It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sharon admits blowing up synagoges and to creating terrorism!!

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Anyone Who actually believes that Sharon is a terrorist must be hopped up on some kind of reallity altering drugs.




posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Anyone Who actually believes that Sharon is a terrorist must be hopped up on some kind of reallity altering drugs.

Sharon is a

CONVICTED WAR CRIMINAL



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 09:59 AM
link   
The largest myths are spread by the smallest minds.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Anyone Who actually believes that Sharon is a terrorist must be hopped up on some kind of reallity altering drugs.

Sharon is a

CONVICTED WAR CRIMINAL


Convicted by Whom???



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 10:06 AM
link   
"Sharon is a CONVICTED WAR CRIMINAL"
Your point and purpose with this outburst Arch?
Does this continue to "justify" the endless cycle of killing?

I have pointed out to you, on numerous occasions, what Arafat and PLO/PLA and Hamas have said and writtten on what occupation and Israel means to them.....to you this is an endless cycle of Israel taking and invading and yet, despite your continued defense, and others, on thier behalf for giving back what is rightly theirs...you FAIL to realize that even giving back what is "rightly" theirs will eventually not fulfill what the overall goal and agenda(s) are....why is that?
Are you still blinded by that fact that the ONLY TRUE SOLUTION is the eradication and destruction of Israel and Jews? Seems so....so be it.


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 17-1-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
"Sharon is a CONVICTED WAR CRIMINAL"
Your point and purpose with this outburst Arch?
Does this continue to "justify" the endless cycle of killing?

I have pointed out to you, on numerous occasions, what Arafat and PLO/PLA and Hamas have said and writtten on what occupation and Israel means to them.....to you this is an endless cycle of Israel taking and invading and yet, despite your continued defense, and others, on thier behalf for giving back what is rightly theirs...you FAIL to realize that even giving back what is "rightly" theirs will eventually not fulfill what the overall goal and agenda(s) are....why is that?
Are you still blinded by that fact that the ONLY TRUE SOLUTION is the eradication and destruction of Israel and Jews? Seems so....so be it.


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 17-1-2004 by Seekerof]


of course, that's not it. religions are used against one another like puppet strings.
the real goal is the irradication of all religions.
it was decided when they added the book of revelation to the bible that is-ra-el would be the cornerstone of the final war which will put the capstone in place.
it's easier to see these things if you sit on the top of the py-ra-mid.
the last 100 years have been the fruition of the plan.

[Edited on 17-1-2004 by billybob]



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Are you still blinded by that fact that the ONLY TRUE SOLUTION is the eradication and destruction of Israel and Jews? Seems so....so be it.

I believe there is another solution. Simply withdraw, and build a wall. Israel has nukes so they can deter attacks from a nation(when was the last time an arab nation attacked Israel?).

If you would place ending the hate of israel are a prerequisite for ending the occupation then it will never end without war. The hate will not end until long AFTER the occupation ands, and not before.

Border control is what they need, but first they need a border. Israel will have a border with people that hate them for what they have done in the past. There is no other option with all the nations around them.

Better this happens under an agreement, and soon.

In the mean time more Israelies, and more Palestinians will die, and more hate will be created in the cycle.

Would you agree that a border is needed?



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Your point and purpose with this outburst Arch?

Balance.

From your persepctive it may seem that I am playing a sort of 'devils advocate', but from my persepctive I am providing a balance. For every action there are at least two perceptions created. If you understand everything from one perspective then you know less than half of the truth.

In order to see the full truth you must not choose a side. The moment you do you yourself have become trapped in a dialectic struggle.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Your point and purpose with this outburst Arch?

Balance.

From your persepctive it may seem that I am playing a sort of 'devils advocate', but from my persepctive I am providing a balance. For every action there are at least two perceptions created. If you understand everything from one perspective then you know less than half of the truth.

In order to see the full truth you must not choose a side. The moment you do you yourself have become trapped in a dialectic struggle.



Everything would be fine and dandy if you actually were trying to offer balance. Unfortunately, your viewpoint comes from an extremist position. It therefore takes another extremist to counter you. You won't find many who give an extreme Jewish argument on this forum. Most of the time it is the moderates who have to argue the Israeli corner against the people who uphold extremist views from the Palestinian viewpoint.

You seem to back your arguments up with views that aren't always based in fact or are pretty devious as in your statements elsewhere about the 1967 war. I would say that if you want to offer balance, you need to research your subject better and come at it from a different angle. So far you seem to have done nothing than offer very dubious arguments based on a very biased viewpoint.

If I were you, I would hit search and look for a few of ColdAnger's posts. Although viewed as an extremist he was able to offer his argument in a far more convincing manner.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Everything would be fine and dandy if you actually were trying to offer balance. Unfortunately, your viewpoint comes from an extremist position.

My viewpoint comes from many different positions. That I do not agree with yours makes it seem extremists to you. Have I not made it clear that my position is ending the conflict with as little suffering as possible where the results are that everyone is liberated? How is that extremist?

I would say that if you want to offer balance, you need to research your subject better and come at it from a different angle.

I spent the majority of my living by the laws of the Torah through Christ. I have read a bookcase worth of material on Israel, and the mideast. I do understand the history, but from many different viewpoints.


[Edited on 17-1-2004 by ArchAngel]



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel


Have I not made it clear that my position is ending the conflict with as little suffering as possible where the results are that everyone is liberated? How is that extremist?



There is no liberation in your theory that a wall would end the conflict.
Walls build prisons as well as houses.

There can be no peace until the religions of Judaism and Islam reach an accord. Walls can and will be breached.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
There is no liberation in your theory that a wall would end the conflict.
Walls build prisons as well as houses.


There would be liberation for the Palestinians, and security for Israel. With the wall around Israel it would not be a prison beacuse they can choose to open the gates. With sea, and air passage in the modern world everything is open to them where they are welcome.

It would be no more a prison than Israel is today.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 12:12 PM
link   
There can be no peace until the religions of Judaism and Islam reach an accord. Walls can and will be breached.

Israel is the one who is guilty of creating the division. Israel is NOT a democacy. The laws do not apply equally to Jews, and everyone else. Israel would be required to change their laws in order to achieve what you suggest.

The conflict over the temple Mount will not go away. The Muslims are not going to let anyone have it, and Israel wnats it more than anything else in the entire world.

That one square kilometer of land at the top of the little hill in Jerusalem is the most valuable piece of land in the world.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 07:52 PM
link   
If anyone has any contributions to make about the jewish religion that were not gathered from a "website" please do so. Otherwise please stop wasting my time. As discussed in another thread, i read the text in it's original language, you didn't. I will tell you one more time and drop the topic afterwards. It is expressly forbidden for anyone but the messiah to rebuild the temple in jerusalem. If you don't want to believe that because someone who never read a hebrew book in their life wrote a theory about it, that's your #ing problem.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 08:02 PM
link   
You have ZERO logic Arch. You quote a biblical commandment for us without knowing it's real meaning.

(Exodus 25:8), "And they shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I will dwell among them."

Maybe your websource didn't tell you that this commandment was given to the Jews to build the "Mishkan/Tabernacle" in the desert? I can only assume this lack of knowledge simply is not your fault. Are all jewish commandments able to be throw back at all times? By your logic maybe god wants all jews to sacrifice their firstborn not just Abraham? Maybe all the jews should put goat's blood on their doorposts? Give me a break please. Yes, there was a commandment to build a temple. No, that commandment doesn't mean that for the jews entire existence they have to "take back the dome of the rock" like you so brilliantly put it.

Next you go into the opinions of the esteemed scholar Rabbi Moses ben Maimon.


According to the Rambam, the Jewish people must build the Third Temple any way they can, at any time they can accomplish the task.


And you do it again. In the Laws of Kings, (chapter eleven, law number four), the Rambam states that the Messiah, an earthly, Jewish king, will build the Third Temple.

Pardon? Are the Jews supposed to or is there messiah supposed to? Are you saying the same Rabbi said both of these things? Did you read him saying them?

In a writing by the Rambam called the 13 Principles of Faith he ends with "I believe with a full belief in the coming of the messiah. And even though he tarries, after all this I wait his arrival, on every day that comes."

What the hell do you think they're waiting for? Him to come and take them to the mall? They wait for him to come and rebuild the temple. If you would like I can quote over 500 sources to you from Hebrew writings equating the coming of messiah with the building of the temple. Believe me, if the Jews thought that they could just do the # themselves they would have a long time ago. Keep in mind who really controls the area. They know it isn't up to them and so should you.

[Edited on 1-17-2004 by Djarums]



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 08:18 PM
link   
You have ZERO logic Arch. You quote a biblical commandment for us without knowing it's real meaning.

The quotes were from a jewish web site, not me.

You are arguing with them that what they believe is wrong.

Whether it is wrong, or right does not change the fact that they believe it.

There really are Jews who want to build the temple today.

If they are wrong, or not does not change the fact.

What do you say of the ones who were ready to set a cornerstone.

They exist, they are jews, and they want the Temple now.

Your interpretation of the Torah means nothing to them. They would believe you to be wrong.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 08:19 PM
link   
If anyone has any contributions to make about the jewish religion that were not gathered from a "website" please do so. Otherwise please stop wasting my time.

You did not start this thread, and the comments are for everyone, not just you.

You are wasting your time, not the other way around.



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 04:36 PM
link   
As is the case in all religions there are those who misinterpret things and live their lives by rules that are not real. You need to start understanding that just because one little group of jews says something doesn't mean that it's the jewish law. That's all there is to it. I could care less what that group says because it is not correct. You would be correct if you stated "there exists a small group of jews who in an incorrect interpretation of their law has decided it's up to them to rebuild the temple themselves."

That would be the right way of stating it. My purpose here is to make the general membership here understand something. I can probably count on one hand the members who can/have read hebrew. Therefore I have decided as one who can that it is my responsibility to clarify things like that. I did it in a horrible thread trying to misrepresent the Talmud a few months ago, and I'm doing it in this one. I think other people in my position would do the same thing.



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   
As is the case in all religions there are those who misinterpret things and live their lives by rules that are not real.

If it is real to them then it is their reality. You cannot be the judge of their theological beliefs, and neither can I, or anyone else.

You need to start understanding that just because one little group of jews says something doesn't mean that it's the jewish law.

I understand this, and Jewish law far more than you realize.

That's all there is to it. I could care less what that group says because it is not correct.

That would be your opinion. Their opinion is that they are correct. Just because you do not believe it does not mean that they belive it.

You would be correct if you stated "there exists a small group of jews who in an incorrect interpretation of their law has decided it's up to them to rebuild the temple themselves.

The group is not so small, and there is no correct, or incorrect in a persons theological beliefs. They are what they are. If anything would be incorrect it would be your position that they are incorrect.

That would be the right way of stating it.

That would be the ignorant way of saying it.

My purpose here is to make the general membership here understand something. I can probably count on one hand the members who can/have read hebrew. Therefore I have decided as one who can that it is my responsibility to clarify things like that.

This is a responsibilty you have placed on yourself, and not authority given. I think that it is more correct to say that you are promoting your agenda, and are imposing your views on others.

I did it in a horrible thread trying to misrepresent the Talmud a few months ago, and I'm doing it in this one. I think other people in my position would do the same thing. .

Actually anyone who reads the Talmud is not supposed to talk about it, so you are wrong to even bring it up.



[Edited on 18-1-2004 by ArchAngel]



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 05:48 PM
link   

If it is real to them then it is their reality. You cannot be the judge of their theological beliefs, and neither can I, or anyone else.


You said it yourself that it's not up to "us" to judge their theological beliefs yet you use online sources to represent the beliefs of all jews. You JUDGE the other millions of jews by the beliefs of a website you read and you tell me I'm judging? That's funny.


I understand this, and Jewish law far more than you realize.


As soon as you are brought up in it like i was then consider yourself on par with me. Otherwise spare me the speech, professor. I was brought up Jewish so I fail to see how you can attempt to make it seem like your "research" makes you more of an authority on what jews believe than a jew is.


That would be your opinion. Their opinion is that they are correct. Just because you do not believe it does not mean that they belive it.


Arch arch arch, you still miss my point. I am not arguing that your webfriends believe it. I am arguing that their opinions do not reflect the beliefs of jews following the laws properly. Some REAL research will tell you that. I see you had ZERO response to my rebuttal of your point on the Rambam? Why? Maybe because i have read his writings and you have only read articles about them?


The group is not so small, and there is no correct, or incorrect in a persons theological beliefs. They are what they are. If anything would be incorrect it would be your position that they are incorrect.


I'll hold back from comparing this to a rumsfeld briefing statement. My point is that the mainstream of judaism does not pay attention to these websites and the people who wrote them. They are deemed wrong. Other religions have their own authorities do they not? Only you have decided any single jew who blurts something out is an authority not the millions of others who think they're nuts?


This is a responsibilty you have placed on yourself, and not authority given. I think that it is more correct to say that you are promoting your agenda, and are imposing your views on others.


My agenda is to keep people like you from dragging my religion through the dirt. That's my right and if you don't like it, that's a damn pity.


Actually anyone who reads the Talmud is not supposed to talk about it, so you are wrong to even bring it up.


Whatever website you read that on is amusing. There are countless stories in the talmud itself which mention the elders like Hillel and Shamai debating those same writings with Roman noblemen. But your sources know better than mine right?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join