Peace or No Peace?

Pages: 1 2

Despite international concern that fragile Palestinian-Israeli peace talks would derail following the expiration of a partial moratorium on West Bank settlement expansion, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas revealed that he would not walk away from the table if the moratorium was not resumed. Indeed, as the expiration time passed at 6pm Sunday evening, both parties remained engaged in peace talks — though for how long appears uncertain.

For weeks, Abbas has threatened to abandon negotiations if the 10-month construction freeze is not extended. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refuses to capitulate to the demand, noting that the moratorium was initially enacted as a concession to Palestinians, who did not even acknowledge the olive branch until almost a year later. The Israeli decision to allow the moratorium to expire is its signal that it does not view the peace talks as a process in which it is expected to meet every Palestinian demand while Palestinians continue to reject Israeli’s right to exist, wage terror against Israelis and preach hatred of Jews in their mosques, schools and media. As is tragically underscored by the Israeli death toll that has been suffered at the hands of Palestinians, Netanyahu is interested in a peace deal only if it means securing an end to the endless Palestinian slaughter of Israelis — and to the Palestinian justifications for such slaughter.

“I say to President Abbas,” Netanyahu entreated after the moratorium ended, “for the sake of our two peoples, let’s focus on what really matters. Let’s continue expedited and serious peace talks to reach a historic framework peace agreement within a year.”

But prospects of this do not seem to be realistic, even if peace talks continue, and even if they achieve noteworthy results. Just hours before the moratorium expired, a radical Palestinian group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), declared it would suspend membership in the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the umbrella Palestinian coalition which Abbas represents. The group stated publicly that it does not want to participate in peace talks and, furthermore, would not be “a cover for policies that would devastate the national cause.” It is an intriguing and honest declaration to be sure: the pursuit of a Palestinian state, which Israel is trying to usher the way for, would devastate the “national cause.” Once again it is clear that, as history has shown time and again, Palestinians are more interested in destroying the Jewish state than in creating their own.

Pages: 1 2

  • SHmuelHaLevi

    I see no reason for pessimism. The end game will be peace. That will happen when either the Jewish people return to all of its Heritage or when extreme islamic monsters kill everyone not Moslem. That is the only way out for the search for peace.
    BTW. The same applies everywhere where Islam sets foot.

  • WildJew

    I believe God promised us something in antiquity. He promised us this piece of land. But the fool says in his heart: "There is no God."

    • bubba4

      But we aren't all as special and chosen by God as you are WildJew….

      • MixMChess

        Bubba, the term "chosen" people is not a Jewish declaration of supreme awesomeness… it simply means that the Jews are chosen to follow all of gods 500+ laws in the Torah. Whereas non-Jews only have to follow the Noahide laws (which are essentially 7 of the 10 commandments).

        As for "gd's promises," try reading up on the history of Zionism, you'll find that It originated as an entirely SECULAR movement. Theodore Hertzl himself was a non-observant and secular Jew. Most of the early Zionist pioneers were secular and socialist Jews. Israel was established consistent with international law and historical grounds.

        • bubba4

          I know…that was said to Wildjew…it wasn't addressed to all jews everywhere…

          I know the origins of Israel, but isn't that part of the problem…while secular government action brought Israel into existance, there were a lot of jews that saw it as a good start…on getting what god already promised them.

          I have great respect for Jewish philosophy and traditions but I don't see how they are relevant. It just seems like while these two sides talk peace, no one is being honest about what they want or think they deserve. Wildjew imparticular has been very clear on this board what he thinks the jews deserve and what he thinks of "Palestinians".

          • WildJew

            I haven't been clear on this board on what I think the Jews deserve? I think the Jews hope to possess what God promised to give to us.

            What do I think of the "Palestinians?" To the "Palestinian" who loves his or her Jewish neighbor, who wishes to live with Israel in peace, he or she is welcome to live with us in peace and equality. If he or she is not willing to live in peace, on an equal basis with the Jews, then there are 22 Arab states in which he can live in peace, if he is willing to live in peace with his fellow Arab brother. Is this not reasonable?

            Mind you, I am speaking only for myself. I am not speaking for God and I do not consider myself "special" as you suggest.

          • bubba4

            Fair enough.

      • ziontruth

        Muslims too believe they're divinely chosen, bubba4; and, unlike the Jews, they believe their chosenness entitles them to a bit more than the land next to the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea–try "the whole globe" for size. That means you, among others.

        I'd think that on pragmatic grounds alone, people would support Israel rather than her enemies even if they approve of neither. Of course, anyone thinking so isn't banking on fear and appeasement of Islam and the readiness to believe the "Palestinian nation" lie (the lie that there is a nation other than the Jews that is indigenous to Palestine).

        • bubba4

          Its funny that like WildJew, you thought I was talking about Jews when I used "people" quite on purpose. It doesn't matter what the hue or shade of your crazy…

          • ziontruth

            Actually I took it as you intended, and I think my response addressed it perfectly.

            You said believers of all stripes in divine promises are an obstacle to peace. It would take too long for me to refute that. Suffice it here to say that the 20th century became the bloodbath it was because of two non-religious ideologies: Nazism and Marxism. So I disagree with you completely on your premise: It's not divine promises but imperialism, the belief that the entire world is yours to take, that's an obstacle to peace. That's what bridges Nazism, Communism and Islam; in contrast, Judaism is non-imperialistic despite the belief in the divine promise. Jews have never believed in a divine entitlement to the whole world, no matter what various libels and forgeries have said.

            But, as I said, I see little chance of persuading you. My response was on these lines: OK, so both Jews and Muslims believe in a divine promise, but their particular beliefs are totally different. Judaism talks about a not very large piece of land on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, while Islam talks about the whole world. If you can't see the difference between the two, then you're truly blind.

            And no, we Jews aren't willing to give up our lands for the sake of peace that simply runs away each time we do. It's the Muslims who should show some initiative in that area, especially considering their territorial abundance. It's a bit like the GZ Mosque affair, in a way: Muslims and Leftists keep saying a mosque should be built on Ground Zero as a show of tolerance, but it's the Muslims who should take the initiative by allowing freedom of non-Muslim religion on their turf.

          • bubba4

            "You said believers of all stripes in divine promises are an obstacle to peace. It would take too long for me to refute that."

            That's too bad…that would have been interesting…but yes that was my point. Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu, crazy new political cult…it doesn't matter…
            they are all potential obstacles to the future of humankind.

            "Suffice it here to say that the 20th century became the bloodbath it was because of two non-religious ideologies: Nazism and Marxism."

            Yeah I hear ya, but first…are you putting these two together simply because a lot of people died under these ideologies…because isn't pollo like Nazism in the same way…

            While the Nazis weren't religious in the way we think, the whole thing was very cultic. That's how you get people to do crazy things. It's not mythology or the appreciation/activation of it in one's life that is the problem…the problem is with letting insidious cultic mind forms over take one's perception of reality.

            The last century was also incredibly bloody because the new ways we created to kill each other….machine guns…tanks and so forth.

            OK..I see the parallel you're drawing about imperialism…um, but you are arguing about which religion is better based on your interpretations of both. I am not advocating for either or trying to equate the two. Isn't it hard to go into peace negotiations thinking that Islam wants the whole world the same way the Nazis did? So both sides will continue to have "secular" discussions about the future in a secular forum of nations while both harboring the unshakable religious convictions that actually animate their decisions.

            So I support Israel and it's right to exist…and I have no love for the Arabs, their aesthetics or their religion/philosohpy…and my point stands…there is subterfuge of peace ON BOTH SIDES over religious issues pure and simple…and both sides should be honest about what those are or get on with at secular solution that is proclaimed as such.

          • ziontruth

            "Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu, crazy new political cult…it doesn't matter…they are all potential obstacles to the future of humankind."

            Maybe, but there's no immunity against those things. Even the most vocal proponents of "Skepticism And Reason Are The Way" can breed cultish behavior. We learned that as far back as the French Revolution.

            "are you putting these two together simply because a lot of people died under these ideologies"

            No, I'm putting them together because Nazism and Marxism (and Islam) share the idea that their followers are entitled to the whole globe. Imperialism, that's the lynchpin. Imperialism is the great evil. Non-imperialistic religion or nationalism are just fine.

            "um, but you are arguing about which religion is better based on your interpretations of both."

            No, those are standard interpretations in the orthodox forms of both religions: Orthodox Judaism says the Jews are entitled to the Land of Israel on the eastern Mediterranean coast, and orthodox Islam says the Muslims are to bring the entire world under Islamic law (shariah).

            "Isn't it hard to go into peace negotiations thinking that Islam wants the whole world the same way the Nazis did?"

            Hard? It's absolutely impossible. But that doesn't change the reality. That's how Islam is: world-supremacist. All Muslims who take Islam seriously (which would be most of them, because the Islamic world has never undergone anything like the Enlightenment that the West has) give their support to this end, if not their active duty.

            "there is subterfuge of peace ON BOTH SIDES over religious issues pure and simple…and both sides should be honest about what those are or get on with at secular solution that is proclaimed as such."

            The Jewish side has not often staked its claim with the religious argument. I'm a religious Jew myself, but I usually argue the case for Israel by stating that the Jews are the indigenous Palestinians. In contrast, the religious argument is overwhelming on the other side. Again, this is because religion has never been marginalized in the Islamic world the way it has been in the West. Eat in public among Jews on Yom Kippur – get angry looks at worst; eat in public among Muslims in Ramadan – found next day riddled with bullet holes. The Islamic world is medieval in how it takes religion seriously. That's a fact and it needs to be dealt with.

          • bubba4

            Much of the Islamic world is still very primitive in some ways I will agree. Do we have any other solutions on the table other than killing/converting the lot of them?

            How can the argument ever turn against religious extremism with the region locked in mutli-generational one-upsmanship and fingerpointing based on religion. So some Jews go into negotiations about land here or there while behind the scenes they bless the expansion over the same because God gave them the land. And Arabs go into negotiations thinking just a few more years and maybe we can beat back these jews…lol

            "The Islamic world is medieval in how it takes religion seriously. That's a fact and it needs to be dealt with."

            Yes, I agree, but unfortunately, our own religious extremist..american and israeli alike would use the shield of criticism of islamic barbarism for their own self righteous "my god can beat up your god". Not that some of them feel shy about it now…just read the board.

            Good talking with you.

          • ziontruth

            "Do we have any other solutions on the table other than killing/converting the lot of them?"

            I don't think the offensive should be taken onto their territories first. I don't call for genocide either, and since Judaism doesn't seek converts, not conversion. I advocate, before anything else, their deportation from non-Muslim countries. (To be honest, I really advocate this only for Israel, because what other countries do is no business of mine. But I think it's a good move for other countries too.)

            "So some Jews go into negotiations about land here or there while behind the scenes they bless the expansion over the same because God gave them the land."

            Speaking for myself–though this is a widespread experience in Israel–I didn't become an expansionist until it became clear to me the majority of Muslims (and their Marxist allies in the West) want everything Israel has. I would have shared, but when the other side demands it all, I can only react by the same token.

            Since you bring religion into this, it is noteworthy that the influential rabbi Ovadiah Yossef (former Sephardi chief rabbi) had permitted the ceding of Jewish lands for the sake of preserving lives, but after the disastrous results of the expulsion of the Jews of the Gaza Strip in 2005 he reversed his edict, and declared the ceding of Jewish lands prohibited. So even the religious leaders are not always intransigent by nature, but reacting to Muslim intransigent much like me.

            "Yes, I agree, but unfortunately, our own religious extremist..american and israeli alike would use the shield of criticism of islamic barbarism for their own self righteous 'my god can beat up your god'. "

            While this is true, I think you exaggerate the point. Very much like me, most of the anti-Islamics had not been anti-Islam until some Islamic aggression pushed them to it: 9/11, the Danish Cartoons Affair, the October 2000 Intifada and other such examples. Of note is that the Hindus, famous for their religious tolerance, made laws restricting Islam in the 17th century. You have to be really over the top to drive the Hindus to do a thing like that. The Muslims just don't seem to realize how hated they've made themselves all over the world.


          • highpressure

            Hindus were never known for tolerance. There has never been a time in history that they were. Besides their enslavement of 750 million lower cast Hindus in I ndia, persecution of Christians has steadily increased since their breaking of the British Empire to where on this day it is at it's worse.

          • ziontruth

            "Hindus were never known for tolerance. There has never been a time in history that they were."

            Sorry, but I'll take it from Jews who came back to Israel from India–most of them fled to India from Persia, much the same as the Zoroastrians and the Afghan Buddhists. If the Hindus were never known for tolerance, then I wonder why they all chose that destination.

          • Highpressure

            I suggest you research Hindu hit squads that were prevelant and reemerge. Where there have been pockets of safety, even for some Christian ethnic groups that have been there 2000 years, overall they have persecution of peaceful Hindus as well as Christians and Jews. Using your analogy I can point out pockets of Jews that prospered in Afganistan since the Babylonian/ Syrian captivities. But one would not say that Afganastan is eiter Jew or Christian Friendly. Organizations like VOM would disagree with you sir.. Christian Persecution is at a all time high in India.

          • highpressure

            Nazism and Communism are Secular/Atheist religion. On can argue that they are more a religion then Judaism or Christianity where the Soviet Union and the Red Chinese were the biggest theocracies known ever. Everyone has a god, and the secular religionists choose the state and their leaders as their god(s). They are in fact the biggest persecutors of Christians and Jews known. That is why they get along so well with Islam today. We see persecution of Jews and Christians today in America headed by the followers of Alinski with Obama, Clinton and Schumer. Alinskites love to step on the rights of Christians and Jews and dream of the day they can be imprisoned and if necessary for the purity of a secular religionist state, kill them.

          • highpressure

            PEACE will not come because it is about good vs evil. And when you compromise with evil, you simply get more evil.

            The answer is not Secularism, which is a RELIGION. Look at the record of secular religion as seen in their theocracies and movements:

            Nazism – 25 Million dead
            USSR – 55 Million dead (trying to make the theocracy pure)
            Red China – 65 Million dead (trying to make the theoracy dead)
            Environmental Wacko Movement – 200 Million dead from malaria because of non-science religionist proclamations over DDT

            Anyone want to venture the death toll in the US for what the actions of the "Secular Fundamentalists" have done here? (Term borrowed from Rabbi Lappin)

  • jacob

    Does anybody wonder why do Arabs, as I refuse to call them "Palestinians", as they are anything but, want to return to Israel ??
    When in their lives and that of their ancestors have they lived in the prosperity enjoyed by their correligionists, the Israeli Arabs and those around, from the prosperity brought about by the Jewish nation ?????
    Perhaps their leaders speak from both sides of their mouths but people are not that stupid and therefore…
    There will never be peace in the M.E as long as, like ancient Romans considered the
    Mediterranean their MARE NOSTRUM in which there was no room for anything but Roman ships, Arabs consider there is no room in the M.E for anything but MUSLIMS
    and all this beating around the bushes is equivalent to mental masturbation

    • highpressure

      Excellent point. One should define the word "Palestinian". People from Obama and to the leftisit NGO's feet should be held to the fire. Surely the 80% of the group who call themselves the "P" word are Jordanians, Iraqs, Lebeonese, Egyptians who came along to take advantage of the Hebrew economic success in the 30s and 40s are frauds. And the opportunists in 1948 who sought to take advantage of a Muslim Invaision of Israel surely are cowardly enemies of the state.

      Instead of the word Palestinians, I correct the person and tell them "you mean the criminal muslim insurgents".

  • BS77

    People, especially in the media, have bought into the term "Palestinian"…a total illusion. If you read books from the 1940s you will know Palestine was known as "the land of Israel", "the land of the Jewish people"……the land of Jerusalem, Gaza, and the so called "West Bank"….but endless propaganda has turned the land of Israel into a grab bag for Jordanian Arabs….Now they are the "Palestinians"….funny, the word Palestine, Jerusalem or Gaza never appear even once in the Koran. Jerusalem appears in the Bible hundredds of times. Libtard leftists don't really care about "peace" or justice….they just like seeing Israel and AMerica being attacked …..They know the idiotic "peace conferences" Carters, Clinton's etc etc all are stuck. The Arabs want to destroy Israel. THe Israelis want to live on their land without attack. They want to build homes and schools, businesses and farms in the land of Israel. Yes, it is THAT SIMPLE. Hard to believe no one can grasp the essential simplicity of Israelis desire to be given the right to exist!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • AL__
  • ajnn

    International law requires a distinct national identity based on some of the factors: ethnicity, language, religion, geography, history, you get the idea.

    history: There has never been a 'palestinian arab' country in the past.

    cultuure: There was no 'palestinian arab' literature, art, universities, etc before the 1970's.

    geography: 'traditional historic palestine' is an administrative region from the ottoman empire and it includes parts of syria, all of jordan, and parts of lebanon.

    ethnic identity: before 1948 palestinian arabs identified themselves as 'arabs'.

    religion, language, etc: The same as other arabs in the middle east, arabic and islam, christianity, and judaism.

    Under International law the palestinian arabs did not constitute a national group before the 1980's.

  • Gary McAleer

    The Bible recorded the outcome of this conflict over 3,400 years ago. Arabs are descendants of Ishmael, the son of Abraham. Both the Jews and Arabs come from the seed of Abraham. But each son had a different mother: one was his wife and the other a slave. It is the slave that hates the free as it is written of the Arabs, "And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him." Genesis 16:12. (This explains the bloodbath among themselves). But in the end, Ishmael worshiped the God of Abraham (Gen.25:9) not the god of Muhammad called Allah. Therefore, Arab Muslims dishonor their fathers Ishmael and Abraham in their sin against the 5th Commandment (Ex.20:12) while claiming to serve God and declaring their superiority over all men.

    • bubba4

      Wow…that's stunningly ignorant. If you ever find yourself using scripture to justify bigotry, you should take a deep breath and get the myth and fact portions of your brain sorted out.

      Allah literally means God in their language…like "Dios" in Spanish…it's not another heavenly being or demon while your God is the real God from your stories (or the ones you want to claim).

      Unlike the societies of our ancestors, the Arabs were much more of a nomadic people (like the Indians of North America but with sh*t land) and remained so until early in the last century.

      As their societies have developed, they have done so in the shadow of colonial power, tribal feuds, and the encroaching "outside" world of the infidel. Oil was their blessing and their curse. Put down the bible and go rent Lawrence of Arabia…it might help.

      • Gary McAleer

        In the 6th & 7th centuries 2 new religions rose to power: Catholicism and Islam; and the bloody competition began. Both united their religion with civil magistrates to impose penalties for disobedience to their dogmas; and all who stood in their way were deprived of goods and even life. And both deny the Sabbath day. Their tyranny was most effectively used on the simple unobtrusive Christian churches first established by Christ's Apostles.–These were people who wouldn't force the will of anyone. Here's the leading difference between Christians and Muslims according to their respective texts: The Christian says, I will sacrifice my life for what I believe, and will not force your will to believe as I (Matt.5:44,45). The muslim says, I will sacrifice your life for what I believe and under threat of death force you to believe as I (Surah 9:5). Certain facts should be kept in mind: 1. Liberty of conscience has no place in Islam. 2. It is a religion promoting 1st degree murder, and therefore, sin. 3. All men are not created equal in Islam.

      • highpressure


        Where does he use scripture to justify bigotry? He doesn't. Who's ignorant?


    • WildJew

      I am not arguing with what you've written. It seems pretty fair over all. But Gen 25:9 says: "Then his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him (Abraham) in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, facing Mamre…" Ishmael may have honored his father when he died, but how has he honored his father's God or his father's people, Israel?

      How do you glean from this that Ishmael worshipped his father's God? I'm not sure when (at what point in history) the Arabs adopted Allah into their pantheon of gods. I think it was Muhammad who made Allah into the (only or sole) God of the Muslims. The Muslim-Arabs might dishonor their father Abraham – by not worshipping Abraham's God – but how have they dishonored their father Ishmael?

      • ziontruth

        HaRambam (Maimonides) says the Muslims believe correctly about God's essence: one God in simple unity, not many gods or three-in-one. But they believe incorrectly about His attributes and actions: the Koran describes Him as having abrogated the Torah, which would make Him someone who changes his mind. Also the Koran makes God nearly totally transcendent. In Judaism, God is the awesome and dreaded King of the World, but also the merciful Father of His children (the Israelites) and loving Husband of His wife (the Jewish nation as a collective). In Islam, God has only the first attribute.

        • WildJew

          "In Islam, God has only the first attribute….."

          Maybe that is why, unlike the Jews, there is no mercy in Islam. If a wife who flees from her abusive husband is captured, her ears and nose are cut off. There is no mercy.

          But I disagree with your view that God is only merciful to the Israelites. That's what Islam believes about Allah. Allah only extends mercy Muslims.

          • ziontruth

            "But I disagree with your view that God is only merciful to the Israelites."

            I didn't say or mean to say that. I was only bringing the Jewish view of God being like a father to His beloved in contrast to Islam, where the very idea of comparing God to a father or husband constitutes unbelief.

            God loves all who follow His commandments. The difference between Jews and non-Jews is Jews have been given a lot more commandments–a greater burden.

          • WildJew


          • Tamza

            the same old self pity is it? more burden therefore more rights!

          • ziontruth

            "more burden therefore more rights!"

            No. Not in Judaism. Nowhere do the end times visions in Judaism say the Jews get to lord it over the non-Jews. The Messianic Age in the Jewish view means freedom from political subjugation, not the inversion of it.

            You really ought to expend those energies on bitching about (or maybe even fighting, but that would be too hopeful) those who deserve it, those who do have an end time vision of lording it over all others, and are working at making it true: the Muslims. If not, at least get off our (the Jews') backs.

      • Gary McAleer

        Good questions. Concerning Ishmael, when I studied the cultures of the heathen religions and their gods, a grotesque caricature of GOD always rises to the forefront: child sacrifice by fire, public rape, intemperance, etc. Ismael witnessed first hand the contrast between his father's God and the heathen gods. When you've had a taste of the superior its unreasonable to adopt the inferior. (Its like today's near-universal doctrine of Christianity and Islam, teaching that all who reject "GOD'S Love" will be tortured in the flesh searing fires of hell for all eternity. Both deny the passages of Ezekiel 28 and Malachi 4 declaring that the devil and his minions will be brought "to ashes on the earth." Also, both deny the fundamental doctrine that only "the tree of life" provides immortality.)

        As for the 5th Commandment, in Psalm 119 it is written, "Thy commandment is exceeding broad." The Hebrew people understood the scope of the 5th Commandment in honoring their father Abraham by believing the Creator's promise given to him and to his children. They viewed their safety, their prosperity and their eternal reward by honoring the faith of their father Abraham. Also, GOD many times used the name "Jacob" in calling His nation Israel. The 5th Commandment in intertwined with the corporate nature of humanity extending back to the first man, Adam.

      • highpressure

        And furthermore, Abraham had six more children after Sarah died with a concubine. Are they Arab decendents of Ishmael? Are they Arabs at all? The Lebanese in fact are mixed breeds of Carthiginians and Jews that converted to Christianity in the 1st century. Very little Arab blood. (this statement usually upsets most Arabs, most Muslims, some Jews and some Christians alike for different reasons, but it is true.)

        • Gary McAleer

          Interesting history I had not considered. Thank you. As you know the Bible is the quintessential abbreviation of the family of Adam through our day. The opening chapters of Genesis outline this focus on the two branches of mankind: from the righteous Abel and Seth through the unrighteous Cain and Nimrod. And while the Bible does not delineate the tens of billions of people who have lived (through the days of Noah, nor the estimated 120 billion through our day), their distinctive character traits are clearly outlined. This is why the words of Jesus ring true when He said, "Behold, I have foretold you all things." Mark 13:23. NOTHING WAS OMITTED FROM THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS CONCERNING THE SALVATION OF MAN FROM SIN AND DEATH! I won't force your will to believe as I, But Daniel 9:24-27 clearly delineates the time frame from Artaxerxes' command (Ezra 7) freeing the Jews to the anointing of Christ in 27 A.D. at the hands of John the Baptist. The last 7 years for the Jews as God's "peculiar people" were given the last and supreme revelation of their destiny for eternal life or eternal death. They turned their backs on that promise simply for their laws outside of Bible guidelines.

          To this day, Rome and Islam have usurped this promise and transformed it into antagonistic dogma against every child's ideals, effectively amputating the heart of GOD'S call to every man: "Repent!" Repent from what? Sin! "Sin is the transgression of the Law." I Jn.3:4 If they will not honor the Sacred Law here, they would not honor it period!

          • Highpressure


            We are not that far a part. I was just noting something to add to the debate – not to disagree. Although there are small differences in our reading of scripture, I have a tendency to be less alogorical. That is where the enemy gets a foot hold whether it was in the dark ages or now the emrgent church.

            Bless you.


  • Mikeymojo

    The fact that Abbas has to check in with the Arab League before he can decide if he'll continue talks speaks volumes about his impotence. Even if he signed a peace deal, no Arab or Muslim would accept it.

    • Tamza

      Not very different from the US 'checking' with Israel is it?

  • Beverley

    Sixteen facts that everyone should know about Israel. sixteen-facts-that-everyone-should-know-about-israel

    Have a good read … it is either true or not.

  • PAthena

    There would be peace between Israel and the Arabs if the Arabs stopped waging war against Israel, which they do solely for religious reasons. See the history of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin who was waging war against the Jews in the Palestine Mandate from at least 1921 and was an ally of Hitler.
    Calling Arabs "Palestinians" is a consequence of Soviet propaganda, for Nasser and the Soviet Union in Cairo in 1964 invented the "Palestine Liberation Organization" with all the phony history to accompany it.
    The Roman Emperor Hadrian changed the name of Judea to "Palestina" in 135 A.D. after he had defeated the last Jewish uprising under Bar Kochba. He wanted to eradicate all memory of Judea and Judaism (he outlawed Judaism). Since that time, "Palestine" became synonymous with "land of the Jews" or "the Holy Land" (since Jesus was a Jew), and "Palestinian" synonymous with "Jew." That is why the Zionists wanted the "Palestine Mandate" and why Great Britain was awarded the "Palestine Mandate" after World War I as the "homeland of the Jews."
    Israel should certainly not give up any territory, including the propaganda-named "West Bank," namely, Judea and Samaria, for a "Palestinian" state named "Palestine." It should not give up any territory it controls, in any case, for military reasons, and the Arabs, as phony "Palestinians." The Arabs not deserve yet another state. The only "Palestinians" are the Jews, with the state of Israel.

  • Clarence

    Why is it only Israel who is expected to make hard choices, painful sacrifices and worst of all give up territory . How many "palestinian" homelands does the U.N wants to have.
    Why only Israel is expected to grant the "right of return" Have the made in Britain king abudllah of Jordan forgotten about the thousand he daddy chased out of Jordan in september of 1970?