Who Should Be Able to Pray on the Temple Mount/Noble Sanctuary?

[louie888]

Israel did not "take" the land by force.

LIE.

 

[Divine Wind]

Prove it.

Post every single comment from any rabbi or Jewish sage, prior to zionism, who even contemplated taking the holy land by force.

BTW, Homeland Security is interested in anyone who favors those who seek to destroy the United States or its allies through subjugation by or surrender to radical Islam.

I wish they would be that interested in the radical jews. Maybe then, we could take our country back.

Translation: I can't prove it, everyone knows you are right that I can't prove it since it is, indeed, debatable, but I will continue to refuse to admit you are correct.

No worries, kid.

"Maybe then, we could take our country back"? What country has "Radical Jews" committing acts of terrorism?

 

[Hollie]

Israel did not "take" the land by force.

LIE.

View attachment 140176

Better than your earlier, compelling "Duh" argument, but it's a start.

 

[Divine Wind]

Israel did not "take" the land by force. The Jewish people came back to it with the recognition and support of the international community of the time, through treaties and international law acknowledging her pre-existing claim. The only time "force" came into it was when she was forced to defend herself and her people.

That's not quite true. Partially true, but there was some violence. What is being left out is who had "the land" in the first place. It wasn't the nation of Palestine since no such nation exist. It was the Brits who took it from the Ottomans as war booty AKA the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916.

The Ottomans have held the entire region, not just the area now known as Israel, for hundreds of years.

Ottoman Rule (1517-1917)
Following the Ottoman conquest in 1517, the Land was divided into four districts and attached administratively to the province of Damascus and ruled from Istanbul. At the outset of the Ottoman era, an estimated 1,000 Jewish families lived in the country, mainly in Jerusalem, Nablus (Shechem), Hebron, Gaza, Safed (Tzfat) and the villages of Galilee. The community was comprised of descendants of Jews who had never left the Land as well as immigrants from North Africa and Europe.

All countries were forged in revolution or war, often violence, including the United States. It's simply a matter of reading history.

 

[Shusha]

That's not quite true. Partially true, but there was some violence.

I didn't say there wasn't violence. There was. I said the violence was perpetrated on the Jewish people by the Arabs, both those within and outside the territory in question. I agree the Jewish people responded with violence of their own. No question.

But the land passed more-or-less peacefully from the Ottoman Empire to Syria, and Jordan and Lebanon and Iraq. Why did it not pass peacefully to the Jewish people and Israel? Why is there still no peace?

 

[louie888]

I didn't say there wasn't violence. There was. I said the violence was perpetrated on the Jewish people by the Arabs, both those within and outside the territory in question. I agree the Jewish people responded with violence of their own. No question.

Lie! The jews started it all when they invaded.

 

[Shusha]

See, the problem is that oftentimes people assign a mutuality to the conflict, as though both sides are in the wrong.

But this thread, this discussion about the Temple Mount, the events which have occurred there in the past week, demonstrate clearly there is no mutuality to this conflict.

One side murders police officers, riots, refuses simple security measures (which they submit to everywhere else in the world), and stabs people during Shabbat dinner.

The other side protects citizens, installs security systems, tries to control riots and is even willing to consider alternate methods of protection, all the while voluntarily restricting its own freedom of worship in order to placate the murderous other side.

It is representative of the entire conflict and is ASTONISHINGLY one-sided.

 

[louie888]

But this thread, this discussion about the Temple Mount, the events which have occurred there in the past week, demonstrate clearly there is no mutuality to this conflict.

Exactly - armed jews attacking unarmed Muslims...

Unreal... Israeli attack in E. Jerusalem caught on video

 

[Shusha]

The jews started it all when they invaded.

And here is another common problem with the way the conflict is portrayed. The mere presence of Jewish people in a place is considered to be an aggression.

The didn't "invade". They moved there, bought land, built farms and towns and universities and factories and museums.

 

[louie888]

The didn't "invade". They moved there, bought land, built farms and towns and universities and factories and museums.

Nope, that's more jewish lies.

 

[Shusha]

Louie, go away. You are boring me. And making yourself look childish.

If you want to argue my points, please do. But I'm not especially interested in watching the same meme posted over and over and over again. If I wanted that, I'd be on Facebook.

 

[louie888]

But I'm not especially interested in watching the same meme posted over and over and over again.

EASY FIX! STOP LYING!

 

[Divine Wind]

That's not quite true. Partially true, but there was some violence.

I didn't say there wasn't violence. There was. I said the violence was perpetrated on the Jewish people by the Arabs, both those within and outside the territory in question. I agree the Jewish people responded with violence of their own. No question.

But the land passed more-or-less peacefully from the Ottoman Empire to Syria, and Jordan and Lebanon and Iraq. Why did it not pass peacefully to the Jewish people and Israel? Why is there still no peace?

Ummm, the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the Palestine territories was called World War I.

 

[Divine Wind]

Lie! The jews started it all when they invaded.

View attachment 140182

Exactly - armed jews attacking unarmed Muslims...

Nope, that's more jewish lies.

View attachment 140183

EASY FIX! STOP LYING!

Three more reasons why I doubt your veracity when you claim to be Jewish; you say "jews" (uncapitalized) instead of "Israelis" and/or "Zionists". Obviously your caps key isn't broken.

You claim to be an anti-Zionist Jew, but you talk more like a fucking anti-semitic masquerading as a Jew.

 

[louie888]

Two more reasons why I doubt your veracity when you claim to be Jewish; you say "jews" (uncapitalized) instead of "Israelis" and/or "Zionists".

I capitalize it when I am speaking of actual Jews who follow the Torah or biblical Jews.

You claim to be an anti-Zionist Jew, but you talk more like a fucking anti-semitic masquerading as a Jew.

Because you are ignorant to the facts.

 

[Shusha]

Ummm, the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the Palestine territories was called World War I.

Ummmm. After the war. When the peace treaties were signed. Why was there no conflict in those other places?

 

[Lipush]

You and Sherry could have made great friends. I'm sure.

 

[Divine Wind]

Ummm, the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the Palestine territories was called World War I.

Ummmm. After the war. When the peace treaties were signed. Why was there no conflict in those other places?

There can't be peace treaties without a war.

I don't want to get tangled up in semantics, but the fact remains the only reason the Ottoman Empire collapsed and was subdivided by the Brits and the French was because the Ottomans backed the wrong side in WWI.

Consider other consequences of that war was the subdivision of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which also backed the wrong side in WWI thus creating the nations of Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Austria, etc. To say those nations were created peacefully is misleading since it took a war to collapse the Austro-Hungarian Empire thus creating those nations.

Austria-Hungary | historical empire, Europe

 

[Divine Wind]

Two more reasons why I doubt your veracity when you claim to be Jewish; you say "jews" (uncapitalized) instead of "Israelis" and/or "Zionists".

I capitalize it when I am speaking of actual Jews who follow the Torah or biblical Jews.

You claim to be an anti-Zionist Jew, but you talk more like a fucking anti-semitic masquerading as a Jew.

Because you are ignorant to the facts.

I still think you're a liar. You're backing the destruction of Israel, you've repeatedly made anti-Jewish posts. Dude, I think you're an anti-Semitic sock puppet.

Deny it all you like, but the fact remains I've never, ever seen a Jewish person slam all "jews" in general. They may disagree with the actions of Israel (I do too at times) and they may be against "Zionism", but never have I seen a Jew slam all "jews".

 

[Shusha]

I don't want to get tangled up in semantics, but the fact remains the only reason the Ottoman Empire collapsed and was subdivided by the Brits and the French was because the Ottomans backed the wrong side in WWI.

Sure. But how is this relevant to the Israel/Arab conflict?

My point was that, especially with respect to the current events on the Temple Mount / Noble Sanctuary compound, the conflict is often portrayed as mutual violence, when, in fact, that is a false narrative.