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.

 

Declaring A Second Jewish State?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   
www.algemeiner.com...

It is an idea that is gaining mometum. The settlers in the West Bank could declare the "State of Judah" and snatch statehood from the Palestinians. Don't think it can't happen as it is a real possibility. Historically at times there WAS a state called "Judah" next to a state called "Israel"




posted on May, 7 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Sounds like a great idea, just tell me where to send more of my American Tax dollars. Thanks.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by gem_man
www.algemeiner.com...

It is an idea that is gaining mometum. The settlers in the West Bank could declare the "State of Judah" and snatch statehood from the Palestinians. Don't think it can't happen as it is a real possibility. Historically at times there WAS a state called "Judah" next to a state called "Israel"


And historically, there was a state known as Prussia. There was another state, known as Rhodesia. Let's not forget Samarkand. or The Confederate States of America. Or the Kingdom of Ulster. Anyone remember the mightiest nation in the world during its time, the mighty Andean state, Tawantinsuyu? How about Khazaria? How about État Français? And who could ever forget the might of Kush, or Songhai?

"There used to be a state" really isn't an intelligent reason to recreate it.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Hey, don't shoot the messanger! I am simply reporting on what I read today. I personally do not support a new Jewish state on land that I believe should be for a Palestinian state. BUT, this idea COULD cause great harm to the Palestinian cause.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by gem_man
 


It's more likely to cause great harm to a bunch of Jewish colonists, honestly.

Not that the Israeli government has ever minded a big ol' heap of dead Jews; most of their policy decisions seem geared towards that conclusion, honestly.



posted on May, 7 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


If this ever happens it will be the settlers that initiate it . They will already have an army of sorts as a lot of the IDF is drawn from the settler ranks. The very fact that people are talking about it makes it a possibility however remote.



posted on May, 8 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Jewish Autonomous Oblast


In May 1928 the first group of Jewish settlers from cities and villages in Ukraine, Byelorussia and Russia arrived in the region that became the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. These individuals settled in many different areas of the autonomous oblast, some in Birobidzhan and others in various rural settlements.[2]

In 1934, the Jewish Autonomous Oblast was formed in the Russian Far East to show that, like other national groups in the Soviet Union, Russian Jews could receive a territory in which to pursue cultural autonomy in a socialist framework. The JAO's capital city was in Birobidzhan, and Yiddish was its official language. Jewish life was revived in Birobidzhan much earlier than in other regions of the Soviet Union. Yiddish theatres began opening in the 1970s.



en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.eao.ru...


How many "settlements" have there been anyway ?

what did this one do in WW2 ? .... any soldiers to "help" themselves ?



edit on 8-5-2011 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
And who could ever forget the might of Kush?


Kush???

SOUR POWER!!!!!!!!




posted on May, 10 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by gem_man
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Hey, don't shoot the messanger! I am simply reporting on what I read today. I personally do not support a new Jewish state on land that I believe should be for a Palestinian state. BUT, this idea COULD cause great harm to the Palestinian cause.


What exactly is the "Palestinian cause?"They were offered a state over 50 years ago and decided to embrace hatred and violence. They cheered when 9/11 happened, and they name their landmarks after suicide bombers. If the Palestinian's every got a state it would sink into corruption, violence and fighting. They do not know any other way at this point, and have invested far too much into their hatred.

I am not endorsing Israel to take over any more land (which never ever was a "Palestinan State" in any event), but it's up to the Palestinian's to step up to the plate and start acting civilized.



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Actually what to-day we call the 'West Bank' - i.e. The West Portion of the Jordan River- now home to nearly 2 Million modern 'Filistin' i.e. Palestinians, was actually the major part of the ancient NORTHERN 'clan-kingdom of 'Yisro'el' (a group of allegedly 10 tribelets who 'separated themselves' from the southern Kingdom of Yehud c. 920 BCE) after the death of 'Jedediah-Solomon'.

It is not quite known for sure (to judge from all the modern archaeological finds with their pesky Carbon-14 dating !) if the northern 'kingdom' was EVER really a part of the 'southern kingdom' - except in the minds of the writers of the Hebrew Bible - despite the Judaean fantasies contained in their 'scriptures' which only set down their 'history' many centuries AFTER the events they purport to relate [i.e. 'following the period of the Judges] -

Not surprisingly perhaps, bearing in mind that the Hebrew 'Chronicles' found in the heavilly midrashic Books of Samuel / Kings etc. were not finally redacted/re-edited into its present form until after c. 630 BCE during the era of 'Josiah' who is named in the text) - and there was a lot of 'retro-jection' of later (post Exilic) religio-political ideas into earlier histories that never really happened in 'historical fact'.

Not only 'physically and politically separate' , the inhabitants of this West Bank area - i.e. the so-called Northern Kingdom' (also called 'Ephrayim') - also never really adopted the sole worship of 'YHWH alone' especially in the early 'Daviddic' days - probably not until after the Babylonian Exile (BCE 587 - BCE 530) -

To judge from what Archaeologists have actually found in the ground dating from c. 1000 BCE to BCE 500 the general 'West Bank' Ephrayim area was filled with pre- and non-Israelitish 'pagan' shines to the 'gods' for centuries after 'David' and Solomon - some of these very elaborate Canaanite shrines date back millennia at the numerous cult centers

e.g. Shomeron ("Samaria"), Gilgal, Beth-El (Luz), Shekhem and Shiloh etc. - mostly dedicated to various pagan gods including Ba'al (and all the various Ba'alim), the goddess Asherah-Ashterot (also called the 'Wife-Consort of YHWH" !) as well as the Cannanite fertility god Bull EL - only much later did the cult of the clan god-YHWH became identified with 'YHWH' post Exilic clan-god of the 'Hebrew Bible' - sometime prior to the time of Ezra c. BCE 430 )

This Northern Amphyctiony of Ephraimitish tribelets (in today's West Bank area) went through long periods of ecconomic successes (clearly borne out by rich Archaeological finds in the area) at least when compared with the originally tiny tribelets of Judah & Benyamin in the South (despite what the Hebrew Bible says about the 'evil' Northern Kingdom - since the North worshipped not YHWH of the Bible but the many pre-Israelite 'Canaanite' clan-gods prior to the Assyrian invasion (722 BCE to 701 BCE) - it was the Assyrian army who deported the elite of the Northern (West Bank) population to Nineveh [anyone who could read/write were taken there - mainly the scribes/priestly class of the various cults of the gods in the 'north') and (of course !) all persons who could work in metals - i.e. anyone who could foster a Rebellion against the Assyrians.

These are the so-called '10 Lost Tribes of Israel' - many of whom never made it back to Palestine, but rather stayed put and got racially mixed (read: 'married into') the ancient local Assyrian population - only to become genetically mixed in - and becomea genetic part of to-days's modern Iraqi's, Iranian and (Shock and Awe !) the oft-displaced 'Kurdish' population in the Middle East.

The Assyrians then re-populated the area [what we to-day call the West Bank] with their own imported 'foreign' (law abiding 'Assyrian') citizens during this time, and many of these 'imported persons from abroad' after the Babylonian Exile (c. BCE 587-537) later became identified with the group known as the Samaratim ('Samaratins') who also likewise 'separated from Judah' in the south.

So the West Bank has always been a separate entity from the rest of Palestine, despite all the mythological fantasies of a 'single giant united (and politically important) kingdom' of Judah under the clan chiefs 'David' and Jedediah' (Solomon). The population of Jerusalem prior to the Assyrian invasion (and the influx off refugees c. 720-700 BCE) was less than 4,000 permanent persons to judge from the archaeogical remains...hardly a kingdom to be compared with Egypt, Assyria or Babylon whose capitol cities contained more than 150,000 persons each at this time.

Check out the most recent Israeli led Archaeological digs which DO NOT show any 'major kingdoms' at all in existence in the southern region during the alleged Judean 'reigns' of Yehudite clan-chiefs such as 'David' and Jedidiah ('Solomon') c. 1000 BCE to 920 BCE

A good start for the novice to all this 'shock and awe' information would be the book (designed for the general reader) entitled,

"The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts" (published in 2001)

which tells all about all the shocking modern findings of Archaeology in both the area thought to be ancient Israel and Judah - and its relationship to the midrashic legends / fantasies of the 'essentially made up history' of ancent Israel as reflected in the 'Hebrew Scriptures' with regards to Judah's alleged political control of the lands to the north pf Jebus/Jerrusalem (incluiding the area of the modern PalestinianWest Bank) - and how the 'propaganda' of the Hebrew Bible foisted legendary 'wishful thinking' on to the world.

The authors of this 'beginners guide' to modern Israelite digs are : the eminent Dr Israel Finkelstein, Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, and Dr Neil Asher Silberman, a contributing editor to 'Archaeology Magazine' -and are considered 'main stream' archaeologists - not weirdo fringe persons in the field. They at least TRY to tell it like it was !

In the book, Finlestein & Silberman try to explain to the reader (who often has never heard this before !) that the 'southern kingdom' of Yehud (=Judah) did not become a signigifant political player on the Canaanite-Palestinian Scene until the time of the many-gods worshipping clan chief Humberi (=Omri) some 150 years later than the purported reign of 'David' - and how the politics of the reign of Josiah (c. 630 BCE) caused all the propaganda we read today in the Hebrew texts about the 'historical origins' of 'Israel' and 'Judah'.

It is clear from the Archaelogy that most of the real political movers and shakers in Palestine (prior to the Assyrian Mow Down of 722 BCE) did not take place in the Jerusalemite 'backwater' south at all (i.e. Judah) but rather in the modern (roughly) West Bank area = i.e. in the northern tribal amphytionies known as 'Ephraim' - - and it is very clear from the most recent archaeological digs since 1960 that the 'kingdoms' of the 'north' (Yisro'el / Ephrayim) and the south (Yehud / Judah) had a TOTALLY separate political and environment history as far back as from c. BCE 3000 - mainly because of the different types of climate and land quality.

So it is not surprising that even to-day the modern Palestinian West Bank inhabitants (quite apart from their separate religion) think and act much different from modern 'state of Israel' - they always were a breed apart in one way or another from very ancient times...

edit on 10-5-2011 by Sigismundus because: Dittography & Haplography - still around with a Modern Computer Keyboard !



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


And what was the reason to recreate a state called "Israel"? Whatever the reason was the same reason could be used to recreate a state called "Judah"



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ultraman2011

Originally posted by gem_man
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Hey, don't shoot the messanger! I am simply reporting on what I read today. I personally do not support a new Jewish state on land that I believe should be for a Palestinian state. BUT, this idea COULD cause great harm to the Palestinian cause.


What exactly is the "Palestinian cause?"They were offered a state over 50 years ago and decided to embrace hatred and violence. They cheered when 9/11 happened, and they name their landmarks after suicide bombers. If the Palestinian's every got a state it would sink into corruption, violence and fighting. They do not know any other way at this point, and have invested far too much into their hatred.

I am not endorsing Israel to take over any more land (which never ever was a "Palestinan State" in any event), but it's up to the Palestinian's to step up to the plate and start acting civilized.


Sounds to me like you are also describing the Israelis. They DID cheer 9-11 when it happened as did also the "dancing Israelis" and Netanyahu himself when he said 911 was good for Israel. They WERE offered a state over 50 years ago and the resolution is still extant so they may choose to establish their state NOW. They name their landmarks after suicide bombers? True, but Israel ALSO names their streets after THEIR radicals. As far as acting civilized is concerned the Israeli settlers have taken civilization to a whole new level of barbarism.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Sigh. Seriously, there are these things called "books." We store them in "libraries" just shelves upon shelves of books. Within each book is a wealth of information, and in most libraries, that information is free for you to take and learn from. Granted every third book is written by Danielle Steele, but in between those things is the occasional work on Israel and Palestine. Maybe you could go check out a few of those, after i correct your everything that you have failed at here.


Originally posted by Ultraman2011
What exactly is the "Palestinian cause?"They were offered a state over 50 years ago and decided to embrace hatred and violence.


Incorrect at both points. First, neither the Palestinians nor the Jews were ever "offered a state," as such. Rather, several proposals for division were floated around. Both sides found these plans unacceptable; the Zionist lobby wanted everything - literally, they wanted the entire mandate and there were calls for Jordan to be annexed onto the territory as well. In the Palestinian camp, they wanted a pluralist state with shared power between Jews and Arabs.

The British withdrew without the impasse being resolved. The Zionists declared themselves a state within one of the plans' boundaries, and immediately set about killing and driving out Arabs from that territory. Entire towns were eradicated, before the other Arab states got involved. Really, it was the Zionists who chose "hatred and violence" - and they still do, every time. If Israel wanted peace, there would be peace.


They cheered when 9/11 happened,


Any why shouldn't they? What nation is it that gives Israel $3 billion in military aid, along with untold millions in free hardware, almost all of which is turned on Palestinian civilians? Why shouldn't people, whose homes have been demolished by Caterpillar bulldozers, whose families have been killed by tomahawk missiles and Apache gunships, cheer when someone hits the arms dealers in the face? "Maybe now the Americans know how it feels."

As mentioned before, the Israelis cheered as well - And then very promptly tried to cinvince us that Yassir Arafat and Osama bin Laden were buddies... which if you know anything about either of the guys was about as laughable as the idea of Eisenhower and Rommel having a civil afternoon tea together.


and they name their landmarks after suicide bombers.


We named our capitol city and one of our states after a guy who, in between abusing his slaves and sending tens of thousands of Americans to their deaths for his personal profit, still found time to burn several Indian villages to the ground and kill every man, woman, and child within them. Oh, and we enshrine him in two pieces of our currency. And there's a memorial. And a sculpture of him as Zeus. Oh and we totally defaced a holy site in order to cram his face up there, along with a slave rapist, a warmongering racist, and Abraham Lincoln.


If the Palestinian's every got a state it would sink into corruption, violence and fighting.


Never know til you try.


They do not know any other way at this point,


You're aware that the Palestinian government is more open and accessable to its people than the Israeli government, much less the American government, right?


and have invested far too much into their hatred.


Really? Then why are they the ones who keep coming to the table and trying to make it work? it would seem to me the ones who have heavily invested in their hatred are the ones who work so very, very hard to stymie any motion towards a peaceful resolution.


I am not endorsing Israel to take over any more land (which never ever was a "Palestinan State" in any event),


Well, there wasn't an "Israeli state" until a bunch of European Jews decided that the 1940's hadn't seen quite enough ethnic cleansing.


but it's up to the Palestinian's to step up to the plate and start acting civilized.


Civilized by whose standard, exactly? Palestinians haven't wrecked Iraq lately. Hell, in the last decade, Palestinians have killed less than five hundred people, almost exclusively by the hands of non-governmental criminals. Your nation has murdered over two hundred thousand people in the same period, with the full and total support of the government and the people who elect it.

Fact is, this line from you is just a fig leaf; much like the American whites who felt themselves entitled to judge when blacks would be "ready" to vote (specifically, never) you have no actual interest in seeing this sort of development; it's a goal post with wheels. No matter how long the kick, it'll never, ever quote reach, will it?
edit on 2/6/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join