Posted on 02/24/2002 3:30:15 PM PST by naine
Aided by evidence from mural inscriptions in temples, items in museums and most Importantly verses from the Holy Quran, the researcher Bassam Al Shama' gave proof that the Jews were not existent in Egypt in the age of Pharaonic dynasties and that Prophet Joseph came to Egypt when it was under the reign of the Greek. He also cast doubt on the assumption that the Pharaoh who stood in the face of Moses was neither Ramsis 11 nor his son Nebtah.
Al Shama' has in fact caused a row by his research which goes against previous historic studies, but he has provided proof which could be still refuted by specialists. However irrespective of how far his theory might be right, his well-intentions drove him to set aside the Western viewpoint affected by the ideas of Jewish researchers.
Bassam told an Arabic magazine that all through his years of study of archaeology and work as a tour guide he found that the majority of tourists and those interested in archeology, 'believe in what classical archaeologists had said about the name of the pharaoh at the time of Moses and about Joseph entering Egypt at the days of the Hyksos, which were theories propagated by the Jews. He said the Jews had chosen this period of Egyptian history in particular to claim their participation in the building of the pyramids, and the temples of Abu Simbel and Wadi Al Sobou'.
Basaam said that he referred to Quranic verses especially the chapter on Joseph to get an evidenced clue. He also tried more than once to attend a seminar with Ulemas from Al Azhar to get a thorough explanation of the chapter. “It is due time Egyptian history is written by Egyptian historians, archaeologists and men of religion," said Bassam to the magazine.
He said that according to the Holy Quran those who saved Prophet Joseph from the well sold him for a few dirhams. But in the age of ancient Egyptian dynasties money was not yet known. They rather relied on the bartering system. It was not until the age of the Greeks that coins came in use which means that Joseph came to Egypt at a date later than what was believed.
On the other hand he said that those who believe that Joseph approached Egypt at the time of the Hyksos, relying on the common idea that the governor of Egypt was addressed as king whereas before and after the Hyksos he bore the title of Pharaoh, were erroneous. "The fact is that royalties wrote their names in cartouche and above the cartouche many titles were mentioned. But never has the word pharaoh been written in hieroglyphic in any cartouche, which means that Egyptian rulers were not necessarily called pharaohs," he asserted. He went on to say that verse No 41 of the same chapter refers to crucifixion although historically speaking crucifixion was not known at the time of the pharaohs as a sort of punishment. Crucifixion had never appeared on murals or in papyri scrolls, the researcher affirmed.
Moreover, he said the same chapter refers to the incident of stealing silver utensils of which "camel riders"-as explicitly put in Arabic- were accused. This verse bears another proof that Joseph did not come to Egypt at the days of the pharaoh, he explained, saying that if the brothers of Joseph had entered Egypt in the era of the Hyksos on camel backs, why didn't the Egyptians register the shape of the camel as a strange animal in any of their murals as they had done with the horse? The camel was uncommon to the ancient Egyptians and it did not in any of their murals , the researcher contended.Why hadn’t they used camels in their commercial trips across the desert ?, asked Bassam.
The pharaohs didn't leave any indication that they knew camels, although they mummified dogs, cats, crocodiles and foxes and drew pictures of many animals but not camels.
Moving to another controversial and sensitive issue in Egyptian history and comparative religions, Bassam refuted the claim that the ruling pharaoh at the days of Moses was Ramsis II or his son Nebtah. He said that no sufficient proof as a papyrus, an inscription or anything of the sort was given to vindicate this theory.
He said that if Ramsis II was the referred to Pharaoh how could he fostered Moses as a child when he (Ramsis II) was known to have 52 sons and 48 daughters? Another point Bassam raised was that non of Ramsis' eight wives bore the name of the pharaoh’s wife mentioned by Prophet Mohamed as Asia.
"Those claiming Nebtah to be the Pharaoh referred to in his stele at Cairo Museum in which the Jews were mentioned are also faulty in their presumption because the stele also mentions his victory over many tribes in Libya and Syria in the fifth year of his rule. It is well known that Nebtah, Ramsis's son No 13, reigned for ten years. So if Nebtah was the Pharaoh, who was then the ruler that died in the fifth year?" he said.
Bassam actually urges the formation of a work team of men of religion, archaeologists and historians to present a clear "picture of the Quranic chapter of Joseph, which he said was brimming with facts that had to be elucidated. He said that the effort should take place under the supervision of Al Azhar and the Ministry of Waqfs.
He also of the opinion that civilization should be a subject on school curricula, starting from the primary stage up to university stage so that Egyptians would be well-prepared to refute any faulty claims by those attempting to forge history.
Or - perhaps - the Quran is not entirely reliable ? ;-)))
He's absolutely wrong. I saw the Ten Commandments with Chuck Heston and Yul Brynner. CB Demille had it right! =^)
Bassam Al Shama' is all wrong.
Ah, aren't we talking about slavery here? Oh, but then that's right, this was a Jew after all. Whew!
There is support (that)
the builders of the pyramids were Egyptians. They
are not the Jews as has been said, they are not
people from a lost civilization. They are not out of
space. They are Egyptian and their skeletons are
here, and were examined by scholars, doctors and
the race of all the people we found are completely
supporting that they are Egyptians.
Exodus 10:28
Pharaoh said to Moses, "Get out of my sight! Make sure you do not appear before me again! The day you see my face you will die."
I could go on for days....
This story is nothing more than an attempt to continue on the lie that the Jews werent important to the rise of Egypt or to its downfall.
Whatever...
'holy quran'...
(insert farting sound)
I think that I might have seen a verse from the 'holy quran' the other day on a public restroom's sh!tter stall door...
I didn't know that old mohamma-rama-ding-dong had a phone number though...
There's nothing wrong with investigating the historical claims of each and comparing them to other secular evidence. But this appears to have a built-in bias for writing the Jews out of Egyptian history.
For one, the Hebrew language has a great many loan words from ancient Egyptian-- in fact, that is the source of some half of its difference from Arabic.
For another, this researcher has a ridiculously late idea of when the Exodus took place. OF COURSE, if it had to take place in or after the heyday of Egypt under Ramses II, it COULD NOT HAVE BEEN A REALITY. But, garbage in, garbage out! It occurred much earlier.
The Exodus occurred (very probably) under Amenhotep II, but in any event the date was BC 1440 at the latest! At the very earliest, many think the LIMIT might be as early as some 1550-40 BC, but IMO 90% of those scholars who believe the Exodus took place in a biblically recognizable way, ...believe it took place between 1465 and 1440 BC, a fairly narrow window for such a long time ago.
I fail to see the point about stamped money. All the Bible says is "twenty pieces of silver", and the Egyptians certainly had standardized weights and measures at the time. You better believe they knew what the Pharoah and his agents meant by "twenty pieces" - stamped money or not.
Our Egyptian informant seems to have not understood what the Bible says either - at least not any more than his critics!
Ye gads, people! Trade was being conducted with precious metals and jewels long before the development of stamped money, and millenia before the development of paper money. Obviously Joseph was sold for a price - intriguingly not stated by the Bible in terms of a monetary standard.
No, Dog Gone has it right at ~600 AD.
--Boris
Genesis and Exodus were redacted into their present exact letter-perfect form by Ezra about circa 444 BC, a thousand years earlier.
But from the many ancient details they give us, things no one in Ezra's time could have known, but we are just finding out...we can tell that Ezra's sources were accurate oral and written materials dating from very close to the events described.[example: the statement that when Abraham came into Eretz Yisroel, the "Amorites were in the land." This people was lost to history even when the KJV was translated, so they could not then be used to date Abraham.]
Only in my own lifetime has it been learned who the Amorites were, and that they were in the Land from about 2210 to 2020 BC, and by 2000 BC had totally vanished, gone with the wind.
That's about 1,300 years from the time of the Exodus.
MORE........The ONLY GOD is JEHOVAH-JESUS of the 66 books of THE ONLY HOLY SCRIPTURES known as THE BIBLE.
THIS ONLY GOD says, to the express and specific point that HE ONLY RECOGNIZES "ONE" SON as TRUELY the SON ONE and ONLY BLESSED ONE.
Bottom Line FOREVER is Genesis 22:2 and Genesis 22:16 !!!
THE ONE "SEED" of Inheritance ie. THE "ONE" and ONLY GENUINE INHERITER (Bo) CAME IN THE (His unique sinless) FLESH.
BEING HIMSELF,......"GOD IN HIS THE ONE and THE ONLY "IMMACULATE" ONE EVER IN FLESH,.....BEING THEREFORE HIMSELF GOD IN "HIS SINLESS FLESH". (St. John 3:16)
I think that's 600AD. Mohammed came AFTER Jesus Christ.
There is just over 2 THOUSAND years from the Exodus, until the Koran. Maybe even 2100 or 2200.
Al Shama is an Egyptian researcher speaking about a matter of Egyptian state ideology. I'd trust him as far as I could throw him. Or as far as I could throw any of the pyramids :).
http://www.san.beck.org/AB13-MuhammadandIslam.html#5
Folks also seem to not understand the "sources" for the Koran. The entire book has two general kinds of documents. One kind consists of what we might call "Mohammed's 50 Greatest Sermons". The other kind consists of things Mohammed claimed he received in a trance from an angel.
Woven in and among these things there seems to be a third kind of material - ancient texts from Egyptian, Syrian, Persian and Babylonian/Sumerian sources. Many of these items were long identified with the Bible itself. It's almost as if Mohammed "lifted" parts of the Bible and didn't tell anybody about it.
Actually, we don't know what Mohammed said he received in a trance. Almost 100% of the material in the Koran was written down by his disciples or others as he recited it to them. It was assembled and compiled into the Koran later. Individuals with access to "other" ancient sacred texts had ample opportunity to infiltrate that material into the Koran.
All of which means when you read the Koran you read portions which are held to be divine revelation, other parts which are just sermons, yet other parts which are taken from the Bible itself, and lastly, portions which come from other ancient sources.
Regarding those other ancient sources, some of them have been identified in modern times. You will usually see such discoveries portrayed by Moslems as "proof" that the Koran is a "true" revelation from God. Western archaologists usually just anounce that another portion of the Koran has been found in some ancient library circa 1800 BC or thereabouts.
Remember, in Mohammed's time, the world was just beginning to crawl out of the Dark Ages, a very destructive worldwide event. It's a doggone shame that Mohammed seems to have never seen an intact copy of even a single one of the gospels. Apparantly such things were quite rare in the Dark Ages!
Crawling out? Don't you mean crawling toward?
Various writings and recollections were compiled after Mohammed's death. It seems to have reached its current form about 700 AD, although there aren't manuscripts from that time.
Iago as an archetypical devil and his role in Othello mirrors the ancient psychodrama of the pagan Egyptian gods. Iago’s line here in this soliloquy also suggests a parallel to the function of Set in the esoteric and pagan Egyptian cosmology.
Iago:
"Divinity of Hell!
When devils will the blackest of sins put on,
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows,
As I do now." (II, III, 340)
Egyptian Book of the Dead: "Behold, I am Set, the creator of confusion, who creates both the tempest and the storm throughout the length and breadth of the heavens." (Naville, p. 39)
Iago serves this role as Set, the Destroyer, who kills his brother Osiris out of jealousy for his popularity. Plotting and weaving a tangled web of deceit, Iago creates confusion, a storm of intrigue that ensnares his victim, Othello. Much like the bejeweled chest of precious wood that Set used to trap Osiris at a feast under the guise of playing a game, Iago also delights in luring victims into a sparkling illusion that imprisons them so that he can manipulate others into serving his desires of destroying them. The entrapment of Othello in a prison of his own delusions of purity and nobility, the manipulation of Cassio under the cherished promise of regaining Othello’s favor, and the treasure of Desdemona used to tempt the ever stupid Rodrigo, all fit this model of esoteric cosmogony.
The idea of Iago as an archetype is not new. In Magic in the Web, Action and Language in Othello, Robert B. Heilman writes:
"…we move into the symbolic dimension and use the word archetype to describe that compression of possibilities which is so inclusive that all other characters of the same order seem but partial representations of the original idea. Iago is this kind of character; he is infinitely more than the skillful manipulator of a stratagem…" (Heilman, p. 12)
Not far from this, we can also see the intent to cast Iago as the Satan of the Judaic, Christian, and Muslim mythoi. A clue to this is where Iago says; "I am not what I am." (I, I, 65) as opposed to the biblical phrase "I am that I am," representing the Judaic God (Exodus 3:14). More imagery and figurative language used in Iago’s dialogues with other characters, symbolic interactions with them, is also another way to see Shakespeare’s intentions concerning the character.
Set, Satan, and Shaitan are the same. "Satan" is a Hebrew word for the pagan Egyptian Set. Satan, Shaitan, Set or Seth ("Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) is a pagan entity, the "adversary" of Judaic theology. (A "pagan" is anyone not Judaic, Christian or Muslim.)
Fraternal agreements prohibit the source reference on this etymology, it is the focus of rancorous theological debates, and is at odds with the "accepted" theology on the subject; of which my fraternity stands in opposition to. However, I will gratuitously include it as an item for debate, speculation and/or discussion, something our adversaries are unwilling to do in the interests of their deception(s). We are also unwilling to reveal certain things, in the interest of our own purposes - - figuratively preserving a ‘Library of Alexandria’ from our enemies…
The Greeks called Set "Typhon," who was the war god assigned to Upper Egypt. This also represents another contravention to the "accepted" etymologies of words like "typhoon" in English, which is erroneously listed as the Cantonese "tai fung" in many dictionaries. English has more commonalties with Greek and Latin, does it not?
Egyptian Book of the Dead: "Behold, I am Set, the creator of confusion, who creates both the tempest and the storm throughout the length and breadth of the heavens." (Naville)
Interestingly, "Setebos" was the Patagonian god or devil, alluded to by Shakespeare through Caliban in the Tempest:
Caliban:
"His art is of such power
It would control my dam’s god, Setebos,
And make a vassal of him."
-The Tempest (I, II)
This is a curious reference by Shakespeare that is indicative for a pattern of etymology outside of established acceptance.
Iago:
"The Moor is of a free and open nature,
That thinks men honest that but seem to be so,
And will as tenderly be led by th’nose
As asses are." (I, III, 392)
There is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic in Othello. The father of Othello was an Egyptian. The term "asses" in this soliloquy is a literary allusion to this often-bloody conflict between these forces.
The Egyptian priest Manetho associated the Jews with the Hyksos and Moses with the Egyptian priest Osarsiph. It was at this time that the belief the Jews worshipped an ass – an animal holy to the Egyptian god Set was established. Both the Jews and the pagan Egyptians used the labels (i.e., Satan, Set, Seth, or "Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) to defame each other. How fitting that amidst this epic struggle and bloody conflict, the entity known as Satan was born into the World. Such conflict continued through the Maccabean period (with Antiochus Epiphanes), and continues into modern times on several fronts.
[Othello’s instruction to Desdemona about the handkerchief is also telling. Ponder the actions of Iago in the play and Othello’s words to Desdemona: " ‘Tis true: there’s magic in the web of it." (III, IV, 65)]
What does all this have to do with Shakespeare and Othello? Consider the period of time in which William Shakespeare lived, his oft criticized and "unconventional" use of spelling, punctuation and terminology in a time where there was an effort to standardize the English language.
King James I acceded to the throne. He published the detailed treatise Daemonology, because of his concern about witchcraft in Britain (this did have an effect on the presentation of Macbeth and other plays).
There is the matter of the King James Bible to consider. There was pressure from the Church and open condemnation concerning secular drama. (English theatres were actually shut down for 18 years prior to 1663 when a puritan government came to power.) Latin was used in the churches, composed the language found in bibles, hymnals and was frequently used by the nobility in matters of state affairs. Often history has been colored by the occlusion of religious concerns; translations were subject to interpretation not always in the interest of accuracy.
Camille Paglia, professor of humanities and media studies at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, artfully depicts the dynamics at work in her book Sexual Personae, Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson:
"Spenser, Shakespeare, and Freud are the three greatest sexual psychologists in literature, continuing a tradition begun by Euripides and Ovid. Freud has no rivals among his successors because they think he wrote science, when in fact he wrote art. Spenser, the Apollonian pictorailist, and Shakespeare the Dionysian alchemist, compete for artistic control of the English Renaissance. Shakespeare unlooses his metamorphic flood of words and personae to escape Spenser’s rigorous binding…" (Paglia, p. 228)
Unless the whole of the professor’s book is taken in as a scholarly commentary on pagan beauty and it’s relation to sex, culture, politics and art or literature, there is some confusion for most readers concerning the analogies being made here…
"Spenser’s radiant Apollonian armouring becomes Milton’s louring metallic daemonism, militant and misogynistic. Satan’s legions gleam with hard Spenserian light. Milton sinks when he sings of the foggy formlessness of good. His God is poetically impotent. But his noisy, thrashing Spenserian serpents and monsters; his lush Spenserian embowered Paradise; his evil, envious Spenserian voyeurism: these are immortal. Milton tries to defeat Spenser by wordiness, Judaic word-fetishism, tangling the Apollonian eye in the labyrinth of etymology. Shakespeare succeeded here by joining words to pagan sexual personae…" (Paglia, p. 228-229)
This "Judaic word-fetishism" from the above, or fascism for my purposes, is most illustrative. Like the complexities of the Elizabethan court protocols (relaxed under King James I), the use of language, definitions, etymologies, and the recording of history has also suffered a suppression by those with an interest to keep some things hidden. This is why I will assert that despite authoritative and scholarly denials, William Shakespeare had privy to occult knowledge not commonly available to others in his time, as well as a powerful English King’s ear and patronage.
Iago as the Setian, or Satan does not separate him from being human, but does indicate Iago as both devil and human (Antichrist), the embodiment of ‘original evil.’ (Heilman, p. 41) Iago represents an inherent, autonomous evil, not a developing one as in the character of Macbeth. Desdemona unknowingly contributes to Othello’s willingness to eat the poison pome, tricked by the perspicacious serpent that is Iago. The Garden of Eden represented by Desdemona’s purity is plowed asunder with the sins of sanctimonious delusions, Othello murders her and takes upon himself the power to render his God’s divine judgement. Satan conquers the human spirit with Othello’s seppuku.
Iago:
"Divinity of Hell!
When devils will the blackest of sins put on,
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows,
As I do now." (II, III, 340)
"The Iago evil is redefined for us: his method is planned confusion, The metamorphosis of opposites, the use of "shows" that keep things from being seen in their "true colors." (Heilman, p. 65)
This idea of ‘planned confusion’ from Heilman shows the analogy I made earlier with the Egyptian Book of the Dead and these same lines of the soliloquy. The bejeweled chest of Set’s game to trap Osiris, the weaving of a web, an illusion, the storm of intrigue and the tempest prior to Othello’s arrival in Cyprus. The purity of Desdemona is also a subject Iago continues to assail…
Iago: "So will I turn her virtue to pitch," (II, III, 350)
These images of color are a tool used to portray the darkness, iniquity or evil all throughout Othello as are other references employed to contrast against the divinity and virtue of the Judaic mythoi. Just as the ideas of the heavens being blackened by the gathering storm, the bright daytime sky is always darkened by foul weather. Much of the play projects the imagery as occurring during the night. There is a metaphorical divergence at work as a dramatic device illuminating a contemplative audience to the spiritual battle between the sacred and the profane, of Providence’s divine light and the primordial darkness of Chaos.
"When dominated by the Spectre, the self becomes a hermaphroditic Selfhood, whom Blake calls Satan or Death… Incestuous self-insemination: the grappling duo is a new Khepera, the masturbatory Egyptian cosmos-maker. Actors and audience are a sexual octopus of many legs and eyes.The contest between male Spectre and female Emanation is archaic ritual combat. I find homosexual overtones in the betrayal of the self into a queasy spectral world ruled by dark, deceiving male figures. Note the elegance with which Blake’s Spectre theory fits Shakespeare’s Othello. A conspiratorial Spectre, Iago, is homoerotically obsessed with splitting Othello, through jealous fears, from his Emanation, Desdemona. (Jealousy and fear are the Spectres’ regular weapons.) Othello, cleaving to his Spectre instead of casting him off, destroys himself. He ends by not killing his Spectre but his Emanation." (Paglia, p. 287-289)
Iago also represents homoeroticism in Othello from the beginning. Not just in his obsessive hatred for Othello but in a seeming contempt for heterosexual relations as evidenced by his reference of Cassio being "A fellow almost damned in a fair wife." (I, I, 21) There is the opening act, the masturbatory fever pitch and sexual imagery of Iago’s speech. It should also be noted in reference to the pagan Egyptian mythos, Set had a battle with Horus, son of Osiris, where he was emasculated. Set managed to tear out one of the god’s eyes.
Iago seems to have this sexual impotence about him, an inborn hostility for women and disgust for heterosexuality as a result. Iago also feels rendered impotent that he was passed over for position by Othello in favor of Cassio, as well as by his own rage. This rage could also be construed as a sadomasochistic component to Iago’s character.
In addition, the description to Othello by Iago about Cassio’s nocturnal speech conjures up a homoerotic imagery. It is also interesting to contemplate the prohibition of women being on the stage, where men in drag portray female characters.
Iago also sets out to mutilate Othello’s spirit, much the same as Set dismembering Osiris. Iago as Set, declaring war, plucks away at Cassio, Othello’s ‘favorite son,’ who’s vision is partially taken away by drink. Cassio does rise to take Othello’s place as governor of Cyprus. Horus accedes to the throne of the heavens. Wounded, the Setian is bound and tortured in the Abyss…
I use Othello to paint a picture showing there is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic. Often it is claimed by the Neo-Pagans that Satan is only found in Christianity. How can this be if Satan is undeniably a Hebrew word adapted from the name of the Pagan Egytian god Set? The Jewish synod of Rabbinical authority will deny that Satan even exists. How do they reconcile that with the fact that it is a Hebrew word?
The point is that in avoiding their true pagan roots, the Neo-Pagans are particiating inadvertently in a Judaic word-fetishism. This should give some of the Judaic/Christian community cause for reflection and cooperation.
I have offered up a riddle for you to ponder, especially for the Christians who are constantly criticized and bashed for their beliefs in this insipid modernity of prime time television.
By Mohammad's time, it was well underway. The Plague of Justinian had depopulated vast areas of Europe and North Africa. Millions died in China. Mecca and Medina were among the few fortunate places in the world that were usually unaffected by plague. The carriers and their rats could not survive the trek across the desert before they died of their diseases.
By 600 AD people were only beginning to drag themselves out of the Dark Ages!
In fact, I'm not sure if Merlin had yet planted the vinyards in Beauge.
I do. The Dark Ages was a worldwide event as evident by the 'long ring' tree ring chronology. Some think the Dark Ages began after a cosmic encounter of some nature, more specifically, an impact in the Celtic Sea. The five major catastropies of the last 10k years are recorded in the tree rings and the ice core samples, acid layer=volcanic. The 538-540 event is not recorded in the ice core samples=cosmic.
It's starting to resemble the worst days of the USSR, where every work of scholarship had to "acknowledge" its inspiration from the works of the beloved Stalin...
Aided by evidence from mural inscriptions in temples, items in museums and most Importantly verses from the Holy Quran, the researcher Bassam Al Shama'...
Nothing about "pyramids" or "temples" there, but rather "treasure cities".
Hey Bassam Al Shama', you ignorant twit, maybe you should read the Holy Bible too, just so you can get your "facts" straight.
Yes, and the Egyptian pilot of flight 800 didn't intentionally fly/crash his plane into the ocean killing everyone on board to the "glory of allah" either. Believe me, would I lie to you?
What a maroon..............
The eruption of Thera/Santorina/Akitora in 1628BC caused the plagues of Egypt and the result was the Jewish Exodus. The 'staff by day and torch by night' was likely the volcano plume from this eruption and also the associated quakes and etc. probably caused the tidal wave of the 'reed sea.' Look at this map of the Red Sea during the Ice Age and see that the Red Sea was landlocked, ...and I'm beginning to wonder when the Red Sea was re-connected to the worlds oceans? Click here
This is definitely a minority opinion. Most scholars place the exodus in the 13th or 14th century, no later that 1280BC to be sure because of the textual evidence of the Merneptah Stela (c.1220 BC) which mentions Israel as a nation. There are those that contend for a 15th century exodus, but not so many. It is a more common opinion among fundamentalist and evangelical Christians who do work in the field because it is in accordance with a single verse of Scripture found in the first book of Kings. Good scholars disagree on the matter.
Due to pressure from President Bush, Sharon and Arafat are brought to the negotiation table in an attempt at defusing the volatile situation there and finally creating the sought after Palestinian homeland.
PM Sharon and his aides enter the room and take their seats, a few minutes later so does Arafat and his delegation.
Arafat smirks, and looks a Sharon.
"Shall we begin then?"
Sharon speaks first.
"We have an ancient custom that we need to observe before entering into this sort of negotiation. We must tell a tale from our History as a people, to remind ourselves of who we are."
Arafat, looking slightly annoyed gestures their way.
"Ach! Go ahead!
Sharon thanks him and begins his narration.
"After forty years of wandering in the desert, Moses finally leads the nation of Israel to the promised land. The people set up their tents by a river, and begin making plans to build the settlement and all the other details which need to be attended to."
"Moses, knowing that his job his done, finally decides it's time to chill out a bit, so he decides to take a long, relaxing bath in the cool river waters."
"He finds a quiet spot by some trees, disrobes, and enters the water to begin bathing. As he relaxes in the water, some kids come by and steal all his clothes."
"Moses gets out of the water, and naturally becomes quite alarmed at finding his belongings gone. He looks around and sees a few Hebrew children nearby tending to some sheep, so he calls out to them."
"Children! Did you see what happened to my clothes?"
The children quickly reply.
"Yes Moses, we saw...some Palestinian kids took them and ran off across that bank over there."
At this point in the story, Arafat jumps up, clearly outraged, and slams his fist on the negotiating table.
"That's why you can't negotiate with Jews! You are all liars! Even your "history" is built on lies!"
"How so?"--asks Sharon.
Arafat thunders back.
"There were no Palestinians back then!"
Sharon smiles and says:
"Now we can begin the negotiations."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
