Skip to comments.
Israel's Right to the Land
Arutz Sheva ^
| 1-4-04
| Lee Underwood
Posted on 01/04/2004 10:40:03 AM PST by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
1
posted on
01/04/2004 10:40:03 AM PST
by
SJackson
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
2
posted on
01/04/2004 10:40:18 AM PST
by
SJackson
To: All
 |
| If you can make a donation to Free Republic, then don't make others carry your water! |
3
posted on
01/04/2004 10:43:11 AM PST
by
Support Free Republic
(I'd rather be sleeping. Let's get this over with so I can go back to sleep!)
To: SJackson
You are very busy today.
Happy New Year.
5.56mm
4
posted on
01/04/2004 10:44:03 AM PST
by
M Kehoe
To: SJackson
BINGO! . . . I read the title of this thread, pondered briefly the source and then settled on "Arutz Sheva" as the most likely propigator of the notion that GOD bestowed OWNERSHIP . . . BINGO . . . Arutz Sheva.
It is a battle, for the most part, between those of faith who believe the promises G-d made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and those who, for whatever reasons, would prefer that Israel (i.e., the Jews) did not live on the land bordered by the Nile and Euphrates Rivers and the Mediterranean Sea and the wilderness of Jordan.
Religions are fine things to practice but bloody things to implement.
There is little separation between the blasphemy of Mohammed Atta and the blasphemy of Arutz Sheva.
5
posted on
01/04/2004 11:13:24 AM PST
by
Phil V.
To: Phil V.
There is little separation between the blasphemy of Mohammed Atta and the blasphemy of Arutz Sheva. Please tell me you didn't just say that.
6
posted on
01/04/2004 11:15:09 AM PST
by
Mr. Mojo
To: SJackson
Bump for later read..
7
posted on
01/04/2004 11:16:36 AM PST
by
The Mayor
(Those who love and serve God on earth will feel at home in heaven.)
To: Mr. Mojo
I didn't say that.
I posted that.
8
posted on
01/04/2004 11:25:27 AM PST
by
Phil V.
To: Phil V.
You're insane.
9
posted on
01/04/2004 11:27:11 AM PST
by
Mr. Mojo
To: Mr. Mojo
No.
I'm looking at the end product of implementing and securing the lands defined as Israel within this article.
To be a proponent of of securing the boundaries defined in this article as Israeli boundaries IS insane.
10
posted on
01/04/2004 11:36:01 AM PST
by
Phil V.
To: Mr. Mojo
My particular favorite, at this time, is Ezekial 36. Which is a prophecy addressed to the mountains of Israel. Read it, then take a look at a topo map. Then compare it to a map that shows the west bank.
...Can you say fireworks?
11
posted on
01/04/2004 11:44:51 AM PST
by
D Rider
To: Phil V.
You know perfectly well no political party in Israel with enough support (actually none) proposes annexation of everything from
Nile and Euphrates Rivers and the Mediterranean Sea and the wilderness of Jordan. No party party with meaningful support supports annexation to the Jordan river and expulsion of the arab population, as you frequently imply.
Your comment is pure propaganda.
12
posted on
01/04/2004 11:48:03 AM PST
by
SJackson
To: Phil V.
The boundary's in this post have never been under any sort of control by Israel, with the exception of possibly Solomon.
One common belief is that it will take the establishent of the messianic kingdom for Israel to achieve those boundarys. At which point, who will argue with G_d?
13
posted on
01/04/2004 11:52:12 AM PST
by
D Rider
To: SJackson
You know perfectly well no political party in Israel with enough support (actually none) proposes annexation . . .Correct.
I have in no way suggested or implied that Arutz Shiva speaks for the government of Israel. But I have, in short, characterized Arutz Shiva's article as blasphemous.
14
posted on
01/04/2004 12:01:13 PM PST
by
Phil V.
To: Phil V.
15
posted on
01/04/2004 12:03:04 PM PST
by
Phil V.
To: Phil V.
I have, in short, characterized Arutz Shiva's article as blasphemous. You characterize a great many things as "blasphemous" even then they in fact are not so.
Disagreeing with Phil Almighty's leftist ideology is not blasphemy, but Phil setting himself higher than G-D is.
16
posted on
01/04/2004 12:13:34 PM PST
by
Alouette
(Proud parent of an IDF recruit!)
To: D Rider
"At which point, who will argue with G_d?"
That's an easy one - ACLU will be in court against Him in a New Yawk moment.
If spectators are allowed, I'd like to be there when the Defendant opens.
17
posted on
01/04/2004 12:29:39 PM PST
by
GladesGuru
(In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles - -)
To: SJackson
BTTT
18
posted on
01/04/2004 3:11:38 PM PST
by
thatdewd
To: SJackson
Hmmm - let me see if I have understood this correctly: G-d has given half of Egypt and Iraq, all of Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, and presumably a third of Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and all of Kuwait, to the Jewish people, and all of the current inhabitants of these places as well as all members of non-Jewish religions, atheists, and agnostics of the world are supposed accede to this divine land grant?
To: SF South Park Republican; Phil V.
Ain't ya never seen a map of original Israel, before civil war? Nope. Didn't think so. But Philly swears he has the answer, the one and only answer, to something about which he remains, (since I've known him,)utterly ignorant and unabashedly clueless. But he never lets that stop him....
Phil---5
Real knowledge---0
20
posted on
01/04/2004 10:52:15 PM PST
by
Nix 2
(http://www.warroom.com QUINN AND ROSE from 6-10 AM-104.7 FM in da Burgh-as of Jan. 5)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson