Palestinian's aren't the only ones who throw rocks!

[Vigilante]

 

[Roudy]

 

[fanger]

Dry Bones is an Israelipolitical cartoon strip published in the English-language newspaper The Jerusalem Post since 1973. Dry Bones is the work of Yaakov Kirschen.
Dry Bones comic strip - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Roudy]

 

[Challenger]

They always were and always will be Jewish holy lands. Muslims only invaded the region and looted and murdered the people, however the land has never been Muslim holy land as they fraudulently claim.

Greedy Muslims already have Mecca and Medina, they should stay away from other people's holy lands. Even Christians have much more of a claim than Muslims do. At least Jesus was born and raised in that region. The terrorist prophet Mohammad never set his foot in the Holy land.

They've been living there for over 2000 years.

Fuck you and anyone who looks like you.

The Arabs who are recent 20th century invaders from Jordan, Egypt and Syria lived in Israel for over 2000 years? Ha ha ha ha.

Even the founder of the Palestinian national bowel movement Arafat himself was born and raised in EGYPT.

*Sigh* the "Fellahin" were always there; they were " איכר" in Hebrew, they ere "رعیت" in Persian, the Greeks called them "χωρικόi". the Romans "Paganii" and the Arabs and Turks فلاحين "Fellahin". Looking back through history, there were cultures that dominated the region who formed the "ruling elite", but they were just a veneer. The people of the land remained the same.

It's a matter of historical fact that the Arab conquest in the 7th Century did not bring about an influx of settlers into Palestine. The Greek speaking Christian Romano-Byzantine elite was given the choice to convert or leave and most left; their vacant estates were taken over by the Arab nobility in turn, and these ensured that the overwhelming majority of Arab settlers from the Hejaz were "moved on" into Mesopotamia and elsewhere. The Turks never bothered to displace the Arab elites, often ruling through them, keeping a minimal administration.

The only true invaders were Christian Crusaders, the Mongols and the Europeans and only the European jewish and Christian Zionists made any attempt to disposess the Fellahin. Arafat may well have been born and raised in Egypt, but his father was from Gaza. Compared with the first cabinet of the new state of Israel who mostly came from Eastern Europe, Arafat had a more legitimate claim.

To anyone interested in an objective history of the region, these books are well worth a read:
The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates The Islamic Near East from the 6th to the 11th Century A History of the Near East Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780582405257 Books
The Great Arab Conquests How The Spread Of Islam Changed The World We Live In Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780753823897 Books

Wrong again, asswipe, the Jews were there throughout the millennia. They even defended Hebron from the Crusaders over 600 years ago. That was before the Arabs invaded and decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing on the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929. Of course now the animals claim Hebron as an Arab city....

I just love it when the source you cite contradicts your own argument:

"Jews continued to live in Hebron after the city's conquest by the Arabs (in 638), whose generally tolerant rule was welcomed, especially after the often harsh Byzantine rule — although the Byzantines never forbade Jews from praying at the Tomb. The Arabs converted the Byzantine church at the Tomb the Patriarchs into a mosque."

Thanks for backing up my previous post. As for the Fellahin, who have always lived there under different regimes; some adhered to Christianity, some to Judaism and some converted to Islam, while many more retained whatever pagan animistic, nature based beliefs that were present before the arrival of the various monotheist religions. The only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

 

[Roudy]

They always were and always will be Jewish holy lands. Muslims only invaded the region and looted and murdered the people, however the land has never been Muslim holy land as they fraudulently claim.

Greedy Muslims already have Mecca and Medina, they should stay away from other people's holy lands. Even Christians have much more of a claim than Muslims do. At least Jesus was born and raised in that region. The terrorist prophet Mohammad never set his foot in the Holy land.

They've been living there for over 2000 years.

Fuck you and anyone who looks like you.

The Arabs who are recent 20th century invaders from Jordan, Egypt and Syria lived in Israel for over 2000 years? Ha ha ha ha.

Even the founder of the Palestinian national bowel movement Arafat himself was born and raised in EGYPT.

*Sigh* the "Fellahin" were always there; they were " איכר" in Hebrew, they ere "رعیت" in Persian, the Greeks called them "χωρικόi". the Romans "Paganii" and the Arabs and Turks فلاحين "Fellahin". Looking back through history, there were cultures that dominated the region who formed the "ruling elite", but they were just a veneer. The people of the land remained the same.

It's a matter of historical fact that the Arab conquest in the 7th Century did not bring about an influx of settlers into Palestine. The Greek speaking Christian Romano-Byzantine elite was given the choice to convert or leave and most left; their vacant estates were taken over by the Arab nobility in turn, and these ensured that the overwhelming majority of Arab settlers from the Hejaz were "moved on" into Mesopotamia and elsewhere. The Turks never bothered to displace the Arab elites, often ruling through them, keeping a minimal administration.

The only true invaders were Christian Crusaders, the Mongols and the Europeans and only the European jewish and Christian Zionists made any attempt to disposess the Fellahin. Arafat may well have been born and raised in Egypt, but his father was from Gaza. Compared with the first cabinet of the new state of Israel who mostly came from Eastern Europe, Arafat had a more legitimate claim.

To anyone interested in an objective history of the region, these books are well worth a read:
The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates The Islamic Near East from the 6th to the 11th Century A History of the Near East Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780582405257 Books
The Great Arab Conquests How The Spread Of Islam Changed The World We Live In Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780753823897 Books

Wrong again, asswipe, the Jews were there throughout the millennia. They even defended Hebron from the Crusaders over 600 years ago. That was before the Arabs invaded and decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing on the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929. Of course now the animals claim Hebron as an Arab city....

I just love it when the source you cite contradicts your own argument:

"Jews continued to live in Hebron after the city's conquest by the Arabs (in 638), whose generally tolerant rule was welcomed, especially after the often harsh Byzantine rule — although the Byzantines never forbade Jews from praying at the Tomb. The Arabs converted the Byzantine church at the Tomb the Patriarchs into a mosque."

Thanks for backing up my previous post. As for the Fellahin, who have always lived there under different regimes; some adhered to Christianity, some to Judaism and some converted to Islam, while many more retained whatever pagan animistic, nature based beliefs that were present before the arrival of the various monotheist religions. The only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Meaning what? The Jews maintained a presence in their holy land despite all the invasions, that's what that quote proves. You seem to have severe reading problems. The Arabs then lost the land for 700 years to the Ottomans and then the Ottomans lost it to the British after World War One. And now it's the Jews that are back in control in their ancient homeland, which means they also get their ancient holy sites back the way they were before Muslim animals got there.

In other words the Arabs who are mostly 20th century invaders from neighboring Arab lands, haven't controlled the land for 700 years, nor did they have a say as to what happens. It wasn't even called Palestine by the Ottomans during these 700 years , and it's the Jews that have somehow managed to stay in their holy land over the millennia, despite various barbarian invasions.

 

[Challenger]

Meaning what?...

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

 

[Roudy]

Meaning what?...

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

None of that happened of course that's just the Pali Nazi version of history, or embellishments and exaggerations. Majority of the people who now call themselves Palestinians are 20 century Arab invaders from neighboring states. Heck they had no idea what a "Palestinian" was. Arafat the terrorist gave then that idea.

The first recorded massacre was when Arab animals attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron which causing the Jews to arm and defend themselves against the savage animals. Eventually the Arab aggression and intolerance and inability to coexist (what else is new?) sparked a civil war between the Jews and Arabs, of which the Jews won. Arabs had many chances but each time they chose war because it pays to be the eternal all victims while being terrorists, as opposed to creating a functional state.

Israel will remain the only Jewish state standing tall, strong and prosperous in a sea of Muslim savages.

 

[docmauser1]

Shhhhh! It's okay when Israelis behave this way. They're gawds chosen people and can do anything they want. PERIOD! You're a hater for saying otherwise.

It's the will of allah.

 

[docmauser1]

When the U.S. delegation arrived in the area to investigate settlers started hurling stones at the convoy.[/I]

Not only did they throw rocks at a US convoy, they uprooted thousands of olive trees that were planted on land these psycho settlers didn't own. These people are mean. Just plain mean. If there was anyone in need of an ass-whipping, it's these people.[/QUOTE]Hilarious drivel!

 

[docmauser1]

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Drivel.

 

[Challenger]

Meaning what?...

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

None of that happened of course that's just the Pali Nazi version of history, or embellishments and exaggerations. Majority of the people who now call themselves Palestinians are 20 century Arab invaders from neighboring states. Heck they had no idea what a "Palestinian" was. Arafat the terrorist gave then that idea.

The first recorded massacre was when Arab animals attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron which causing the Jews to arm and defend themselves against the savage animals. Eventually the Arab aggression and intolerance and inability to coexist (what else is new?) sparked a civil war between the Jews and Arabs, of which the Jews won. Arabs had many chances but each time they chose war because it pays to be the eternal all victims while being terrorists, as opposed to creating a functional state.

Israel will remain the only Jewish state standing tall, strong and prosperous in a sea of Muslim savages.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water...

Nationalist movements need their "creation myths" in order to justify their existance and Zionism is no exception. Sadly for your ilk, even home-grown Israeli academics disagree with you. Professor Schlomo Sand, for example, has done an excellent job of debunking the Zionist creationist myth in his books, "The Invention of the Jewish People" and "The Invention of the Land of Israel"

"In 2009, Shlomo Sand published The Invention of the Jewish People, in which he claimed that Jews have little in common with each other. They had no common "ethnic" lineage owing to the high level of conversion in antiquity. They had no common language, since Hebrew was used only for prayer and was not even spoken at the time of Jesus. Yiddish was, at most, the language of Ashkenazi Jews. So what is left to unite them? Religion? But religion does not make a people – think of Muslims and Catholics. And most Jews are not religious. Zionism? But that is a political position: one can be a Scot and not a Scottish nationalist. Besides, the majority of Jews, including many Zionists, have not the slightest intention of going "back" to the Holy Land, much preferring, and who can blame them, to stay put in north London, or Brooklyn or wherever. In other words, "Jewish People" is a political construct, an invention. Now Sand tells us, in this second volume of what will be a trilogy, that even the "Land of Israel" was invented. Guardian readers who happen to be Jewish should brace themselves for the third volume: The Invention of the Secular Jew. All this takes considerable chutzpah.

The "Land of Israel" is barely mentioned in the Old Testament: the more common expression is the Land of Canaan. When it is mentioned, it does not include Jerusalem, Hebron, or Bethlehem. Biblical "Israel" is only northern Israel (Samaria) and there never was a united kingdom including both ancient Judea and Samaria.

Even had such a kingdom ever existed and been promised by God to the Jews, it is hardly a clinching argument for claiming statehood after more than 2,000 years. It is an irony of history that so many past Zionists, most of whom were secular Jews, often socialist, used religious arguments to buttress their case.

Besides, the biblical account makes it quite clear (insofar as such accounts are ever clear) that the Jews, led by Moses and then by Joshua, were colonisers themselves and were commanded by God to exterminate "anything that breathes". "Completely destroy them – the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites – as the Lord your God has commanded you." Imagine if the Amorites came back and claimed their ancient land. If they did, this is what Deuteronomy 20 has to say: "Put to the sword all the men ... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else ... you may take these as plunder for yourselves."

Today, such an injunction would take you straight to the international criminal court.

Seems the more things change the more they stay the same.

The Invention of the Land of Israel by Shlomo Sand review Books The Guardian

 

[Challenger]

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Drivel.

Only in your nightmares.

 

[docmauser1]

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Drivel.

Only in your nightmares.

Drivel.

 

[Challenger]

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Drivel.

Only in your nightmares.

Drivel.

Still dreaming it seems.

 

[docmauser1]

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

Drivel.

Only in your nightmares.

Drivel.

Still dreaming it seems.

Still drivel.

 

[docmauser1]

Besides, the biblical account makes it quite clear (insofar as such accounts are ever clear) that the Jews, led by Moses and then by Joshua, were colonisers themselves and were commanded by God to exterminate "anything that breathes". "Completely destroy them – the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites – as the Lord your God has commanded you." Imagine if the Amorites came back and claimed their ancient land. If they did, this is what Deuteronomy 20 has to say: "Put to the sword all the men ... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else ... you may take these as plunder for yourselves."

A palistanian dream?

 

[Roudy]

Meaning what?...

Meaning the native people of Palestine have always been there, whether they converted to Christianity, Islam or Judaism, or remained Pagan, or became atheists. They still worked the land, raised their children, and made lives for themselves, whoever was in charge or what religion they touted. They all spoke Aramaic dialects. All that came to an end when the Jewish Zionist colonists arrived from Europe, started buying land and throwing the Fellahin out of their ancestral homes and lands. So the only "invaders" who "decided to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing" were the Zionist Jewish European colonists in the late 19th early/mid 20th centuries.

None of that happened of course that's just the Pali Nazi version of history, or embellishments and exaggerations. Majority of the people who now call themselves Palestinians are 20 century Arab invaders from neighboring states. Heck they had no idea what a "Palestinian" was. Arafat the terrorist gave then that idea.

The first recorded massacre was when Arab animals attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron which causing the Jews to arm and defend themselves against the savage animals. Eventually the Arab aggression and intolerance and inability to coexist (what else is new?) sparked a civil war between the Jews and Arabs, of which the Jews won. Arabs had many chances but each time they chose war because it pays to be the eternal all victims while being terrorists, as opposed to creating a functional state.

Israel will remain the only Jewish state standing tall, strong and prosperous in a sea of Muslim savages.

As they say, you can lead a horse to water...

Nationalist movements need their "creation myths" in order to justify their existance and Zionism is no exception. Sadly for your ilk, even home-grown Israeli academics disagree with you. Professor Schlomo Sand, for example, has done an excellent job of debunking the Zionist creationist myth in his books, "The Invention of the Jewish People" and "The Invention of the Land of Israel"

"In 2009, Shlomo Sand published The Invention of the Jewish People, in which he claimed that Jews have little in common with each other. They had no common "ethnic" lineage owing to the high level of conversion in antiquity. They had no common language, since Hebrew was used only for prayer and was not even spoken at the time of Jesus. Yiddish was, at most, the language of Ashkenazi Jews. So what is left to unite them? Religion? But religion does not make a people – think of Muslims and Catholics. And most Jews are not religious. Zionism? But that is a political position: one can be a Scot and not a Scottish nationalist. Besides, the majority of Jews, including many Zionists, have not the slightest intention of going "back" to the Holy Land, much preferring, and who can blame them, to stay put in north London, or Brooklyn or wherever. In other words, "Jewish People" is a political construct, an invention. Now Sand tells us, in this second volume of what will be a trilogy, that even the "Land of Israel" was invented. Guardian readers who happen to be Jewish should brace themselves for the third volume: The Invention of the Secular Jew. All this takes considerable chutzpah.

The "Land of Israel" is barely mentioned in the Old Testament: the more common expression is the Land of Canaan. When it is mentioned, it does not include Jerusalem, Hebron, or Bethlehem. Biblical "Israel" is only northern Israel (Samaria) and there never was a united kingdom including both ancient Judea and Samaria.

Even had such a kingdom ever existed and been promised by God to the Jews, it is hardly a clinching argument for claiming statehood after more than 2,000 years. It is an irony of history that so many past Zionists, most of whom were secular Jews, often socialist, used religious arguments to buttress their case.

Besides, the biblical account makes it quite clear (insofar as such accounts are ever clear) that the Jews, led by Moses and then by Joshua, were colonisers themselves and were commanded by God to exterminate "anything that breathes". "Completely destroy them – the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites – as the Lord your God has commanded you." Imagine if the Amorites came back and claimed their ancient land. If they did, this is what Deuteronomy 20 has to say: "Put to the sword all the men ... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else ... you may take these as plunder for yourselves."

Today, such an injunction would take you straight to the international criminal court.

Seems the more things change the more they stay the same.

The Invention of the Land of Israel by Shlomo Sand review Books The Guardian

Nah. You Pali Nazi lovers are always resorting to same garbage and bullshit. Shlomo Sand and his Khazar theory have been debunked and laughed at by all historians.

No myth greater than the hoax of a Palestinian nation and Palestinian people.


Khazar theory debunked by a real historian


Now, another Israeli historian has challenged one of the foundations of Sand’s argument: his claim that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the people of the Khazar kingdom, who in the eighth century converted en masse on the instruction of their king. In an article published this month in the journal “Jewish Social Studies,” Prof. Shaul Stampfer concluded that there is no evidence to support this assertion.

“Such a conversion, even though it’s a wonderful story, never happened,” Stampfer said.

Stampfer, an expert in Jewish history, analyzed material from various fields, but found no reliable source for the claim that the Khazars – a multiethnic kingdom that included Iranians, Turks, Slavs and Circassians – converted to Judaism. “There never was a conversion by the Khazar king or the Khazar elite,” he said. “The conversion of the Khazars is a myth with no factual basis.”

As a historian, he said he was surprised to discover how hard it is “to prove that something didn’t happen. Until now, most of my research has been aimed at discovering or clarifying what did happen in the past ... It’s a much more difficult challenge to prove that something didn’t happen than to prove it did.”

That’s because the proof is based primarily on the absence of evidence rather than its presence – like the fact that an event as unprecedented as an entire kingdom’s conversion to Judaism merited no mention in contemporaneous sources. “The silence of so many sources about the Khazars’ Judaism is very suspicious,” Stampfer said. “The Byzantines, the geonim [Jewish religious leaders of the sixth to eleventh centuries], the sages of Egypt – none of them have a word about the Jewish Khazars.”

 

[Challenger]

Well I never mentioned the Khazar theory, but since you brought it up, the following eminent Jewish academics blow your puerile, "...debunked and laughed at by all historians" comment out of the water. Avraam Yakovlevich Harkavy was the first academic to postulate the Zhazar theory, not Schlomo Sand. Then the theory was developed by, amongst many others:
Joseph Jacobs
Maksymilian Ernest Gumplowicz
Samuel Weissenberg
Maurice Fishberg
Yitzhak Schipper
Samuel Krauss
Abraham N. Poliak
Ben-Zion Dinur
Salo Wittmayer Baron
Arthur Koestler, probably the most famous amongst recent historians.

For every academic that subscribes to the Khazar theory, there is another that disagrees, Stampfer is just the latest who "disagrees"; currently it's still not proven, either way and irrelevant to the fact that the Palestinian Fellahin, or whatever you want to call them, were always there, whatever religion they chose to follow or not.

As an aside, the Khazar theory has often been hijacked for political agendas, especially with Christian far-right white supremacist groups in the USA:

"The formative period of Christian Identity could roughly be said to be the three decades between 1940 and 1970. Through missionaries like Wesley Swift, Bertrand Comparet and William Potter Gale, it took on a white racialist, anti-Semitic, anti-Communist and a far-right conservative political outlook.

Combined with the teachings of early disciples Richard G. Butler, Colonel Jack Mohr and James K. Warner, a distinct racist theology was gradually formed. Whites were said to be the Adamic people, created in His likeness. A notion of a pre-earthly existence is found in an important substratum, teaching that whites either had a spiritual or extraterrestrial pre-existence. Blacks were either pre-Adamic soulless creatures or represented fallen, evil spirits, but they were not the chief target of fear and hatred.

This position was reserved for Jews. The latent anti-Semitism found in British-Israelism rose to prominence. Jews were, at best, reduced to mongrelized imposters, not infrequently identified with Eurasian Khazars without any legitimate claim to a closeness with God, and at worst denounced as the offspring of Satan.'---Religion and the Racist Far-Right.

 

[toastman]

I have read the Khazar theory from several different articles, and there is zero proof that there was a mass conversion, among other parts of the theory.