extremists) and that they are the ones who will most likely put up resistance to being uprooted.
How many are there? I don’t know (and in all likelihood neither do you), perhaps 10 % is not an unreasonable estimate.
In Gaza they sure caused quite a bit of trouble, as witnessed in the excellent documentary ‘The Last Stance’ where a group of religious zealots erected a ‘settlement-for-the-day’ (in Gaza – days before the ultimatum) and threatened to defend it by means of arms (they were lightly armed). A few competent IDFers managed to avoid the worst and it ended ‘peacefully’.
To claim I attach too much importance to them (which I don’t do) is akin to underestimating their powers of mischief. It also diminishes the fact that these people were among the first to create these facts on the ground, at a time when it was still unclear what Israel had in mind with the OTs. Many prominent Israelis, among them Moshe Dayan and Yitzak Rabin, were opposed to colonising the OTs. Presumably they had some prophetic foresight as to what it would lead to…
In another doc, Rabin, back then still an ordinary Colonel in the IDF, complained about having to remove these very early settlers, only to find that a fortnight later they had simply moved back in!
Sam May 29th, 2009
12:38 pm
Alex:”Sam – all I’ve done is post the photo; I haven’t put any commentary by it.”
Me: Yes, I found that infinitely amusing, its what provoked me to respond.
Alex:”I don’t know where you get the idea that I have no problem with the implementation of religious privilige.”
Me: The fact that you utilise it? I find actions speak louder than words.
Alex:”PS Sam – what is the verse before it?”
Me: [3:84] Say, “We believe in G-d, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters.
Sam May 29th, 2009
12:44 pm
Gert:I note however that they exist (as so Palestinian extremists) and that they are the ones who will most likely put up resistance to being uprooted.
How many are there? I don’t know (and in all likelihood neither do you), perhaps 10 % is not an unreasonable estimate…Many prominent Israelis, among them Moshe Dayan and Yitzak Rabin, were opposed to colonising the OTs. Presumably they had some prophetic foresight as to what it would lead to…
What makes their settlements more or less valid? Why should they consent to being uprooted anymore than those in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?
“What makes their settlements more or less valid? Why should they consent to being uprooted anymore than those in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?”
That’s remarkably clear, thanks…
Avram May 30th, 2009
9:35 pm
Gert:
“In Gaza they sure caused quite a bit of trouble”
How aware are you of the ‘relationship’ between Settlers and Palestinians pre ’87 (intifada 1)?
“It also diminishes the fact that these people were among the first to create these facts on the ground”
Uuuh, can you please delve into this a bit further. What settlements? What ‘people’?
“It’s no surprise you feel the need to vehemently disagree with me, as you create straw man upon straw man, then attack these arguments I’ve never made.”
If you say so dude – you imply things deliberately in your writing and don’t expect people to pull you up on them.
Regards your first point I’m not sure how it relates to mine.
Regards your second point, see e.g. Wiki on the settlements, immediately following the 1967 conquest:
“Original Israeli policy at that time was to deny any Jewish settlement of these areas or even Jewish resettlement of specific locations where Jews had resided up until the 1948 Arab-Israeli War[citation needed] (see: List of villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war). Many attempts were made by Gush Emunim to establish outposts or resettle former Jewish areas, and initially the Israeli government forcibly disbanded these settlements. However, in the absence of peace talks to determine the future of these and other occupied territories, Israel ceased the enforcement of the original ban on settlement.”
And Wiki on Gush Emunim:
“The movement sprang out of the conquests of the Six-Day War in 1967, though it was not formally established as an organization until 1974, in the wake of the Yom Kippur War. It encouraged Jewish settlement of the land they believe God allotted to the Jews in the book of Deuteronomy.[1] “
Regards the Straw Men: you claim I ‘imply’ a lot. Yet the implications seem mostly to exist in your mind. I do not overestimate the importance of the religious settlers for instance but do believe they can’t be brushed under the carpet that easily.
Avram May 31st, 2009
10:53 pm
Well at least you don’t think Tel Aviv and Petach Tikva are settlements … Wrt your post – Who pushed the settler movement where it counted most? Ie in the govt and financially?
“I do not overestimate the importance of the religious settlers for instance but do believe they can’t be brushed under the carpet that easily.”
Who’s trying to brush them under the carpet?
Hugh June 2nd, 2009
7:55 pm
Harvey,
the US is not a Christian country, it is a secular country. Its’ constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom from religion, still the best formulation for a secular government that I have heard.
Personally, as an atheist, I couldn’t care less what any religious fanatic says about the afterlife. It’s when the threats start in the here and now that I become concerned. Here’s hoping our religious brothers and sisters visiting Nazareth can keep a similar perspective.
Sarah August 23rd, 2009
11:56 am
The US is NOT a secular country nor can it claim to be when “Easter vacation” is a school holiday, and Christmas is a paid holiday. The US is a Christian country which permits freedom of worship for all citizens—but you don’t see Yom Kippur or Eid as legal holidays, do you?
There is a simpler solution: Nobody moves. Draw the borders and everyone on the Palestinian side is a Palestinian Moslem, Christian or Jew, and everyone on the Israeli side is an Israeli Jew or Moslem or Christian. Israel isn’t insisting that Arabs move out of Israel so I don’t get the frankly racist insistence that Jews have to leave the Palestinian territories.
well ask any Evangelical Christian of the millions in America and all over the world and he/she’d say anyone who doesn’t believe in the sacrifice of Jesus is going to hell as well
so cut the double standards smith!
It’s not a double standard; I live in Israel, not America.
uuuh maghi, but he didn’t see that billboard in Nazareth … did he?
Sorry Maghi 85 but your analogy doesn’t stand up.
Israel is by its constitution a Jewish homeland with other ethnic and religious minorities in the same way that the US is a Christian country and Saudi Arabia is Moslem . The reaction would be the same if Muslims were to hold a like banner in America or if Christians held up an evangelical banner in Riyad [ some chance ] .
I wonder why it’s in English. My natural response to the sign was to sing “even the losers get lucky sometimes”.
Muslims proselytise. Yawn.
So do Christians. Yawn.
Fundamentalist Israeli Jews build settlements and outposts. Yawn.
Cover your mouth when you’re yawning
I always do.
Ahhh, a real Brit!
Yawn…
Settlements have nothing to do with this in the least, Gert, but as always, you had to say something about those you hate.
Muslims and Christians proselytize, and with some degree of variance, claim that those who disagree with them will suffer in the afterlife. However, the sign is in Israel, where proselytizing for the sake of conversion is illegal. Jews do not proselytize, and do not believe that all non-Jews are headed to an eternity of fire and brimstone. I am not calling for it at all, but then again, if Jews had actively pursued proselytism 2-3,000 years ago the world would probably be a very different place today…
LB:
“[...] you had to say something about those you hate.”
Consumed by victimhood, you have to bring the word ‘hate’ into it.
My point is simple. The settlements are an enormous obstacle to peace. Religious settlers know that, that’s why they create these facts on the ground (they state this policy very openly), even if some of these outposts are nothing more than shacks or a lonely caravan. These actions, though, have far more impact on the I-P situation than a stupid Muslim sign.
The poor dears think G-d gave them the land. In reality they can’t even tell the difference between G-d and the IDF, go figure…
“Consumed by victimhood, you have to bring the word ‘hate’ into it.”
Since you’re that someone who brought ‘hate’ into it when trying to figure out a reason why Gabriel disliked Galloway, does that mean you’re also consumed with victimhood?
Avram:
Address my point instead of polluting the world’s servers with a rather far-fetched ‘you do it too’.
I don’t hate the religious settlers: I just think they need to get a life rather than re-enact a Biblical fantasy.
They’re total hypocrites: disobeying the laws of the land (Israel’s common law), all the while relying on the army of the country for which, frankly speaking, they show such disdain…
Gert:
I was addressing your hypocrisy, which seems to pop up time after time.
Many religious settlers would leave their homes in the West Bank, if the govt passed a notion, as they did with Gaza. That you like to paint ‘religious settlers’ with the brush of a few thousand idiotic fanatics only highlights again how biased you are with the Israelis.
Let’s also correct you slightly further … The amount of ‘religious settlers’ that serve in the army is very high, and most of them are in combat positions. So I’m not sure if you get this disdain from the few sick stories from Hebron (most of those idiots served in the army too) or some ‘We hate the Zionist Entity’ website.
The funny thing is that your attack on HP’s comments re: Alex’s last piece were spot on. But you are the exact same thing with pro-Palestinian allegiances …
That verse would be more interesting if you included the one before it [3:84] :p
No surprise.!! They are masters to turn Holy Q’ran to teach hatred.Kashmir was said to be the ‘Paradise on earth’…Now it became a hell since pakistan is sending the trained terrorists to teach hatreds in Indian controlled Kashmir.
What does Kashmir have to do with Nazareth? I would say that Palestinians feel some degree of hostility when they are considered as interlopers in their own lands. And I find it mildly amusing that Alex finds the sign worthy of note. According to his bio, he is an English born Jew who is partaking of religious privilege denied to ethnic Palestinians who are refugees. Apparently, religious privilege is only a problem when its stated, not when its actually practised.
Avram:
“Many religious settlers would leave their homes in the West Bank, if the govt passed a notion, as they did with Gaza. That you like to paint ‘religious settlers’ with the brush of a few thousand idiotic fanatics only highlights again how biased you are with the Israelis.”
The first part of your comment is pure speculation: you don’t know how easily they’ll go or not. Quite a few resisted very strongly in Gaza. Some now pledge to never leave. It’s wishful thinking on your part.
The second part is a straw man. I’ve dedicated one or two posts to them, one post using a video they disseminate through the ‘Women in Green’ website. Nuttiness indeed, no bias needed to see it.
Gert – you love claiming everything you don’t agree with is a straw man. Every time you do that when it isn’t such an argument (almost always) – that argument itself is a straw man.
Anyway, there are about a quarter million Israelis who live over the green line – most people have misconstrued notions about them. Women in Green, however nutty you may think they are, do not represent the majority, or even close to it. One mistake many have is thinking that all are religious fanatics, etc – when, in fact, the majority of “settlers” are secular.
Nevertheless, I was extremely surprised to see I actually agree with you on something. While many would probably leave their homes, the resistance any “Disengagement redux” would, most likely, surpass what was seen in August 2005, probably to a degree that would make any real withdrawal nearly impossible without causing violent divisions within Israeli society.
“Quite a few resisted very strongly in Gaza.”
How many? Do you remember?
“I’ve dedicated one or two posts to them, one post using a video they disseminate through the ‘Women in Green’ website.”
Right, I forgot – ‘women in green’ = the mouth piece of all settlers. Sheesh, how stupid of me to have forgotten, **slaps forehead**
What’s sad is that I’d laugh at someone’s face if they painted all Palestinians as ‘radical Jew haters’ because of Hamas. You’re doing the exact same thing with all settlers.
Sam – all I’ve done is post the photo; I haven’t put any commentary by it. I don’t know where you get the idea that I have no problem with the implementation of religious privilige.
Paatch – not sure what the photo has to do with Kashmir!
PS Sam – what is the verse before it?
Avram:
It’s no surprise you feel the need to vehemently disagree with me, as you create straw man upon straw man, then attack these arguments I’ve never made.
I’ve never said the religious settlers are representative of all settlers or the mouthpiece of the settler movement.
I note however that they exist (as so Palestinian extremists) and that they are the ones who will most likely put up resistance to being uprooted.
How many are there? I don’t know (and in all likelihood neither do you), perhaps 10 % is not an unreasonable estimate.
In Gaza they sure caused quite a bit of trouble, as witnessed in the excellent documentary ‘The Last Stance’ where a group of religious zealots erected a ‘settlement-for-the-day’ (in Gaza – days before the ultimatum) and threatened to defend it by means of arms (they were lightly armed). A few competent IDFers managed to avoid the worst and it ended ‘peacefully’.
To claim I attach too much importance to them (which I don’t do) is akin to underestimating their powers of mischief. It also diminishes the fact that these people were among the first to create these facts on the ground, at a time when it was still unclear what Israel had in mind with the OTs. Many prominent Israelis, among them Moshe Dayan and Yitzak Rabin, were opposed to colonising the OTs. Presumably they had some prophetic foresight as to what it would lead to…
In another doc, Rabin, back then still an ordinary Colonel in the IDF, complained about having to remove these very early settlers, only to find that a fortnight later they had simply moved back in!
Alex:”Sam – all I’ve done is post the photo; I haven’t put any commentary by it.”
Me: Yes, I found that infinitely amusing, its what provoked me to respond.
Alex:”I don’t know where you get the idea that I have no problem with the implementation of religious privilige.”
Me: The fact that you utilise it? I find actions speak louder than words.
Alex:”PS Sam – what is the verse before it?”
Me: [3:84] Say, “We believe in G-d, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs, and in what was given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters.
Gert:I note however that they exist (as so Palestinian extremists) and that they are the ones who will most likely put up resistance to being uprooted.
How many are there? I don’t know (and in all likelihood neither do you), perhaps 10 % is not an unreasonable estimate…Many prominent Israelis, among them Moshe Dayan and Yitzak Rabin, were opposed to colonising the OTs. Presumably they had some prophetic foresight as to what it would lead to…
What makes their settlements more or less valid? Why should they consent to being uprooted anymore than those in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?
Sam:
“What makes their settlements more or less valid? Why should they consent to being uprooted anymore than those in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?”
That’s remarkably clear, thanks…
Gert:
“In Gaza they sure caused quite a bit of trouble”
How aware are you of the ‘relationship’ between Settlers and Palestinians pre ’87 (intifada 1)?
“It also diminishes the fact that these people were among the first to create these facts on the ground”
Uuuh, can you please delve into this a bit further. What settlements? What ‘people’?
“It’s no surprise you feel the need to vehemently disagree with me, as you create straw man upon straw man, then attack these arguments I’ve never made.”
If you say so dude – you imply things deliberately in your writing and don’t expect people to pull you up on them.
Avram:
Regards your first point I’m not sure how it relates to mine.
Regards your second point, see e.g. Wiki on the settlements, immediately following the 1967 conquest:
“Original Israeli policy at that time was to deny any Jewish settlement of these areas or even Jewish resettlement of specific locations where Jews had resided up until the 1948 Arab-Israeli War[citation needed] (see: List of villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war). Many attempts were made by Gush Emunim to establish outposts or resettle former Jewish areas, and initially the Israeli government forcibly disbanded these settlements. However, in the absence of peace talks to determine the future of these and other occupied territories, Israel ceased the enforcement of the original ban on settlement.”
And Wiki on Gush Emunim:
“The movement sprang out of the conquests of the Six-Day War in 1967, though it was not formally established as an organization until 1974, in the wake of the Yom Kippur War. It encouraged Jewish settlement of the land they believe God allotted to the Jews in the book of Deuteronomy.[1] “
Regards the Straw Men: you claim I ‘imply’ a lot. Yet the implications seem mostly to exist in your mind. I do not overestimate the importance of the religious settlers for instance but do believe they can’t be brushed under the carpet that easily.
Well at least you don’t think Tel Aviv and Petach Tikva are settlements … Wrt your post – Who pushed the settler movement where it counted most? Ie in the govt and financially?
“I do not overestimate the importance of the religious settlers for instance but do believe they can’t be brushed under the carpet that easily.”
Who’s trying to brush them under the carpet?
Harvey,
the US is not a Christian country, it is a secular country. Its’ constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom from religion, still the best formulation for a secular government that I have heard.
Personally, as an atheist, I couldn’t care less what any religious fanatic says about the afterlife. It’s when the threats start in the here and now that I become concerned. Here’s hoping our religious brothers and sisters visiting Nazareth can keep a similar perspective.
The US is NOT a secular country nor can it claim to be when “Easter vacation” is a school holiday, and Christmas is a paid holiday. The US is a Christian country which permits freedom of worship for all citizens—but you don’t see Yom Kippur or Eid as legal holidays, do you?
There is a simpler solution: Nobody moves. Draw the borders and everyone on the Palestinian side is a Palestinian Moslem, Christian or Jew, and everyone on the Israeli side is an Israeli Jew or Moslem or Christian. Israel isn’t insisting that Arabs move out of Israel so I don’t get the frankly racist insistence that Jews have to leave the Palestinian territories.