Jews and Democrats….Oil and Water

[Rigby5]

{...
As Hagee noted in his speech, some of the basis for this support is theological. Darrell Bock, a Bible scholar and professor at the Dallas Theological Seminary, believes evangelical support for Israel is largely rooted in the belief that God makes good on his promises.

“It looks back to the idea that God has made certain commitments to his people — to the people through whom the gospel originally came — and he’s not abandoning them, ultimately. And so there’s a hope that drives this belief that Israel deserves to be supported,” he said.

These beliefs are both deeply held, and widespread. Depending on how you define it, about one in four Americans are evangelicals. Richard Land is president of the Southern Evangelical Seminary near Charlotte, North Carolina. Like many of his faith, he was raised in a tradition that believed that the Jews are God’s chosen people, and that “God gave the land of Israel to the Jews, forever. And that God blesses those who bless the Jews, and God curses those who curse the Jews. And if we want God to bless us and God wants us to bless America, we’ve got to bless the Jews.”

There are other Biblical and more future-oriented reasons that some evangelicals support Israel — specifically the “prophecy that Israel has a major role to play at the end of days. This idea was popularized in the Left Behind book series, which sold tens of millions of copies and was adapted into a film series starring Kirk Cameron in 2001, and rebooted in 2014 with Nicolas Cage.

In one decisive moment in the apocalyptic series, The Battle of Armageddon, the “antichrist” gathers all the world’s armies to attack the last remaining Christians and Jews in Israel, before Christ himself intervenes to destroy the invading army.

The movie wasn’t well received by critics, and many evangelical leaders objected to it on theological grounds.

“To take this popularized Apocalyptic end times view as the norm is a huge mistake. It's absolutely not, and most evangelicals don't share it,” says Robert Nicholson, executive director of Philos Project, a nonprofit working to promote positive Christian engagement in the Middle East. ”There are evangelicals who think some of those things, but they're an absolute minority.”

While support for Israel is strong, there are some signs of growing sympathy of Palestinians as well. Bock, of the Dallas Theological Seminary, notes that this seems particularly true among younger evangelicals.

“What drives a millennial are justice questions — and there are real questions related to justice and how Israel handles the Palestinians. Of course, the flipside of this is that there are real problems of security that Israel has to cope with so Israel is a very tangled web,” he said.

Another factor, according to Richard Land, the head of the Southern Evangelical Seminary, is that since the intifadas in the 1990s, more Palestinian Christians have come to the US, “so a lot more evangelical Christians know Palestinians than was the case 20 years ago because they're their neighbors, they're their fellow church members,” he says.
Why American evangelicals are a huge base of support for Israel
...}

 

[Rigby5]

Evangelicals do support Israel, but that is because they are ignorant.
Israel abuses Christians in Palestine as much as it does the Muslims.
And clearly the Old Testament of the Chosen People and Promised Land must be wrong, or else the Romans would have been defeated by God, and Christians would never have existed.

 

[Rigby5]

And, the reason Jews tend to identify as Democrats is because the Democrats “own” the separation of church and state idea.

Why do Democrats think there is a legal basis to this separation of church and state statement?

We were founded as a Christian nation, there was never any intent to have separation between church and state.

Look at all the founders, like Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Madison, etc., and you find at most Deists, not Christians. The founders were not at all religious in any particular established religion. In fact, they tended to be Masons instead of members of a standard religion.

{... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ...}
That clearly states that Congress can not establish Christianity above any other religion.
The majority of the common people were Christian, so the founders made all the necessary allowances for Christianity, but they clearly were not really Christian themselves in the normal sense of the word.

 

[Rigby5]

No part of what, exactly?

In regards to the evangelical right, I feel the tweet of Cenk Uygur is a most vulgar way of looking at people and attacking their sincerity. Since I lean more towards to evangelical left, it made feel guilt towards my initial post.

No, Urygur is correct in that Evangelicals are afraid of dying, so relish the idea of the rapture instead.
They want the apocalypse as soon as possible, so that they can get to heaven without dying.
Just ask an Evangelical.
This is no secret.
They are just USING Israel.
As Christians they do not believe Judaism is correct.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of some interest here..

Omar to Introduce Resolution Declaring Support for Anti-Israel BDS Movement

National Review ^ | July 17, 2019 l

Representative Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) will introduce a resolution this week declaring support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to elevate the Palestinian negotiating position vis-a-vis Israel through an international pressure campaign.

“We are introducing a resolution . . . to really speak about the American values that support and believe in our ability to exercise our first amendment rights in regard to boycotting,” Omar told Al-Monitor. “And it is an opportunity for us to explain why it is we support a nonviolent movement, which is the BDS movement.”

The announcement comes on the same day that the House Foreign Affairs Committee, on which Omar sits, plans to vote on another non-binding resolution explicitly condemning the BDS movement as an attempt to “undermine the two state solution” by demanding “concessions of one party alone and encourag[ing] Palestinians to reject negotiations in favor of international pressure.”

The anti-BDS resolution further notes that the movement’s founder, Omar Bharghouti, has openly dismissed the possibility of reaching any settlement that allows the state of Israel to retain its sovereignty.

Omar is expected to cast the lone vote against the anti-BDS resolution, further highlighting the divide between herself and the panel’s older, more-established lawmakers, who have condemned her comments about Israel in the past.

Representative Elliot Engel (D., N.Y.), the committee’s chairman, accused Omar of “invoking a vile, anti-Semitic slur” earlier this year after she suggested that pro-Israel American lawmakers’ loyalty to the country was suspect. However, he resisted Republican calls to remove Omar from the panel in the wake of her comments.

The House also passed a non-binding resolution in March condemning anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in response to Omar’s suggestions that support for Israel was “all about the Benjamins.”

Omar told CBS News’s Gayle King this week that she doesn’t regret the words she used to cast support for Israel as primarily the product of the Israel lobby’s financial influence.

“So you don’t regret your words either?” King asked.

“I do not. But I have gotten the — I am grateful for the opportunity to really learn how my words make people feel and have taken every single opportunity I’ve gotten to make sure that people understood that I apologize for it,” Omar responded.

Since Israel has always been in violation of international law, it is surprising it took this long for someone to suggest we stop supporting a criminal nation like Israel.

That cartoon is racist.
It does so many irrational and unethical things.
First of all, it implies Israel can do no wrong because Jews are victims, when clearly Israel is against Judaism and is a criminal perpetrator.
Second is that anyone using the work Semitic to imply Jews, is ignorant and racist, because the word Semitic actually means a language belonging to the Arab language group. How disgusting is it to appropriate the word Semitic from the Arabs?
Third is that clearly it is NOT Jews who have dual loyalty, but that Zionists have no loyalty at all and are just criminals attempting to appropriate a whole country that is not theirs, and they have no historic, legal, ethical, or religious right to even be in.
Forth is that it IS all about the Benjamins, which means it is about appropriating a Hebrew myth about passing down authority to the son of the right. The use of the name prefix "ben" is unethical attempt to justify crime as if authorized by God. How more immoral can one get?

"That cartoon is racist."


Can you explain the Left's catch-all claim, "Racist"???

Is it an action, or merely a thought-crime.

You totalitarians just love to claim thought-crimes, don't you.

Clearly, this individual evinces a hatred of Jewish folks, and, it appears, you subscribe to same.

True?

The cartoon is racist because it tries to use emotional attacks in order to get people to wrongly hate innocents, and to benefit the guilty instead.

I am Jewish and do not hate Jews.
I do not believe in all Jewish beliefs, but I value the fidelity to an ancient and interesting value system.

It is Zionists I hate, because they are illegally trying to commit genocide against the legal natives of the Land of Canaan, so that they can steal the land.

"It is Zionists I hate, because they are illegally trying to commit genocide against the legal natives of the Land of Canaan, so that they can steal the land."


1. That is a disgusting blood libel....there is no such genocide from the Jewish side, only from the Muslims.


2. The Jewish folks bought the land and won it in defense of their lives.
The King of Jordan says so.


One would expect to see commonplace examples of Jews stealing, strong-arming, swindling, blackmailing; basically resorting to any trick up their sleeve to pry land out of Arab hands. In reality, the Jewish technique of accumulating land was simple ... they bought it. Both the concern and the complaints of Jews dispossessing Arabs centered on how much land the Jews were purchasing, not stealing, from land owners:

• The British investigation into the Arab riots during 1936-39 identifies "Arab alarm at the continued Jewish purchase of land"1, not Jewish theft of land, as one of the motivating factors.

• "Conversely, the main Ottoman and Arab complaint against the Zionists was about land sales..."2

• "Meanwhile, Jewish land purchase continued apace, exacerbating Palestinian disquiet."3

• "Arab discontent on account of Jewish immigration and the sale of lands to Jews which has been a permanent feature of political opinion in Palestine for the past ten years, began to show signs of renewed activity from the beginning of 1933, developing in intensity until it reached a climax in the riots of October and November."4

• "In the beginning of the 1930s, the national value of the land and its transfer from one people to the other became one of the main issues in the political conflict between the two communities. The Arabs insisted that His Majesty's Government put an end to land purchase by the Jews, claiming that it threatened their national existence."5

• "Though they had profited from the enhanced trade and employment opportunities generated by the new Jewish settlements, Palestinian Arabs had grown increasingly concerned about the rise of Jewish immigration and land purchases."

6

• "An article published in July 1911 by Mustafa Effendi Tamr, a teacher of mathematics at a Jerusalem school" reads, "You are selling the property of your fathers and grandfathers for a pittance to people who will have no pity on you, to those who will act to expel you and expunge your memory from your habitations and disperse you among the nations. This is a crime that will be recorded in your names in history, a black stain and disgrace that your descendants will bear, which will not be expunged even after years and eras have gone by. ... Opposition to land sales was one of the principal focal points around which the Arab national idea in Palestine coalesced."

7

• "Of course, the Zionists bought the land from Arab landholders, who moved to cities or even left the country. They were all too willing to sell, for the price paid by the purchasers was often many times more than anyone else would or could pay."

32

• King Abdallah of Jordan complains several times in his memoirs about Jews acquiring land in Palestine. Not once does he accuse the Jews of stealing it from the Arabs. Each time he mentions it, the complaint is how much land they are buying:
  • "... the fears of the Arab political leaders are supported by the fact that the sale of land continues unrestricted and every day one piece of land after another is torn from the hands of the Arabs.

8

• "According to my information the Jews have requested the continuance of the mandate so that they can buy up more land and bring in additional immigrants. No other country has gone through such a trial as Palestine."

9

• "Or are you among those who believe that there is no harm in continuing the present deleterious mandate despite the Jewish usurpers it has brought and despite the demonstrated inability of those Palestinians now at the political helm to prevent their compatriots from selling their land? Furthermore, it is made quite clear to all, both by the map drawn up by the Simpson Commission and by another compiled by the Peel Commission, that the Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in useless wailing and weeping."

10

• "‘Know each of you that in the end every Arab who sells land of the Arab patrimony or who pimps for the Jews will soon receive his due, which is certain death.’ The placards were signed by an organization calling itself ‘Revenge.’ ‘Our problem is the outcome of the sale of our land. The amazing thing is that we sell to the Jews and then scream and wail and ask for the government’s help,’"11

• "The land policy of the Zionist movement in the pre-state era was based on purchase of land on the open market by Jewish institutions (mainly the JNF) and subsequent freezing of the ownership so as to ensure that the purchased land would be in Jewish hands in perpetuity."33

Not only was the land being legally purchased, it was being purchased at drastically inflated prices. Arab land owners were making a killing selling their land during the waves of Jewish immigration in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Despite the animosity against selling land to Jews coming from elitist Arabs, it simply made good economic sense for landlords to sell while they could exploit the thriving market Jewish demand was creating. Sometimes the land being purchased was nothing more than sand dune, malarial swamps and marshes, or other unattractive plots of waste. Even so, it was payday for many landlords; a day many hadn't seen in a long time and one that wouldn't come again:

• "Until 1936 ... the Jews acquired about 25,000 dunam in the Beit-Shean Valley ... The soil was of the poorest quality, in scattered parcels of land, and it was impossible to establish even one settlement on it. The Jewish purchasers paid the full price for these lands; in addition the Government compelled them to cover all the outstanding debts that the sellers had accumulated. (In most cases not one penny of these bad debts had been paid for years.)"12

• "The Jewish authorities have nothing with which to reproach themselves in the matter of the Sursock lands. They paid high prices for the land, and in addition they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay."13

• "He [the Arab] may sell his land for a fantastic price and add to the congestion in the other zones by moving there. An Arab living a short distance away, just across the zone boundary, cannot obtain anything approximating the same sum for land of equal quality.”14

• "The Jews were paying exorbitant prices to wealthy landowners for small tracts of arid land. “In 1944, Jews paid between $1,000 and $1,100 per acre in Palestine, mostly for arid or semiarid land; in the same year, rich black soil in Iowa was selling for about $110 per acre."15

• "The settlers were ready to pay much more than the economic value of the land. The same or better land is available a few kilometers to the east or north of the Palestine frontiers at one tenth or less of the Palestinian price."16

• “Between 1880 and 1914 over sixty thousand Jews entered Palestine … Many settled on wasteland, sand-dunes and malarial marsh, which they then drained, irrigated and farmed. In 1909 a group of Jews founded the first entirely Jewish town, Tel Aviv, on the sandhills north of Jaffa. The Jews purchased their land piecemeal, from European, Turkish and (principally) Arab landlords, mostly at extremely high prices.”17

• “By 1925 over 2,600 Jews had settled in the [Jezreel] valley, and 3,000 acres of barren hillside had been afforested. This previously uncultivated land, bought at highly inflated prices, became the pattern of all subsequent Jewish National Fund settlements in Palestine.”18

• "In his 'note of reservations' to the Report of the Woodhead Commission, Sir Alison Russel says: 'It does not appear to me that to permit an Arab to sell his land for three or four times its value, and to go with the money to a different part of the Arab world where land is cheap, can be said to "prejudice" his rights and position.'"19

• "The average price paid by Jews for the rural land they bought in Palestine during 1944 amounted to over $1000 per acre or about $250 per dunam (including the value of buildings, orchards and other improvements). These prices are, of course, highly inflated …"20

• "... land brokers sometimes purchased their shares or parcels at a very low price and sold them at ten and twenty multiples to Jewish buyers. Peasants who were in musha' villages were particularly incensed at landlords, land brokers, or agents after learning that they had been swindled."21

• "Aharon Danin of KKL told of an interesting conversation he had at the beginning of the 1940s with Khaled Zu’bi (brother of Sayf al-Din), who helped him buy land in the Zu’biyya villages east of Nazareth: He [Zu’bi] said, ‘Look, who knows better than me that your work is pure. You pay money for everything, top dollar, many times more than what the land is worth. But that doesn’t change the fact that you are dispossessing us. You are dispossessing us with money, not by force, but the fact is that we are leaving the land.’ I say to him: ‘You are from this Zu’biyya tribe which is located here, in Transjordan, and in Syria, what difference does it make to you where you are, if you are here or if you and your family are there? …’ He said: ‘It’s hard for me to tell you, but in any case the graves of my forefathers are here. I feel that we are leaving this place. It’s our fault and not yours.’"30

Footnotes:
1 Great Britain, and William Robert Wellesley Peel Peel. Palestine Royal Commission Report. London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1937.
2 Western Imperialism in the Middle East 1914 - 1958 by D. K. Fieldhouse, Pg. 125
3 Palestine and Israel: The Uprising and Beyond by David McDowall, Pg. 23
4 Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations of the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan, 31 December 1933
5 "The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine" by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 199.
6 Oren, Michael. Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the PresentPg. 368
7 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 45
8 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pg. 81. In a letter written to the High Commissioner for Transjordan, Sir Arthur Wauchope on July 25, 1934.
9 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pg. 88. In a letter written to 'Abd al-Hamid Sa'id on June 5, 1938.
10 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pp. 88-89. In a letter written to 'Abd al-Hamid Sa'id on June 5, 1938.
11 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 219-220.
12 Avneri, Aryeh L. The Claim of Dispossession: Jewish Land-Settlement and the Arabs 1878-1948. Efal, Israel: Yad Tabenkin, 1982. 168.
13 Hope Simpson Report, Pg. 51
14 Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, Chapter I
15 Bard, Mitchell G. Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. 2006. 19.
16 Jewish Colonisataion and Arab Development in Palestine by David Horowitz, Central Zionist Archives, Record Group S90/File 76, 7 October 1945
17 Gilbert, Martin, and Martin Gilbert. The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. London: Routledge, 2002. 3.
18 Gilbert, Martin, and Martin Gilbert. The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. London: Routledge, 2002. 12.
19 Schechtman, Joseph B. Population Transfers in Asia. New York: Hallsby Press, 1949. 101
20 Schechtman, Joseph B. Population Transfers in Asia. New York: Hallsby Press, 1949. 112
21 Stein, Kenneth W. One Hundred Years of Social Change: The Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem. 1991.
22 Stein, Kenneth W. One Hundred Years of Social Change: The Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem. 1991.
23 Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations of the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan, 31 December 1933
24 The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 197.
25 The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 215.
26 Morris, Benny. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press, 2008 14
27 Morris, Benny. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press, 2008 83
28 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 225.
29 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 173.
30 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 200.
Middle East Piece - Jewish Land Purchase and Dispossession




3. You are not Jewish....just one of the usual boilerplate Marxists who makes that claim to hid his biases behind.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I could understand the "Solid South" of the Democrats after the Civil War. I never followed the voting pattern of Jews but this thread made me curious why the Jews historically voted Democrat. Found such opinion here: Why U.S. Jews will continue to vote Democrat.

From the beginning, Wald said, American Jews saw their interests defined largely in their ability to integrate fully into U.S. society.

“That meant acculturation, which is not the same thing as assimilation. To assimilate is consistent with the idea of the melting pot where no distinctions matter. It means to become like Christians and ultimately to become Christians.

“To acculturate means speaking the language of the country, to participate in the public institutions. It’s the idea you are a Jew in the synagogue and a citizen everywhere else. For example, my parents were German Jews, who came here in 1939. To my father, acculturation meant his sons played baseball. So, he became active in the local Little League to the point of becoming league president. That didn’t exclude being active in the synagogue.”

Wald concludes that Jews have developed a politicized social identity in the American political arena, “a deep commitment to the classical liberal values that the state has no religious identity and no authority to allocate benefits or costs based on religious affiliation.”

And, the reason Jews tend to identify as Democrats is because the Democrats “own” the separation of church and state idea.
​

Interesting but I'm not in any position to form judgement. I'll only right or wrongly assume that if the Jews continue to vote mainly Democratic, that perhaps the rants of the few vocal young Democrat representatives are being offset by the rhetoric of the evangelical right.

That was an interesting exposition, but I felt it seemed a bit biased against Christians.

Melanie Phillips, in her book "Londonistan," made this point, which more than balances the points of that author:

. “In America, the churches have been in the forefront of the defense of Western values. Some of the strongest support for Israel comes from evangelical Christians. In Britain, by contrast, the Church of England has been in the forefront of the retreat from the Judeo-Christian heritage. At every stage it has sought to appease the forces of secularism, accommodating itself to family breakdown, seeking to be nonjudgmental and embracing multiculturalism.”
Phillips

If the comparison of America and Great Britain in terms of the defense of Western Civilization is a valid one, and it is, then the attacks on Jews is even more indicative: the major political party in America is now openly running on anti-Semitism.


Today, the Democrat Party is strongly anti-Semitic.

NO!
It is Zionists who are strongly anti-Semitic.
No religious Jews can possibly support Zionism, and its evil abuse of the Palestinians, who are the natives and rightful owners of almost all the land in Israel.

Have you been to Israel?


Met any anti-Semitic Israelis?

 

[PoliticalChic]

That was an interesting exposition, but I felt it seemed a bit biased against Christians.

Melanie Phillips, in her book "Londonistan," made this point, which more than balances the points of that author:

. “In America, the churches have been in the forefront of the defense of Western values. Some of the strongest support for Israel comes from evangelical Christians. In Britain, by contrast, the Church of England has been in the forefront of the retreat from the Judeo-Christian heritage. At every stage it has sought to appease the forces of secularism, accommodating itself to family breakdown, seeking to be nonjudgmental and embracing multiculturalism.”
Phillips

If the comparison of America and Great Britain in terms of the defense of Western Civilization is a valid one, and it is, then the attacks on Jews is even more indicative: the major political party in America is now openly running on anti-Semitism.


Today, the Democrat Party is strongly anti-Semitic.

I'm convinced my initial perception was wrong, my apologies to all right-wing evangelicals. Looking into links provided by a Google search, I came across this thought which I totally want no part of:

View attachment 270666

​

No part of what, exactly?


If you are accepting what that uber-Progessive said, remember rule #1.

Rule #1
Every argument from Democrats and Liberals is a misrepresentation, a fabrication, or a bald-faced lie.



Possibly, this is the reason for those evangelical Christians:

Now the LORD said1 to Abram, “Go from your country2 and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing.3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and pin you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”3
Genesis 12:1-3

That is the Old Testament, and should not be even considered by any Christian, who is supposed to go only by the New Testament. The Old Testament is just Judaism. And the whole point of Christianity is an entirely NEW covenant between man and God. Everything in the Old Testament is now wrong for Christians.
There is not supposed to be any Chosen People of Promised Land any more.

", who is supposed to go only by the New Testament. "


False.


"The first draft, entitled Decretum de Iudaeis ("Decree on the Jews"), was completed in November 1961, approximately fourteen months after Pope John XXIII tasked Cardinal Augustin Bea, a Jesuit and biblical scholar, with its composition. This text was not submitted to the Council, which opened on 11 October 1962. It read:

The Church, the Bride of Christ, acknowledges with a heart full of gratitude that, according to God's mysterious saving design, the beginnings of her faith and election go as far back as to the Israel of the Patriarchs and Prophets. Thus she acknowledges that all Christian believers, children of Abraham by faith (see Gal 3:7), are included in his call. Similarly, her salvation is prefigured in the deliverance of the Chosen People out of Egypt, as in a sacramental sign (Liturgy of the Easter Vigil). And the Church, a new creation in Christ (see Eph 2:15), can never forget that she is the spiritual continuation of the people with whom, in His mercy and gracious condescension, God made the Old Covenant."
Nostra aetate - Wikipedia



Christians recognize the continuum.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No part of what, exactly?

In regards to the evangelical right, I feel the tweet of Cenk Uygur is a most vulgar way of looking at people and attacking their sincerity. Since I lean more towards to evangelical left, it made feel guilt towards my initial post.

No, Urygur is correct in that Evangelicals are afraid of dying, so relish the idea of the rapture instead.
They want the apocalypse as soon as possible, so that they can get to heaven without dying.
Just ask an Evangelical.
This is no secret.
They are just USING Israel.
As Christians they do not believe Judaism is correct.

Just the usual anti-Semitic, anti-Christian lies.

 

[admonit]

Everything in the Old Testament is now wrong for Christians.

"Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God."

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Sacred Scripture

 

[Rigby5]

Since Israel has always been in violation of international law, it is surprising it took this long for someone to suggest we stop supporting a criminal nation like Israel.

That cartoon is racist.
It does so many irrational and unethical things.
First of all, it implies Israel can do no wrong because Jews are victims, when clearly Israel is against Judaism and is a criminal perpetrator.
Second is that anyone using the work Semitic to imply Jews, is ignorant and racist, because the word Semitic actually means a language belonging to the Arab language group. How disgusting is it to appropriate the word Semitic from the Arabs?
Third is that clearly it is NOT Jews who have dual loyalty, but that Zionists have no loyalty at all and are just criminals attempting to appropriate a whole country that is not theirs, and they have no historic, legal, ethical, or religious right to even be in.
Forth is that it IS all about the Benjamins, which means it is about appropriating a Hebrew myth about passing down authority to the son of the right. The use of the name prefix "ben" is unethical attempt to justify crime as if authorized by God. How more immoral can one get?

"That cartoon is racist."


Can you explain the Left's catch-all claim, "Racist"???

Is it an action, or merely a thought-crime.

You totalitarians just love to claim thought-crimes, don't you.

Clearly, this individual evinces a hatred of Jewish folks, and, it appears, you subscribe to same.

True?

The cartoon is racist because it tries to use emotional attacks in order to get people to wrongly hate innocents, and to benefit the guilty instead.

I am Jewish and do not hate Jews.
I do not believe in all Jewish beliefs, but I value the fidelity to an ancient and interesting value system.

It is Zionists I hate, because they are illegally trying to commit genocide against the legal natives of the Land of Canaan, so that they can steal the land.

"It is Zionists I hate, because they are illegally trying to commit genocide against the legal natives of the Land of Canaan, so that they can steal the land."


1. That is a disgusting blood libel....there is no such genocide from the Jewish side, only from the Muslims.


2. The Jewish folks bought the land and won it in defense of their lives.
The King of Jordan says so.


One would expect to see commonplace examples of Jews stealing, strong-arming, swindling, blackmailing; basically resorting to any trick up their sleeve to pry land out of Arab hands. In reality, the Jewish technique of accumulating land was simple ... they bought it. Both the concern and the complaints of Jews dispossessing Arabs centered on how much land the Jews were purchasing, not stealing, from land owners:

• The British investigation into the Arab riots during 1936-39 identifies "Arab alarm at the continued Jewish purchase of land"1, not Jewish theft of land, as one of the motivating factors.

• "Conversely, the main Ottoman and Arab complaint against the Zionists was about land sales..."2

• "Meanwhile, Jewish land purchase continued apace, exacerbating Palestinian disquiet."3

• "Arab discontent on account of Jewish immigration and the sale of lands to Jews which has been a permanent feature of political opinion in Palestine for the past ten years, began to show signs of renewed activity from the beginning of 1933, developing in intensity until it reached a climax in the riots of October and November."4

• "In the beginning of the 1930s, the national value of the land and its transfer from one people to the other became one of the main issues in the political conflict between the two communities. The Arabs insisted that His Majesty's Government put an end to land purchase by the Jews, claiming that it threatened their national existence."5

• "Though they had profited from the enhanced trade and employment opportunities generated by the new Jewish settlements, Palestinian Arabs had grown increasingly concerned about the rise of Jewish immigration and land purchases."

6

• "An article published in July 1911 by Mustafa Effendi Tamr, a teacher of mathematics at a Jerusalem school" reads, "You are selling the property of your fathers and grandfathers for a pittance to people who will have no pity on you, to those who will act to expel you and expunge your memory from your habitations and disperse you among the nations. This is a crime that will be recorded in your names in history, a black stain and disgrace that your descendants will bear, which will not be expunged even after years and eras have gone by. ... Opposition to land sales was one of the principal focal points around which the Arab national idea in Palestine coalesced."

7

• "Of course, the Zionists bought the land from Arab landholders, who moved to cities or even left the country. They were all too willing to sell, for the price paid by the purchasers was often many times more than anyone else would or could pay."

32

• King Abdallah of Jordan complains several times in his memoirs about Jews acquiring land in Palestine. Not once does he accuse the Jews of stealing it from the Arabs. Each time he mentions it, the complaint is how much land they are buying:
  • "... the fears of the Arab political leaders are supported by the fact that the sale of land continues unrestricted and every day one piece of land after another is torn from the hands of the Arabs.

8

• "According to my information the Jews have requested the continuance of the mandate so that they can buy up more land and bring in additional immigrants. No other country has gone through such a trial as Palestine."

9

• "Or are you among those who believe that there is no harm in continuing the present deleterious mandate despite the Jewish usurpers it has brought and despite the demonstrated inability of those Palestinians now at the political helm to prevent their compatriots from selling their land? Furthermore, it is made quite clear to all, both by the map drawn up by the Simpson Commission and by another compiled by the Peel Commission, that the Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in useless wailing and weeping."

10

• "‘Know each of you that in the end every Arab who sells land of the Arab patrimony or who pimps for the Jews will soon receive his due, which is certain death.’ The placards were signed by an organization calling itself ‘Revenge.’ ‘Our problem is the outcome of the sale of our land. The amazing thing is that we sell to the Jews and then scream and wail and ask for the government’s help,’"11

• "The land policy of the Zionist movement in the pre-state era was based on purchase of land on the open market by Jewish institutions (mainly the JNF) and subsequent freezing of the ownership so as to ensure that the purchased land would be in Jewish hands in perpetuity."33

Not only was the land being legally purchased, it was being purchased at drastically inflated prices. Arab land owners were making a killing selling their land during the waves of Jewish immigration in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Despite the animosity against selling land to Jews coming from elitist Arabs, it simply made good economic sense for landlords to sell while they could exploit the thriving market Jewish demand was creating. Sometimes the land being purchased was nothing more than sand dune, malarial swamps and marshes, or other unattractive plots of waste. Even so, it was payday for many landlords; a day many hadn't seen in a long time and one that wouldn't come again:

• "Until 1936 ... the Jews acquired about 25,000 dunam in the Beit-Shean Valley ... The soil was of the poorest quality, in scattered parcels of land, and it was impossible to establish even one settlement on it. The Jewish purchasers paid the full price for these lands; in addition the Government compelled them to cover all the outstanding debts that the sellers had accumulated. (In most cases not one penny of these bad debts had been paid for years.)"12

• "The Jewish authorities have nothing with which to reproach themselves in the matter of the Sursock lands. They paid high prices for the land, and in addition they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay."13

• "He [the Arab] may sell his land for a fantastic price and add to the congestion in the other zones by moving there. An Arab living a short distance away, just across the zone boundary, cannot obtain anything approximating the same sum for land of equal quality.”14

• "The Jews were paying exorbitant prices to wealthy landowners for small tracts of arid land. “In 1944, Jews paid between $1,000 and $1,100 per acre in Palestine, mostly for arid or semiarid land; in the same year, rich black soil in Iowa was selling for about $110 per acre."15

• "The settlers were ready to pay much more than the economic value of the land. The same or better land is available a few kilometers to the east or north of the Palestine frontiers at one tenth or less of the Palestinian price."16

• “Between 1880 and 1914 over sixty thousand Jews entered Palestine … Many settled on wasteland, sand-dunes and malarial marsh, which they then drained, irrigated and farmed. In 1909 a group of Jews founded the first entirely Jewish town, Tel Aviv, on the sandhills north of Jaffa. The Jews purchased their land piecemeal, from European, Turkish and (principally) Arab landlords, mostly at extremely high prices.”17

• “By 1925 over 2,600 Jews had settled in the [Jezreel] valley, and 3,000 acres of barren hillside had been afforested. This previously uncultivated land, bought at highly inflated prices, became the pattern of all subsequent Jewish National Fund settlements in Palestine.”18

• "In his 'note of reservations' to the Report of the Woodhead Commission, Sir Alison Russel says: 'It does not appear to me that to permit an Arab to sell his land for three or four times its value, and to go with the money to a different part of the Arab world where land is cheap, can be said to "prejudice" his rights and position.'"19

• "The average price paid by Jews for the rural land they bought in Palestine during 1944 amounted to over $1000 per acre or about $250 per dunam (including the value of buildings, orchards and other improvements). These prices are, of course, highly inflated …"20

• "... land brokers sometimes purchased their shares or parcels at a very low price and sold them at ten and twenty multiples to Jewish buyers. Peasants who were in musha' villages were particularly incensed at landlords, land brokers, or agents after learning that they had been swindled."21

• "Aharon Danin of KKL told of an interesting conversation he had at the beginning of the 1940s with Khaled Zu’bi (brother of Sayf al-Din), who helped him buy land in the Zu’biyya villages east of Nazareth: He [Zu’bi] said, ‘Look, who knows better than me that your work is pure. You pay money for everything, top dollar, many times more than what the land is worth. But that doesn’t change the fact that you are dispossessing us. You are dispossessing us with money, not by force, but the fact is that we are leaving the land.’ I say to him: ‘You are from this Zu’biyya tribe which is located here, in Transjordan, and in Syria, what difference does it make to you where you are, if you are here or if you and your family are there? …’ He said: ‘It’s hard for me to tell you, but in any case the graves of my forefathers are here. I feel that we are leaving this place. It’s our fault and not yours.’"30

Footnotes:
1 Great Britain, and William Robert Wellesley Peel Peel. Palestine Royal Commission Report. London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1937.
2 Western Imperialism in the Middle East 1914 - 1958 by D. K. Fieldhouse, Pg. 125
3 Palestine and Israel: The Uprising and Beyond by David McDowall, Pg. 23
4 Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations of the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan, 31 December 1933
5 "The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine" by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 199.
6 Oren, Michael. Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the PresentPg. 368
7 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 45
8 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pg. 81. In a letter written to the High Commissioner for Transjordan, Sir Arthur Wauchope on July 25, 1934.
9 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pg. 88. In a letter written to 'Abd al-Hamid Sa'id on June 5, 1938.
10 King Abdallah of Jordan, My Memoirs Completed (Al-Takmilah), Pp. 88-89. In a letter written to 'Abd al-Hamid Sa'id on June 5, 1938.
11 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 219-220.
12 Avneri, Aryeh L. The Claim of Dispossession: Jewish Land-Settlement and the Arabs 1878-1948. Efal, Israel: Yad Tabenkin, 1982. 168.
13 Hope Simpson Report, Pg. 51
14 Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, Chapter I
15 Bard, Mitchell G. Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict. 2006. 19.
16 Jewish Colonisataion and Arab Development in Palestine by David Horowitz, Central Zionist Archives, Record Group S90/File 76, 7 October 1945
17 Gilbert, Martin, and Martin Gilbert. The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. London: Routledge, 2002. 3.
18 Gilbert, Martin, and Martin Gilbert. The Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. London: Routledge, 2002. 12.
19 Schechtman, Joseph B. Population Transfers in Asia. New York: Hallsby Press, 1949. 101
20 Schechtman, Joseph B. Population Transfers in Asia. New York: Hallsby Press, 1949. 112
21 Stein, Kenneth W. One Hundred Years of Social Change: The Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem. 1991.
22 Stein, Kenneth W. One Hundred Years of Social Change: The Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem. 1991.
23 Report by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the Council of the League of Nations of the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan, 31 December 1933
24 The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 197.
25 The Tenants of Wadi Hawarith: Another View of the Land Question in Palestine by Raya Adler,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2. (May, 1988), pg. 215.
26 Morris, Benny. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press, 2008 14
27 Morris, Benny. 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press, 2008 83
28 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 225.
29 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 173.
30 Cohen, Hillel. Army of Shadows: Palestinian Collaboration with Zionism, 1917-1948. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. 200.
Middle East Piece - Jewish Land Purchase and Dispossession




3. You are not Jewish....just one of the usual boilerplate Marxists who makes that claim to hid his biases behind.

That is just lies.
The reality is that Jew purchased and owned less than 5% of Israel.
Here is the map of all Jewish land purchases.

The reality is that 90% of the Jews in Israel are the descendants of illegal immigrants, and over 95% of the land was stolen by murdering or chasing the owners out by threats of murder.

To claim it was Muslims that started all the violence is an obvious lie because then they would have murdered any Jews there when it was under their control, before 1920.

It is an obvious lie to claim Muslims are the problem because they were there first and did not cause the problem by illegally emigrating to a foreign land and attempt to displace the natives.

Who is the problem? Clearly the people who were given massive weapons and technology by the US, and used those weapons to murder tens of thousands of innocent Arab natives.

The facts are that almost all the Jews in Israel are illegally living on stolen Arab homes, are descendants of illegal immigrants, and even now there are only 6 million Jews ruling over 12 million native Muslims.
It is a disgusting and criminal disgrace.

 

[Rigby5]

I could understand the "Solid South" of the Democrats after the Civil War. I never followed the voting pattern of Jews but this thread made me curious why the Jews historically voted Democrat. Found such opinion here: Why U.S. Jews will continue to vote Democrat.

From the beginning, Wald said, American Jews saw their interests defined largely in their ability to integrate fully into U.S. society.

“That meant acculturation, which is not the same thing as assimilation. To assimilate is consistent with the idea of the melting pot where no distinctions matter. It means to become like Christians and ultimately to become Christians.

“To acculturate means speaking the language of the country, to participate in the public institutions. It’s the idea you are a Jew in the synagogue and a citizen everywhere else. For example, my parents were German Jews, who came here in 1939. To my father, acculturation meant his sons played baseball. So, he became active in the local Little League to the point of becoming league president. That didn’t exclude being active in the synagogue.”

Wald concludes that Jews have developed a politicized social identity in the American political arena, “a deep commitment to the classical liberal values that the state has no religious identity and no authority to allocate benefits or costs based on religious affiliation.”

And, the reason Jews tend to identify as Democrats is because the Democrats “own” the separation of church and state idea.
​

Interesting but I'm not in any position to form judgement. I'll only right or wrongly assume that if the Jews continue to vote mainly Democratic, that perhaps the rants of the few vocal young Democrat representatives are being offset by the rhetoric of the evangelical right.

That was an interesting exposition, but I felt it seemed a bit biased against Christians.

Melanie Phillips, in her book "Londonistan," made this point, which more than balances the points of that author:

. “In America, the churches have been in the forefront of the defense of Western values. Some of the strongest support for Israel comes from evangelical Christians. In Britain, by contrast, the Church of England has been in the forefront of the retreat from the Judeo-Christian heritage. At every stage it has sought to appease the forces of secularism, accommodating itself to family breakdown, seeking to be nonjudgmental and embracing multiculturalism.”
Phillips

If the comparison of America and Great Britain in terms of the defense of Western Civilization is a valid one, and it is, then the attacks on Jews is even more indicative: the major political party in America is now openly running on anti-Semitism.


Today, the Democrat Party is strongly anti-Semitic.

NO!
It is Zionists who are strongly anti-Semitic.
No religious Jews can possibly support Zionism, and its evil abuse of the Palestinians, who are the natives and rightful owners of almost all the land in Israel.

Have you been to Israel?


Met any anti-Semitic Israelis?

No, I have never been to Israel because that would be against Judaism until the Messiah comes.
But Zionists have offered me a free home and job if I would move there.
Yes, all Zionists are strongly anti-Semitic, like you.
Semitic means of an Arab language group, so primarily means Arabs.
The fact the Hebrew tribes were Arab, apparently has been forgotten by most Jews, or deliberately covered up.
For Zionists to appropriate the word Semitic is very reprehensible.

 

[Rigby5]

That was an interesting exposition, but I felt it seemed a bit biased against Christians.

Melanie Phillips, in her book "Londonistan," made this point, which more than balances the points of that author:

. “In America, the churches have been in the forefront of the defense of Western values. Some of the strongest support for Israel comes from evangelical Christians. In Britain, by contrast, the Church of England has been in the forefront of the retreat from the Judeo-Christian heritage. At every stage it has sought to appease the forces of secularism, accommodating itself to family breakdown, seeking to be nonjudgmental and embracing multiculturalism.”
Phillips

If the comparison of America and Great Britain in terms of the defense of Western Civilization is a valid one, and it is, then the attacks on Jews is even more indicative: the major political party in America is now openly running on anti-Semitism.


Today, the Democrat Party is strongly anti-Semitic.

I'm convinced my initial perception was wrong, my apologies to all right-wing evangelicals. Looking into links provided by a Google search, I came across this thought which I totally want no part of:

View attachment 270666

​

No part of what, exactly?

If you are accepting what that uber-Progessive said, remember rule #1.

Rule #1
Every argument from Democrats and Liberals is a misrepresentation, a fabrication, or a bald-faced lie.


Possibly, this is the reason for those evangelical Christians:

Now the LORD said1 to Abram, “Go from your country2 and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing.3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and pin you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”3
Genesis 12:1-3

That is the Old Testament, and should not be even considered by any Christian, who is supposed to go only by the New Testament. The Old Testament is just Judaism. And the whole point of Christianity is an entirely NEW covenant between man and God. Everything in the Old Testament is now wrong for Christians.
There is not supposed to be any Chosen People of Promised Land any more.

", who is supposed to go only by the New Testament. "

False.

"The first draft, entitled Decretum de Iudaeis ("Decree on the Jews"), was completed in November 1961, approximately fourteen months after Pope John XXIII tasked Cardinal Augustin Bea, a Jesuit and biblical scholar, with its composition. This text was not submitted to the Council, which opened on 11 October 1962. It read:

The Church, the Bride of Christ, acknowledges with a heart full of gratitude that, according to God's mysterious saving design, the beginnings of her faith and election go as far back as to the Israel of the Patriarchs and Prophets. Thus she acknowledges that all Christian believers, children of Abraham by faith (see Gal 3:7), are included in his call. Similarly, her salvation is prefigured in the deliverance of the Chosen People out of Egypt, as in a sacramental sign (Liturgy of the Easter Vigil). And the Church, a new creation in Christ (see Eph 2:15), can never forget that she is the spiritual continuation of the people with whom, in His mercy and gracious condescension, God made the Old Covenant."
Nostra aetate - Wikipedia

Christians recognize the continuum.

That is just silly.
The Christian church recognizes the Judaeo heritage as being a legitimate way to the same God, but that does NOT at all mean Christians are supposed to follow the Old Testament.

The Old Testament is obviously false lies.
For example, we know now that the Hebrew tribes went voluntarily to Egypt to escape drought, were not slaves, and there was no deliverance or parting of the Red Sea.
We also know that the Canaanites were there over 5000 years before the Hebrew invasion, and were peaceful people who let others in without suspicion. So then the massacre of Canaanite women and children at Jericho by Joshua was disgusting. No one should follow the Old Testament that is full of evil.
As purely practical evidence of that, Christians are free to eat pork, cut their hair, and not cover their head.

Everything you write is just totally wrong,

 

[Rigby5]

Everything in the Old Testament is now wrong for Christians.

"Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God."

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Sacred Scripture

No they do not.
Christians do not believe in things like stoning for supposed adultery, massacring Canaanite women and children, etc.
No one except evil people would ever accept the Old Testament as anything but wrong.

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[anynameyouwish]

No self-respecting Jewish person can turn a blind eye to the hatred and vile associations uncovered at the heart of the Democrat Party.


1. Remember this:

Why Won't Donald Trump Repudiate the Ku Klux Klan? - The Atlantic
Why Won't Donald Trump Repudiate the Ku Klux Klan?

Clarion calls from the media, the Democrats……or is that redundant?......demanding Trump spew venom about the KKK......

....amusing, huh? As the KKK was a Democrat creation.




2. Now, we find this:

“Seven House Democrats Have Direct Ties To Notorious Anti-Semite

• At least seven House Democrats are known to have direct ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan
• Farrakhan is a notorious anti-Semite and racist
• A photo shows Barack Obama smiling with Farrakhan at a Congressional Black Caucus meeting in 2005

…Louis Farrakhan, a notorious anti-Semite and racist who has called Jews “satanic” and said white people “deserve to die.”

California Reps. Maxine Waters and Barbara Lee, Illinois Rep. Danny Davis, Indiana Rep. Andre Carson, Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, New York Rep. Gregory Meeks and Texas Rep. Al Green have all attended meetings with Farrakhan while in Congress, according to photos, videos and witness accounts of the meetings reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Ellison, the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), repeatedly attended meetings with Farrakhan while in Congress, according to photos and videos reviewed by TheDCNF and Farrakhan’s own statements.

Seven House Democrats Have Direct Ties To Notorious Anti-Semite [VIDEO]






If one is a Democrat and claims to subscribe to Judaism......something is wrong.



Democrats: if not for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

You are a dangerously deranged liar.

Your whole premise is lies.

Gallup: 52% of Jews identify as Democrats, 16% as Republicans

https://www.jta.org/quick-reads/half-of-american-jews-identified-as-democrat-in-2018
Mar 14, 2019 - Some 52 percent of American Jews identified as Democrat, 16 percent as Republican and 31 as independent in combined Gallup tracking poll ...


the KKK was started by CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS who happened to be democrat at the time.

it is LYING and ROTTEN to IGNORE the FACT that the KKK was started by CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS and ONLY FOCUS on the fact that they WERE democrats at that time.

it is LYING and ROTTEN to IGNORE the following
KKK's official newspaper supports Donald Trump for president - The ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../the-kkks-official-newspaper-has-endorsed-donald...
Nov 2, 2016 - The Trump campaign criticized the Crusader article and called the Ku Klux Klan newspaper "repulsive."
KKK Leader David Duke Tweets 'Thank God for Trump! That's Why We ...

https://www.newsweek.com › ... › David duke › Trump's twitter › Twitter
Nov 29, 2017 - Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke professed his love of Donald Trump after the president re-tweeted Wednesday morning several videos ...


You are a DANGEROUSLY DERANGED and EVIL LIAR!

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Sanders: I Would ‘Absolutely’ Consider Cutting Aid to Israel
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) said that he would "absolutely" consider cutting aid to Israel during a Friday interview with left-wing podcast Pod Save America."
Sanders: I Would 'Absolutely' Consider Cutting Aid to Israel


As I have always said, any Jewish person who votes Democrat is actually a Marxist rather than a Jew…..or hasn’t thought the issue through.

Ilhan Omar has made this clear.

As has Bernie Sanders.



They may call themselves Jews, but they are Marxists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here is the Democrat Party's bullhorn defending anti-Semitism.


"Washington Post Whitewashes British Labour Party’s Anti-Semitism
The Washington Post is under fire for saying Britain's Labour Party is unfairly criticized as anti-Semitic, despite numerous examples of the party and its leaders demonizing Jews and denying the Holocaust."
Washington Post Whitewashes British Labour Party's Anti-Semitism

 

[danielpalos]

...i tend to caucus with the democrats on most issues.

Free full body massage for Jewish women to help me practice get really really Good at it.

Vote blue not red!

 

[irosie91]

the islamo-Nazi nature of the Washington Post is nothing new

 

[danielpalos]

I don't mind coconut oil.