Here's Why They Hate America and Israel

[NYcarbineer]

Israel's right to exist is only enforceable to the extent that might makes right.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Native Americans" is a misnomer.


"The 9000-year-old skeleton called Kennewick Man, found last year in the bank of the Columbia River in a park in Kennewick, Washington, can speak to us of this Indo-European past so we can understand our future. Kennewick Man connects worlds, living and dead. Forensic anthropologists have said this skeleton's features are more like ancient Europeans' rather than Native Americans'."
Kennewick Man, an Ancestor


So much for your post.

Is that supposed to be relevant?

Shhhhh!!!! Let horsie kick in her own stall. It's more fun to watch that way.

Actually I would be pleased to hear her make the argument, out of her brain and thoughts, as to why that is relevant,

as well as why an Israeli claim to land based on ancient history would be any more valid than similar claims made in this country on the same basis.

 

[mjollnir]

Is that supposed to be relevant?

Shhhhh!!!! Let horsie kick in her own stall. It's more fun to watch that way.

Actually I would be pleased to hear her make the argument, out of her brain and thoughts, as to why that is relevant,

as well as why an Israeli claim to land based on ancient history would be any more valid than similar claims made in this country on the same basis.

I fear you ask the impossible of the incapable.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Europe has a historical penchant for carving up foreign lands and inventing countries where they think countries should be; a good deal of this occurred after WWI as well,

and, for example, gave us the mess we call Iraq.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This claim to lands in the ME based on ancient history might have appeal to people who support the idea for other reasons,

but such types of claims suddenly lose their charm in other contexts,

such as the Aztlan movement's claim to a large swath of the American Southwest, or the many and varied land claims of other Native Americans across the US.

Is your home located on the ancient homeland of an American Indian tribe? Would you happily hand it over to the survivors of that tribe in deference to the long past conditions of the ancient world?

"Native Americans" is a misnomer.


"The 9000-year-old skeleton called Kennewick Man, found last year in the bank of the Columbia River in a park in Kennewick, Washington, can speak to us of this Indo-European past so we can understand our future. Kennewick Man connects worlds, living and dead. Forensic anthropologists have said this skeleton's features are more like ancient Europeans' rather than Native Americans'."
Kennewick Man, an Ancestor


So much for your post.

Is that supposed to be relevant?

Only if one knows the history associated with the Aztecs, and other 'native Americans.'

I forgot who I was dealing with.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Shhhhh!!!! Let horsie kick in her own stall. It's more fun to watch that way.

Actually I would be pleased to hear her make the argument, out of her brain and thoughts, as to why that is relevant,

as well as why an Israeli claim to land based on ancient history would be any more valid than similar claims made in this country on the same basis.

I fear you ask the impossible of the incapable.

You have much to fear.

 

[mjollnir]

Actually I would be pleased to hear her make the argument, out of her brain and thoughts, as to why that is relevant,

as well as why an Israeli claim to land based on ancient history would be any more valid than similar claims made in this country on the same basis.

I fear you ask the impossible of the incapable.

You have much to fear.

Indeed. I fear you may never be off your psych meds.

 

[Billo_Really]

To understand the nadir we have reached in education, and the love of knowledge, it is illustrative to compare this....


On Wednesday, June 6, 1928 the Oxford English Dictionary was completed. In "The Meaning of Everything," Simon Winchester discusses the English of the time as follows:
“The English establishment of the day might be rightly derided at this remove as having been class-ridden and imperialist, bombastic and blimpish, racist and insouciant- but it was marked undeniably also by a sweeping erudition and confidence, and it was peopled by men and women who felt they were able to know all, to understand much, and in consequence to radiate the wisdom of deep learning.”



....and the abject stupidity represented by you as demonstrated in your post.



It is difficult to understand why you even bothered to learn how to read or write.

The fact that I don't give a shit about a particular period in history you happen to be into, has nothing to do with my intelligence or linguistic skills. But you quoting people who think they "know it all", say's a lot about your mental state. That's quite a reach for someone to "know it all" and it's pretty stupid for anyone to believe them. I mean, if you "know it all", how do you learn anything new? And if you do, then obviously, you didn't "know it all".

 

[PoliticalChic]

To understand the nadir we have reached in education, and the love of knowledge, it is illustrative to compare this....


On Wednesday, June 6, 1928 the Oxford English Dictionary was completed. In "The Meaning of Everything," Simon Winchester discusses the English of the time as follows:
“The English establishment of the day might be rightly derided at this remove as having been class-ridden and imperialist, bombastic and blimpish, racist and insouciant- but it was marked undeniably also by a sweeping erudition and confidence, and it was peopled by men and women who felt they were able to know all, to understand much, and in consequence to radiate the wisdom of deep learning.”



....and the abject stupidity represented by you as demonstrated in your post.



It is difficult to understand why you even bothered to learn how to read or write.

The fact that I don't give a shit about a particular period in history you happen to be into, has nothing to do with my intelligence or linguistic skills. But you quoting people who think they "know it all", say's a lot about your mental state. That's quite a reach for someone to "know it all" and it's pretty stupid for anyone to believe them. I mean, if you "know it all", how do you learn anything new? And if you do, then obviously, you didn't "know it all".

Interesting word salad....but, be honest....you're pretty much a dim-wit.


True?

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Native Americans" is a misnomer.


"The 9000-year-old skeleton called Kennewick Man, found last year in the bank of the Columbia River in a park in Kennewick, Washington, can speak to us of this Indo-European past so we can understand our future. Kennewick Man connects worlds, living and dead. Forensic anthropologists have said this skeleton's features are more like ancient Europeans' rather than Native Americans'."
Kennewick Man, an Ancestor


So much for your post.

Is that supposed to be relevant?

Only if one knows the history associated with the Aztecs, and other 'native Americans.'

I forgot who I was dealing with.

Okay, so you can't show that it's relevant. Why did you post it, since it isn't relevant?

 

[Billo_Really]

Interesting word salad....but, be honest....you're pretty much a dim-wit.


True?

It depends on the context of the situation.

In regards to dating the opposite sex, the answer is "true".

In regards to electrical engineering, the answer is "false".

Everything else, falls somewhere in between.

 

[konradv]

Now...get set to take notes:

In “The Oxford History of the Biblical World,” edited by Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures, we find the following. The book is excellent on Syria-Palestinian archeology.
The following will shed light on the question.

The end of the thirteenth century BCE saw major disruptions in the civilizations of the Near East, Cyprus and Greece for unclear reasons (possible major droughts). “Many populations appear to have migrated….Egypt was attacked by groups called ‘Sea Peoples.’ They were repelled from Egypt, but the Egyptians could not stop them from taking over the Canaan coast. The Philistines …were among the Sea Peoples.”
“…the Philistines did not occupy the coast of Canaan until the twelfth century BCE…”

“Not long before, another group had appeared in the land of Canaan…This group called itself Israel…The Egyptians maintained some control over parts of Canaan until just after the death of Rameses III in 1153 BCE….[including] Canaanites, Egyptians, Israelites, and the mysterious ‘Sea Peoples,’ of whom the Philistines are the best known. The settlement process in highland Israel began a generation or two before the Sea Peoples arrived on the coast…The displacement and migration of the tribe of Dan from the central coast to the far north is symptomatic of …this event.”

“This movement is documented by a variety of written sources in Akkadian, Ugaritic, Egyptian, and Hebrew, by Egyptian wall reliefs and by archeology.”
“The Philistines bequeathed their own name to Philistia (and later to all of Palestine).”
“Cypriot archaeologists invoke the Achaeans or Danaoi of Homeric epic as the agents of culture change in Cyprus; in the Levant, the same change is ascribed to the Sea Peoples. Both agents participated in the event recorded by Rameses III and should be related to the same confederacy of Sea Peoples, or Mycenaean Greeks, who invaded the coastlands of (Cyprus) around 1185-1175.”

Further evidence of the origin of the Philistines can be seen in biblical texts, which indicate expert bowman, “chariot-warriors,” and “chariots of iron,” (I Samuel 31.3, Judg. 1.18-19) and pottery which show warriors armed like the Mycenaean warriors depicted on the famous “Warrior Vase” found in Mycenae. The description fits Goliatath, as in I Samuel 17.5-6.
Under King David, first quarter of the tenth century, the Philistines were driven back to their original coastal cities.

None of that is evidence as I see it. The Bible cannot be used as evidence of its own veracity. Where is the evidence that the Exodus ever happened, that there was a large population of slaves in Egypt or that there was a war of conquest in Canaan at the time in question? Even Jewish archaeologists recognize that most of the Bible story were legends written down during the Babylonian captivity to keep the people together, but with little in the way of historical accuracy.

"None of that is evidence as I see it."


There really was no reason, then, for you to have gone to school, is there?

After all, 'as I see it' trumps a lifetime of study and a number of degrees, i.e., Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures.

I realize what a time-saver your outlook is.

Ignore the following:
Michael Coogan is Lecturer in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament at Harvard Divinity School and Director of Publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum. He has also taught at Stonehill College, Boston College, Wellesley College, Fordham University, and the University of Waterloo (Ontario), and has participated in and directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt. He is the author of Old Testament text books and The Old Testament VSI.

There are other people with lifetimes of degrees that don't believe the Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question. There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan, usually determined by changes in pottery. While a small group may have come from Egypt, the majority were actually Canaanites themselves and the slavery, wandering and conquest stories were later additions to the national legend, told to keep the the people faithful while exiled in Babylon.

 

[PoliticalChic]

None of that is evidence as I see it. The Bible cannot be used as evidence of its own veracity. Where is the evidence that the Exodus ever happened, that there was a large population of slaves in Egypt or that there was a war of conquest in Canaan at the time in question? Even Jewish archaeologists recognize that most of the Bible story were legends written down during the Babylonian captivity to keep the people together, but with little in the way of historical accuracy.

"None of that is evidence as I see it."


There really was no reason, then, for you to have gone to school, is there?

After all, 'as I see it' trumps a lifetime of study and a number of degrees, i.e., Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures.

I realize what a time-saver your outlook is.

Ignore the following:
Michael Coogan is Lecturer in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament at Harvard Divinity School and Director of Publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum. He has also taught at Stonehill College, Boston College, Wellesley College, Fordham University, and the University of Waterloo (Ontario), and has participated in and directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt. He is the author of Old Testament text books and The Old Testament VSI.

There are other people with lifetimes of degrees that don't believe the Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question. There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan, usually determined by changes in pottery. While a small group may have come from Egypt, the majority were actually Canaanites themselves and the slavery, wandering and conquest stories were later additions to the national legend, told to keep the the people faithful while exiled in Babylon.

1. I don't believe that questions re: " Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question."
Changing the subject?
Why?

2. "There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan,..."
Dr. Coogan seems not to agree with you.

But, then....that's 'not as you see it,' eh?
And you directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt, and you're the author of Old Testament text books ...

Ooops....that was Coogan, wasn't it.

 

[konradv]

"None of that is evidence as I see it."


There really was no reason, then, for you to have gone to school, is there?

After all, 'as I see it' trumps a lifetime of study and a number of degrees, i.e., Dr. Michael D. Coogan, director of publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum and expert in Near Eastern languages and literatures.

I realize what a time-saver your outlook is.

Ignore the following:
Michael Coogan is Lecturer in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament at Harvard Divinity School and Director of Publications for the Harvard Semitic Museum. He has also taught at Stonehill College, Boston College, Wellesley College, Fordham University, and the University of Waterloo (Ontario), and has participated in and directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt. He is the author of Old Testament text books and The Old Testament VSI.

There are other people with lifetimes of degrees that don't believe the Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question. There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan, usually determined by changes in pottery. While a small group may have come from Egypt, the majority were actually Canaanites themselves and the slavery, wandering and conquest stories were later additions to the national legend, told to keep the the people faithful while exiled in Babylon.

1. I don't believe that questions re: " Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question."
Changing the subject?
Why?

2. "There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan,..."
Dr. Coogan seems not to agree with you.

But, then....that's 'not as you see it,' eh?
And you directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt, and you're the author of Old Testament text books ...

Ooops....that was Coogan, wasn't it.

Never claimed I was. Are you claiming Coogan is the only authority on the subject? Seems you like to cherry-pick sources to fit your bias. I also don't see where I've changed the subject. Rather, I see it as you trying to divert the subject from a thesis you can't prove.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let's stop to observe that the state of Israel, that PC is so stubbornly defending,

is an invention of the United Nations, aka, according to PC's other thread, the 'Wolf in Sheep's Clothing', yes THAT United Nations,

which is, as far as she is concerned, a dire threat that should have no powers in the affairs of men and their nations.

Add that to the use of the UN by PC and the rest of the neocons to justify the invasion and destruction of Iraq and you come up with quite a set of comical contradictions.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There are other people with lifetimes of degrees that don't believe the Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question. There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan, usually determined by changes in pottery. While a small group may have come from Egypt, the majority were actually Canaanites themselves and the slavery, wandering and conquest stories were later additions to the national legend, told to keep the the people faithful while exiled in Babylon.

1. I don't believe that questions re: " Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question."
Changing the subject?
Why?

2. "There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan,..."
Dr. Coogan seems not to agree with you.

But, then....that's 'not as you see it,' eh?
And you directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt, and you're the author of Old Testament text books ...

Ooops....that was Coogan, wasn't it.

Never claimed I was. Are you claiming Coogan is the only authority on the subject? Seems you like to cherry-pick sources to fit your bias. I also don't see where I've changed the subject. Rather, I see it as you trying to divert the subject from a thesis you can't prove.

I have no bias.

I read the tome, and noted the evidence that I provided in post seems dispositive, and it explained what can be evinced from the evidence.

As you have relied on your preconceive notion, not any texts that you have yet provided, I'm going to go with "This important volume focuses on the contribution of excavated material to the interpretation of biblical texts. Here, both practicing archaelogists and biblical scholars who have been active in fieldwork demonstrate that archaeological data and biblical accounts are complementary in the study of ancient Israel, early Judaism, and Christianity. Thus scriptural and archaeological finds are illuminated by consideration of both."
BARNES & NOBLE | Scripture And Other Artifacts by Michael D. Coogan | Paperback


I have no prob with you retaining your prejudices.


And, as far as the thesis....I see it as being proven to a greater extent than the opposite.
My job is to explain it, not force you to comprehend nor accept it.

 

[konradv]

1. I don't believe that questions re: " Exodus as portrayed in the Bible ever happened. There's no record of a large foreign slave population in Egypt. There's the problem of the desert actually being able to support such a large population for such a long time. There's no evidence of warfare and destroyed towns in the time period in question."
Changing the subject?
Why?

2. "There's no evidence of a new population moving into Canaan,..."
Dr. Coogan seems not to agree with you.

But, then....that's 'not as you see it,' eh?
And you directed archaeological excavations in Israel, Jordan, Cyprus, and Egypt, and you're the author of Old Testament text books ...

Ooops....that was Coogan, wasn't it.

Never claimed I was. Are you claiming Coogan is the only authority on the subject? Seems you like to cherry-pick sources to fit your bias. I also don't see where I've changed the subject. Rather, I see it as you trying to divert the subject from a thesis you can't prove.

I have no bias.

I read the tome, and noted the evidence that I provided in post seems dispositive, and it explained what can be evinced from the evidence.

As you have relied on your preconceive notion, not any texts that you have yet provided, I'm going to go with "This important volume focuses on the contribution of excavated material to the interpretation of biblical texts. Here, both practicing archaelogists and biblical scholars who have been active in fieldwork demonstrate that archaeological data and biblical accounts are complementary in the study of ancient Israel, early Judaism, and Christianity. Thus scriptural and archaeological finds are illuminated by consideration of both."
BARNES & NOBLE | Scripture And Other Artifacts by Michael D. Coogan | Paperback

I have no prob with you retaining your prejudices.

And, as far as the thesis....I see it as being proven to a greater extent than the opposite.
My job is to explain it, not force you to comprehend nor accept it.

Why are you calling my opinion "prejudices"? It's prejudice to take an ancient unsourced account and try to make it fit history. Those who believe the Exodus occurred can't even agree as to which pharaoh, dynasty or century the events apply. Many of the cities that Joshua supposedly destroyed show no signs of warfare during the time(s) in question. If there's any prejudice here, it's your need to make the story fit. All archaeological evidence points towards the Israelites developing as a new society from the indigenous Canaanites, not from abroad.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Never claimed I was. Are you claiming Coogan is the only authority on the subject? Seems you like to cherry-pick sources to fit your bias. I also don't see where I've changed the subject. Rather, I see it as you trying to divert the subject from a thesis you can't prove.

I have no bias.

I read the tome, and noted the evidence that I provided in post seems dispositive, and it explained what can be evinced from the evidence.

As you have relied on your preconceive notion, not any texts that you have yet provided, I'm going to go with "This important volume focuses on the contribution of excavated material to the interpretation of biblical texts. Here, both practicing archaelogists and biblical scholars who have been active in fieldwork demonstrate that archaeological data and biblical accounts are complementary in the study of ancient Israel, early Judaism, and Christianity. Thus scriptural and archaeological finds are illuminated by consideration of both."
BARNES & NOBLE | Scripture And Other Artifacts by Michael D. Coogan | Paperback

I have no prob with you retaining your prejudices.

And, as far as the thesis....I see it as being proven to a greater extent than the opposite.
My job is to explain it, not force you to comprehend nor accept it.

Why are you calling my opinion "prejudices"? It's prejudice to take an ancient unsourced account and try to make it fit history. Those who believe the Exodus occurred can't even agree as to which pharaoh, dynasty or century the events apply. Many of the cities that Joshua supposedly destroyed show no signs of warfare during the time(s) in question. If there's any prejudice here, it's your need to make the story fit. All archaeological evidence points towards the Israelites developing as a new society from the indigenous Canaanites, not from abroad.

prej·u·dice (prj-ds)
n.
1.
a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
b. A preconceived preference or idea.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This claim to lands in the ME based on ancient history might have appeal to people who support the idea for other reasons,

but such types of claims suddenly lose their charm in other contexts,

such as the Aztlan movement's claim to a large swath of the American Southwest, or the many and varied land claims of other Native Americans across the US.

Is your home located on the ancient homeland of an American Indian tribe? Would you happily hand it over to the survivors of that tribe in deference to the long past conditions of the ancient world?

"Native Americans" is a misnomer.

I'll be glad to let you call them any word or words you desire, if it will get you to address the issue.

 

[konradv]

I have no bias.

I read the tome, and noted the evidence that I provided in post seems dispositive, and it explained what can be evinced from the evidence.

As you have relied on your preconceive notion, not any texts that you have yet provided, I'm going to go with "This important volume focuses on the contribution of excavated material to the interpretation of biblical texts. Here, both practicing archaelogists and biblical scholars who have been active in fieldwork demonstrate that archaeological data and biblical accounts are complementary in the study of ancient Israel, early Judaism, and Christianity. Thus scriptural and archaeological finds are illuminated by consideration of both."
BARNES & NOBLE | Scripture And Other Artifacts by Michael D. Coogan | Paperback

I have no prob with you retaining your prejudices.

And, as far as the thesis....I see it as being proven to a greater extent than the opposite.
My job is to explain it, not force you to comprehend nor accept it.

Why are you calling my opinion "prejudices"? It's prejudice to take an ancient unsourced account and try to make it fit history. Those who believe the Exodus occurred can't even agree as to which pharaoh, dynasty or century the events apply. Many of the cities that Joshua supposedly destroyed show no signs of warfare during the time(s) in question. If there's any prejudice here, it's your need to make the story fit. All archaeological evidence points towards the Israelites developing as a new society from the indigenous Canaanites, not from abroad.

prej·u·dice (prj-ds)
n.
1.
a. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
b. A preconceived preference or idea.

Which is exactly what you're doing. I'm going with archaeological FACT, not "here's a book, let's make it fit".