Skip to comments.
Netanyahu: Obama Will Try to Internationalize Jerusalem Sites
Arutz Sheva ^
| 1-28-09
| Hana Levi Julian
Posted on 01/28/2009 8:39:17 AM PST by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
There is something very “biblical” about this. Somewhere in a prophecy—either a Joel Rosenberg book, or something like it.
Not a good message either. As we used to say, “bad bongos.”
41
posted on
01/28/2009 9:24:51 AM PST
by
Vermont Lt
(Ein Volk, Ein Riech, Ein Ein.)
To: Filo
First off. I make no bones about it. All of Jerusalem belongs to to Jewish people and must not be divided up like a pie. End of story.
And anytime you have radical jihadists that want to run a people into the sea, there has to be a babysitter. Opening the door to an “international zone” will not give the radical Muslims what they want and their goal>> All of Israel. Some type of a green zone imaginary boundary line will not stop them from attempting to get what they want.
42
posted on
01/28/2009 9:28:50 AM PST
by
444Flyer
(Don't beLIEve Obama...........................................................Repent Herod!)
To: SJackson
Holy Basin? This is pure politically correct leftist garbage!!!!!!!!!!!!
43
posted on
01/28/2009 9:30:17 AM PST
by
RetiredArmy
(Oscuma is a Chicago gangland punk, street thug. Simple as that.)
To: Vermont Lt
44
posted on
01/28/2009 9:32:16 AM PST
by
444Flyer
(Don't beLIEve Obama...........................................................Repent Herod!)
To: SJackson
“Netanyahu: Obama Will Try to Internationalize Jerusalem Sites”
—
Ummm..., the U.N. has been saying Jerusalem is an “International City” forever... And what on earth is an International City anyway? I don’t know of one that exists anywhere...
To: OB1kNOb
“Would it be Washington, D.C. instead of Jerusalem, I dare say you wouldn’t embrace this idea so easily.”
Yes ! DC belongs to Maryland only ! Let’s kick the virginians out of our capital. :-)
46
posted on
01/28/2009 9:37:08 AM PST
by
buzzer
To: Filo
Jerusalem is the City of David. It belongs to the Jews who are wonderful stewards and caretakers of their guests’ religious shrines unlike the palestinian muslims who defiled and desecrated The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, the oldest Church in the Holy Land. Bibi, drive the muslim terrorists from all of the Holy Land given Abram by God for as far as the eye could see. God’s plan was through Abraham’s seed Isaac, not Ishmael. Zero, stay out of this.
47
posted on
01/28/2009 9:37:23 AM PST
by
yorkie01
To: jonrick46
“We wouldn’t want something like New York City to be internationalized?”
At leas the few acres the UN building resides are “international”. Did we ever since heard of turmoil between the people from “Roosevelt Island” and “Murray Hill” ?
48
posted on
01/28/2009 9:43:25 AM PST
by
buzzer
To: RetiredArmy
Translation: collectivise as a baby step to UN global governance.
49
posted on
01/28/2009 9:46:05 AM PST
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: yorkie01
“Gods plan was through Abrahams seed Isaac, not Ishmael.”
Did god tell you this today ? Maybe he meanwhile decided to go with plan b. But only god knows.
50
posted on
01/28/2009 9:46:25 AM PST
by
buzzer
To: skeeter
Hillary Clinton is pushing this.
It is little wonder this is doomed to failure.
Bill Clinton is right to have moved on to date others.
51
posted on
01/28/2009 9:47:44 AM PST
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: Integrityrocks; Filo
The temple was originally built by and a sacred site of the Jews; not Muslims. They took it over and claimed Mohammad ascended into the heavens there. Just be cause they say so, doesn't mean it trumps the original sacredness established by the Jews. Oh, and btw, the Moslem claim about Mohammed ascending to Heaven from the "Westernmost Mosque" cannot refer to anything in Jerusalem: the Moslems didn't reach Jerusalem until 20 years after the death of that murderous child molester.
This is nothing more than yet another attempt by the Moslems to grab something that isn't theirs.
Filo, as a US citizen familiar with its history, I'd suggest that the US has absolutely no right to ask Israel to give territory to others in the interest of satisfying the demands of those others until such time as we give most of the Southwest back to Mexico. Until then, we should probably STFU.
52
posted on
01/28/2009 9:50:52 AM PST
by
Ancesthntr
(Dedicated to stopping the Obamination and his minions from destroying the USA)
To: Ancesthntr
Filo, as a US citizen familiar with its history, I'd suggest that the US has absolutely no right to ask Israel to give territory to others in the interest of satisfying the demands of those others until such time as we give most of the Southwest back to Mexico. Until then, we should probably STFU.
No argument there. I agree that the US should butt out.
Of course I also realize that the US has basically been buying restraint from Israel for decades so we do sort-of have a pony in the show.
But I'm not advocating this to weaken Israel and I do recognize the duplicity and untrustworthiness of Islam that others have pointed out.
I just think that the Vatican might provide a good model for the administration of the Holy Land and that by removing that burr we might be able to finally shut the Muslims up.
Yeah, I know, it's a pipe dream. . .
/sigh
53
posted on
01/28/2009 9:56:45 AM PST
by
Filo
(Darwin was right!)
To: Filo
What exactly are the Muslim roots there?
To: Filo
The reality is that the UK position is really our position and most of the world's. Congress has passed various laws and resolutions on the status of Jerusalem essentially alligning our position with that of Israel. However, Clinton and Bush 43 have either received waviers or ignored the requirement for the US Embassy to move to Jerusalem. The reality is that Congress makes these laws and resolutions for domestic consumption but give a wink and a nod when it comes to taking any concrete action.
If the US were to unilaterally move our Embassy to Jerusalem and recoginze Israeli sovereignity over an undivided city, it would essentially end our role in any future peace negotiations and inflame the Arab world even further against us. Currently, virtually every country with diplomatic relations with Israel has its Embassy in Tel Aviv or its environs. I predict that Obama will delay any move to Jerusalem of the US Embassy just like Clinton and Bush did.
55
posted on
01/28/2009 9:57:10 AM PST
by
kabar
To: yorkie01
56
posted on
01/28/2009 9:58:28 AM PST
by
444Flyer
(Don't beLIEve Obama...........................................................Repent Herod!)
To: dennisw
See my post #55. The UK position is relevant because it is our de facto position despite Congressional laws and resolutions. And most of the world subscribes to the UK position. That is reality. Sorry about that.
57
posted on
01/28/2009 9:59:34 AM PST
by
kabar
To: Filo; SJackson
The biggest obstacle to Mid East peace (beyond psychotic Muslims) is the issue of Jerusalem. The best solution, if anyone would consider it, would be to make the whole of the old city an international zone governed equally by the three religions who have claims there. Kind-of like a Troika Vatican.
Jerusalem was bought and paid for by King David 3000 years ago. It was purchased for and is dedicated to YHvH.
Islam following their god "Allah" is Satan
and there will always be conflict over Jerusalem.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
58
posted on
01/28/2009 10:00:21 AM PST
by
Uri’el-2012
(Psalm 78:35 And they remembered that God was their ROCK, And the Most High God their Redeemer.)
To: AmericanVictory
What exactly are the Muslim roots there?
Islam has several holy sites there, most importantly the aforementioned Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque.
And yes, Islam's claim is far inferior to Judaism's and Christianity's
59
posted on
01/28/2009 10:00:36 AM PST
by
Filo
(Darwin was right!)
To: kabar
If the US were to unilaterally move our Embassy to Jerusalem and recoginze Israeli sovereignity over an undivided city, it would essentially end our role in any future peace negotiations and inflame the Arab world even further against us.
Oooh. Maybe that's a better idea after all! I like it! :-D
60
posted on
01/28/2009 10:02:12 AM PST
by
Filo
(Darwin was right!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 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