Did Anything in The Old Testament Exist

[Cyclone Ranger]

I'll go out on a limb and guess it symbolizes the Red Sea.

[Šñøü†ê®]

^Obviously you have never taken a class in literature or human biology! No doubt you Googled it and failed. But generally speaking the mythical Ancient Israelite were symbolically "sperm" and made their to safety to potential fertilization only after the flow of the Red Sea.*

*That time of the month.

[Cyclone Ranger]

*checks watch*

[Šñøü†ê®]

WHY DIDN'T YAHWEH HAVE THE ANCIENT ISRAELITES WALK ON WATER! Kamandi, did you know the ARK OF THE COVENANT was based on ANCIENT EGYPTIAN stuff and the 10 Commandments came from the Egyptian Book of the Dead? Why do you guys always plagiarize folks and not give them royalties!

[Cyclone Ranger]

I'm not Kamandi.

Also, you're a real zero.

[Šñøü†ê®]

Kamandi, when did FaDeThEBuTcHeR give you access to The Phora? And then what happened?

[Šñøü†ê®]

Yahweh's finger which allegedly created the universe in 6 days was apparently small enough to inscribe some Egyptian Book of the Dead rules onto pieces of granite that Moses the Murderer could carry down from the mountain. But what happened? Kamandi? TAlk to us punk!

[hadit]

I'll go out on a limb and guess it symbolizes the Red Sea.

Or, as it is sometimes translated and thus destroying the Snout's little fantasy, Reed Sea.

[Archaix]

Sorry, Ganja -you're just repeating the points you always make, and answering that is stale to me. Which is a shame, because on most other topics we'd probably agree (even on music).

The fact is this is 2012,Israel isn't going away,if the Palestinians really wanted their own state ,they could have it today,all they have to do to is agree to let Israel exist as a Jewish state ,and then agree to safegaurds that will insure that,and then it's all over,case closed.

The Palestinians refuse to do that.

Polls show that while Palestinians want peace, they're undecided about what form it should take. I don't think they should have to accept two states, and I also think two states would exacerbate tensions. There's a great deal of historical evidence, like I mentioned before, that heavily suggests it wouldn't work. Hell, they're more or less two states now, and it keeps getting worse. That's why Farfour happened, IMO.

I'm also discouraged that your only response to my evidence was that it's all in the past now. Don't you think all that has relevance -that it's a historical truth, in fact, that states are contradistinctive and complex rather static and self-evident?

Such as?

That's not relevant (see below).

You suppose incorrectly. The point is that as per Karsh, Morris has a demonstrable lack of credibility as a documentarian … Morris' credibility in citing and interpreting documentary sources is pivotal to the discussion, since he's the only one who's seen them.

They were declassified, which means everyone who can physically access it can access it. It was interpreted by Morris, in a paper you've yet to directly challenge, and the veracity of it is not contested to my knowledge. Stop fucking around.

As of 2012, there is no internationally accepted definition of terrorism, or in international law … Some sources would consider the Irgun's assault on the British mandatory authority to be legitimate national struggle for self-determination because civilians were not targeted, regardless of whether there was collateral civilian loss of life, while some would not.

So because there's no accepted definition of terrorism, you're allowed to strictly define 'terrorism' in ways that strengthen your argument, but dismiss all other actions as 'not terrorism'? Well, I'm going to define 'terrorism' as how it is commonly understood, which is the use of terror to achieve an end, especially a political one. Which is exactly what Israelis did: and it caused civilian, diplomatic and military loss of life, and should be unacceptable to you even if it was not terrorism. Which, I should point out, it blatently is.

The Ottomans invited the Jews into Palestine to settle before the First Aliyah, where they irrigated the land and drained off malarial swamps, and generally built themselves the second Jewish homeland, the Yishuv. The British overseers recognized that in the Balfour Declaration, and the UNGA with 181

All of that constitutes claims to the territory.

Even if the rule of law was just -which I contend- that would then only realistically apply to the Jews who had settled and all those born from them in that land, not all Jews around the world, and certainly not all Jews around the world in perpetuity.

One, most chose to flee. Only a few were forced. The Haganah hardly had the manpower to drive out 500,000 people in a few weeks.

Of course they did, although I believe it happened over more than a few wees. Zionists had already committed terrorist activity, and as a determined and organised group targeted civilians for physical and psychological attack. And, furthermore, Israeli Intelligence owned up to their actions, which as been documented.

Two, it doesn't matter what they want. Their desires don't outweigh Israeli sovereignty, or justify their terroristic means.

You think that their desires don't matter? Wait, of course you do -because you're a Zionist. And where did I say it justifies their use of terrorism?

Nope, international law says Israel is the Jewish homeland, so that's what it is.

Then that's a bad law that has no basis in common morality, rationality or property rights, and should be revoked.

That is an idiotic argument, based on a ridiculous definition of the concept of a homeland. All Egyptians do not need to live in Egypt for Egypt to be considered the Egyptian homeland, nor do all Jews need to reside in Israel for it to be considered the Jewish homeland.

Nor do the majority of Jews live in Israel, or have ever done so for over a millenium. Jews do not share a common culture or a common homeland, even if they do share an origin-point.

There is no compelling reason nations should not make any law regarding religion. All nations do not have to be the United States.

No, they do not. But that's one of the best laws the United States, and makes the most sense because it enshrines the freedom of religion and prevents the state from become a tool of it. Are you seriously contending the sense behind that, or fooling around again?

Evidence?

I've just given you evidence. The fact you don't like it is neither here nor there, because you would call into question whatever I cited if it went against your argument -as you've done consistently throughout this thread. That is, when you're not lying again about me not citing evidence.

Sorry, but not everyone - or even every expert on sociology or anthropology - accepts post-structuralist ideas about culture and ethnicity. They are certainly not binding on the international community as policy guidance.

I never claimed they were binding, and I'm not sure why you think that matters.

Contradistinction and cultural dynamism have nothing to do with post-structuralism being as they are consistent with structuralism. However, they are almost universally accepted as accurate models by established academia (at least in the Anglophone world) by all the professions I cited. This is because social stasis makes no sense in describing society.

For instance, you claim that there has been a high degree of cultural similarity between all Jews throughout history. Who are the Jews? In centuries BC it would have distinguished a tribe, up to and during the Roman occupation had a religious aspect, and after the diaspora 'Jewishness' probably had a marginal existence, even in their origin-point where they quickly became a minority. Of course, it works both ways: innumerable 'Jews' are lost to history through assimilation into other cultures. The archaeological evidence of Middle Eastern towns during the Arabic conquests in the 7th century suggests that it was less to do with sudden racial imposition and more to do with a centuries-long drawn out process of acculturation (as opposed the actually sudden and tumultuous Arabic imposition in Spain, which resulted in immediate revolt after the Battle of Tours). The Elizabethans were probably not alone in thinking that Jews could be 'saved' by converting to Christianity (as Shylock does in the 'happy ending' of The Merchant of Venice), and apparently did not give Jews a racial distinction in the modern sense. Since Jews were except from usury laws it's likely that in some cases being Jewish was less a stigma but a benefit; Jews could charge interest on loans and be successful, unlike Christians. Conversion to Judaism in this period is not unthinkable. Finally, up to and during the 20th century Darwinian concepts of biology and sociology influenced the modern concept of race, which was loosely pinned to Jews -who'd already been distinguished as a marginal, successful community in Western countries. I don't need to tell you what happened because of this in the 20th century.
All the while these 'Jews' have not been the same people. Non-practising Jews assimilated into different cultures, all have been effected by social change, all have been affected by technology. Only the most Orthodox of Jews live according to OT rules and outlook, and even if they have successfully recreated a specific period in Jewish history for themselves, that has to happen in isolation to the rest of the world (which has since moved on).

Jews, like everyone else, change.

It's his bullshit opinion as an anti-Zionist pro-Palestine. All Israeli citizens have equal rights regardless of ethnicity, no matter how he wishes to slice it. Nor, for that matter, does his rhetoric of race have any relevance, given the fact that the Israelis and Palestinians have no immutable differences.

If they have no immutable differences, then the supposed genetic exclusivity of Jews should have little relevance to you. Religious bigotry, which you apparently support, is no way to define a country, and so all that is left is culture -and who has the right to decide what 'Jewish culture' is, and why should that be necessarily superior to 'Palestinian culture'?

The Palestinians have no right to return to Israel. They have a right to a separate national state in the West Bank and Gaza, but no right to live in Israel.

I know they do, but it being so doesn't mean it should be so. You seem to have difficulty with that simple distinction.

Only if Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Dubai, Iran, are all "racist" states because they exclude non-Arabs based on their status as Arab and Muslim homelands, as they are explicitly defined in their charters.

Then they are. Explain how copying that makes Israel superior.

Israel, however, excludes none of its citizens. All have equal rights, unlike any other nation in the region.

Falk begs to differ, and you have yet to challenge him with anything other than simple schoolground taunts of 'bullshit'.

No one is throttling the Palestinians to death, except the Palestinians. If they give up their terrorist onslaught against the Israelis, they will get a sovereign nation in the West Bank and Gaza, and become a viable political and economic entity. If they don't, they will spend all eternity under Israel's thumb. It's up to them.

That's a situation that Israel caused, that Israel has maintained, and which Israel benefits from; as PA lands and Palestinian people suffer more and more from economic deprivation and injustice they turn to Islamic radicalism (broadly illustrated by the move away from Fatah to Hamas). Since that has no chance of winning, militarily or on the diplomatic stage, the conflict goes on in a vicious cycle.

Nor does it matter what the population picture was in 1900. What matters is what exists on the ground now.

It apparently matters to Ganja, and I explained how it matters in any case to Teller. It also matters in that it undermines your property-rights argument.

Palestinian leaders like the Grand Mufti refused to even guarantee the physical safety of Jews after Palestinian, and Arab leaders like Azzam Pasha said things like:

That quote doesn't prove anything. I'm not even that implies intent to commit genocide, since he isn't stating in that comment whether he believes Palestinians will kill Jews of whether he fears Jews will kill Palestinians. He doesn't even sound as though he approves of mass-slaughter, as though it's something he fears might happen in war that he cannot necessarily prevent. That, incidentally, was also the view of Gad Machnes (according even to your anti-Morris historians' version of his statements): “If we operate against, say, a specific family in a known place, a known village [i.e., identified perpetrators of violence], then there should be no mercy! But only a direct blow and no touching of innocent people! We have already reached a position that necessitates a strong response. Today one should not even avoid hitting women and children. For otherwise, the response cannot be effective.” Civilian causalities are a price worth paying, apparently.

You didn't show either. You just opened your mouth and said it, utterly falsely.

I cited a historical account of what happened, and I stand by it.

Again, Britain's promise to create an Arab state was made to the Hashemites, not the Palestinians, and did not include an independent Palestine … Next, that the Palestinians did not believe they were an independent national group is evident from the statements made by Palestinian leaders in Jerusalem in 1919 … Similar remarks were made by Arab leaders to the Crane King Commission, such as future PLO chairman Ahmed Shuqeiri: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."

You're still thinking in legal terms. Palestinians, that is, those living in Palestine whether it was a formal country or not, lived there. That land belonged to communities of Palestinians, who had a better sense of who they were throughout the 19th century and 20th century through nationalism. I've seen no evidence from you that they wanted to exit that land, or were happy being elsewhere -in fact, the conflict reinforces the idea they they did not want to leave. If I was ousted from one part of the European Union, I would not want to settle in another part of the European Union -I'd want my house back.

Evidence? Exactly the opposite happened in Sudan and Lebanon. There is no evidence national identities and associated conflicts dissolve with industrialization, otherwise the Basque would have assimilated into France.

I've already explained, with evidence, to Teller. As for Spanish identities, Spain was never the industrial power that France was, and struggled enormously even as a national power, let alone an imperial one. There was never a successful, centralised cultural programme as there was in Britain and France, either, because the tools of modernisation were never strong enough. Nor in Sudan and Lebanon.

And you gave no evidence to support your claims in many instances.

I've backed up pretty much everything I've had to say, and complied every single time I was asked to produce evidence. So, not so much, liar.

All of which remains completely unrefuted by you.

You're the one refusing to challenge Jewish exceptionalism, have cited genetic continuity as evidence of right, and have used ethnocentric models as an analytical tool. What, specifically, have I said that's racist, and how is it racist?

It was summarily rejected by Heydrich. Moreover, Madagascar could hardly have absorbed four million Jews, so it would have constituted annihilation of them.

Archaix 2268763: They considered it as a viable option, as Bauman has shown. How seriously considered it was is therefore not relevant.

[Cyclone Ranger]

Polls show that while Palestinians want peace, they're undecided about what form it should take.

Debatable. Here's the most recent credible poll, from the PSR:

While demand for holding local elections increases, and while pessimism regarding the chances for reconciliation increases, and while criticism of the PA for suppression of freedoms increases, credibility of the authorities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip diminishes, support for a permanent settlement along the lines of the Clinton Parameters and the Geneva Initiative decreases, and two thirds oppose return to negotiations with Israel before it freezes settlement construction despite the fact that a majority believes Israel would be the first to benefit from no negotiations

http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2010/p38e.html

I don't think they should have to accept two states, and I also think two states would exacerbate tensions.

International laws says they do have to accept two states, as per UNSC 242, and that's the way it will be.

There's a great deal of historical evidence, like I mentioned before, that heavily suggests it wouldn't work. Hell, they're more or less two states now, and it keeps getting worse. That's why Farfour happened, IMO.

No, what happened with Lebanon and Sudan would occur: fratricidal civil war.

[Cyclone Ranger]

You're a liar. You cited no historical account of MacMahon's promise to the Arabs, and you were refuted with a citation.

[GanjaFreebird]

MEH NEEGAH, EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT UNLESS YOU ARE A TOURING MUSICIAN OR IN A WEDDING BAND

I'm a touring musician who plays with wedding bands too.

YOU ARE NOT EVEN MAKING WHAT A MANAGER AT A MC'DONALD'S MAKES SO STOP KIDDING YOURSELF THAT ANYONE BELIEVES YOUR BULLSHIT!

I have no idea how much a manager at McDonald's makes, but I make enough to pay my bills, as do many good musicians around here.

! FEEL FREE TO POST ANY EVIDENCE OTHERWISE YOU LYING, UKRANIAN CHUMP!

I'm telling the truth, as always, and no, my ethnicity is the same as yours.

Now before we discuss Ancient Israel's wars against their neighbors, lets review stuff like the "parting of the Red Sea" and determine if that really happened.

Why are you so obsessed about trying to convince White people that you're really one of them? They don't GIVE A SHIT, at least not in NY. Even if you proved that Judaism is false (which you can't, of course), that still doesn't change ANYTHING about your Jewish ethnicity.

[GanjaFreebird]

This is the 21st century -- nutjob.

Humanity is doomed. Primitive thinking of the sort on display above will soon make the earth uninhabitable. Luckily, I won't be around to see it.

Why, are you dying from a terminal disease?

[GanjaFreebird]

WHY DIDN'T YAHWEH HAVE THE ANCIENT ISRAELITES WALK ON WATER!

Why would he do that for?

Kamandi, did you know the ARK OF THE COVENANT was based on ANCIENT EGYPTIAN stuff and the 10 Commandments came from the Egyptian Book of the Dead? Why do you guys always plagiarize folks and not give them royalties!

Where do you think the barbarians in Egypt got those ideas to begin with? Maybe it's because the Jewish people lived there since Yaakov moved there with his sons, until Moshe saved them from slavery.

[Šñøü†ê®]

I'm a touring musician who plays with wedding bands too.

Stop the madness! Touring means being on the road with Rodney Atkins doing several gigs a week and getting a paycheck. Not bumming a flight to do a charity once a year! And no, doing 2 birthday parties and a bar-mitzfah each year does not make you part of a wedding band! You crazy!


Again, see if you can get state resident tuition for the local community college and get a fluckin' degree and start making some. Again, unless the zionist regime has a deal where they give you US taxpayer money! It is the hub of corruption after all.

[GanjaFreebird]

Polls show that while Palestinians want peace, they're undecided about what form it should take. I don't think they should have to accept two states, and I also think two states would exacerbate tensions. There's a great deal of historical evidence, like I mentioned before, that heavily suggests it wouldn't work. Hell, they're more or less two states now, and it keeps getting worse. That's why Farfour happened, IMO.

Most Israelis will NEVER agree to a one-state solution, you will have to murder most of us to make this happen.

Jews do not share a common culture

Yes they do.

Jews, like everyone else, change.

So?

, and so all that is left is culture -and who has the right to decide what 'Jewish culture' is, and why should that be necessarily superior to 'Palestinian culture'?

Most Israelis do, and that's how they feel, obviously. And considering the "Palestinian culture" of treating women like dog shit, killing gays and discriminating against non-Muslims, you can't blame them either.

Then they are.

So why are you so hypocritical about Israel then?

You're still thinking in legal terms.

What OTHER terms there are anyways?

've seen no evidence from you that they wanted to exit that land, or were happy being elsewhere -in fact, the conflict reinforces the idea they they did not want to leave.

Who are "they"? The 300,000 Arabs who did live there before the Zionists came? Please, we have almost 2 million Israeli Arabs today in the Jewish state who have full equal rights and live better than in any Arab countries, so if that's not good enough, then I don't know what is.

I've backed up pretty much everything I've had to say, and complied every single time I was asked to produce evidence.

Wrong.

You're the one refusing to challenge Jewish exceptionalism, have cited genetic continuity as evidence of right, and have used ethnocentric models as an analytical tool. What, specifically, have I said that's racist, and how is it racist?

You can't stand the truth, so you call it "racist"?

[GanjaFreebird]

Yahweh's finger which allegedly created the universe in 6 days was apparently small enough to inscribe some Egyptian Book of the Dead rules onto pieces of granite that Moses the Murderer could carry down from the mountain. But what happened? Kamandi? TAlk to us punk!

Happy Hag Pesach to you, Snouter!!

[GanjaFreebird]

Stop the madness! Touring means being on the road with Rodney Atkins doing several gigs a week and getting a paycheck.

I play several times a week and have studio sessions and paid rehersals too.

And no, doing 2 birthday parties and a bar-mitzfah each year does not make you part of a wedding band! You crazy!

True, but playing at a few weddings a year does. Besides, wedding gigs aren't the best ones anyways, I much prefer to play festivals, fairs, colleges and casinos.

Again, see if you can get state resident tuition for the local community college and get a fluckin' degree and start making some.

I don't need to because I already do.

Again, unless the zionist regime has a deal where they give you US taxpayer money! It is the hub of corruption after all.

No, I'm talented enough to make my own money. Israel helps enough people as it is.

[Cyclone Ranger]

Most Israelis will NEVER agree to a one-state solution, you will have to murder most of us to make this happen.

It would be national suicide, a precursor to the new Palestinian majority setting up yet another Islamic fundamentalist state.

Yes they do.

Specifically, they share Jewish culture.

What OTHER terms there are anyways?

There is isn't one law for Palestinians and one law for everyone else.

It's ridiculously hypocritical for the pro-Palestinians to cite international law chapter and verse when it suits their purposes, then try to claim it has no jurisdiction when it doesn't.

[Šñøü†ê®]

Kamandi, yes we know the zionist regime is racist insanity. But lets get back to discussing the mythology of the Old Testament. That way we can uncover what they base their madness on.