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.

 

Something strange about the Bank of Israel logo.

page: 5
39
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


There has never in the history of this planet been a country called "Palestine", only an undefined AREA. And since the Jewish religion is about 2000 years OLDER than Islam I'm going to state as a fact that Jews have lived in that area first and longer than Muslims.

The only thing worse than being a bigot is being a stupid bigot. You wallow in ignorance.




posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Carreau
 

There has never in the history of this planet been a country called "Palestine", only an undefined AREA.
That is not true at all.
What you are repeating is one of the zionist supporter talking points that are so often said that people just accept it as fact, probably reasoning that "if it wasn't true, how could all these people say it?".

And since the Jewish religion is about 2000 years OLDER than Islam I'm going to state as a fact that Jews have lived in that area first and longer than Muslims.
What you are calling the Jewish religion (Judaism), is a fairly new thing that came out of the Middle Ages.
What existed before that was the official state religion of the priestcraft of the Jerusalem temple, and after its destruction, there was rabbinical Judaism connected with the Talmud.

The only thing worse than being a bigot is being a stupid bigot. You wallow in ignorance.
No, I'm not ignorant at all.
You may be "wallowing" in propaganda promoted by zionists, which is by definition slanted in a chauvinistic way.

edit on 16-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 

You do understand the reasoning for this war?
The '67 attack by Israel, you mean?
The "reasoning" was that they could win, and from their experience, winning wars got them more territory.

Maybe the prior wars the Arabs started had something to do with it?
That depends on if you want to accept standard Israeli propaganda or not. Non-Jews who lived there at the time have a different view of things and considered it a defensive action against the centers where attacks on them were coming from.

Egypt closing the Strait of Tiran had a lot to do with it too. Gamal Abdel Nasser blocking all shipping to Israel had a lot to do with it also. That is REAL history no one wants to know, because those making revisionist history likes to play the blame game.
In 1956, Israel attacked Egypt which had nationalized the Suez Canal.
After the Israelis had attacked Syria in '67, Nasser partially blocked the Israeli's access to the Red Sea or at least declared his intention to do so, shortly before the Israelis attacked Egyptian forces.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Like I said, for every action there is a reaction, right or wrong.

Standard Arab Propaganda states Israel wants ALL the Land.

I think they could have taken it years ago if they really wanted..........


Taking the lands would have come with a price though.........

If you want to blame anyone one, blame those helping both sides arming them. The UN is one organization that I could blame outright.



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 

Haha, what?
Care to provide a source for this?

Genesis 17:1
When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. (2011 NIV)

The word translated here as Almighty is שַׁדַּ֔י (šad·day).

Genesis 17:8
The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

Genesis 15:18
On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadie of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—



Who is this "God".

This "God" is a Lucifer who appears in a dream of Abraham.

Ancient people believed in dreams and wrote them in their books.

The landless dream of land, the poor dream of riches etc. Almost every person dreams of something.

If dream become valid reason to wage wars and stake claims, I can guarantee no society can function on Earth.

Bible is NOT word of God. It is word of man. Bible or Torah cannot be the reason for existence of a State.

I have no problem with State of Israel existing or any other State. I have a problem with something existing on the basis of blatant falsehood, and waging wars for it.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 

Haha, what?
Care to provide a source for this?

Genesis 17:1
When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. (2011 NIV)

The word translated here as Almighty is שַׁדַּ֔י (šad·day).

Genesis 17:8
The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

Genesis 15:18
On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadie of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—


Yeah, i do not see the Hermon mountain demon worshiping bit there. The quotes are correct but there is no connection between your previous post and these lines.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


How can "God" appear before Abraham. The real God appears before no one.

This is the problem with these books and the believers.

Somebody wrote something in a book and a whole bunch start believing that story. Wars are fought and people are put in slavery over it.

Veda says that soul has to make the journey to the God. The God does not make the journey to the soul. The soul needs God. God has no need of any soul.

God provides for everybody - Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Atheists too. Does God refuse food to Atheists who does not believe in Him even?

Then why would "God" promise land to Abraham? This question must be asked.

There is no promised land for any race or religion.

God is kind to people who follow his laws. And mindless violence, falsehood, usury, jealousy, sexual perversion are not His laws. This is behavior of Satanic souls.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 

Yeah, i do not see the Hermon mountain demon worshiping bit there. The quotes are correct but there is no connection between your previous post and these lines.
You asked for a source for "that" without specifying what that meant exactly.
The connection with "these lines", meaning apparently what Christians call verses, is that this deity person who was having some sort of conversation with the man credited as being the "first Hebrew" with the appropriate name, Abraham, was claiming as his power to grant this land, being a member of the Shaddayyin, with the word found in the text being the singular form. The significance of the association of that title with that divine person being that this particular type of a god was, according to Canaanite mythology, had the power of life and death over the people who lived within his reach, and therefore by extension, could choose who would eventually be the main inhabitants of that region, basically by killing their "enemies".
The 'mountain' part comes from the definition of the Shaddayyin, (read Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan, Library Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies, by John Day)which were the gods of mountains and who "lived" on the tops of those mountains. You can see in the Old Testament, this conflict between the god of the local to Judea mountain, and the god of the mountain to the north, supposedly the Baal who lived on the top of mount Zaphon.

. . . located near the mouth of the Orontes River on the Syrian-Turkish border . . .
en.wikipedia.org...
You see the traditional place of the terrestrial god associeted with the OT divine entity in thew Book of Revelation with the so-called Battle of Armageddon being "in the Hebrew" the mountain of Meggido (Har Magedon in the Greek text), commonly known as Mount Hermon (read Revelation a Commentary by David Aune).

The southern slopes of Mount Hermon extend to the Israeli-occupied portion of the Golan Heights . . .
. . . Nickelsburg connected it with the place name of Baal-Hermon (Lord of Hermon) and the deity given by Enoch as "The Great Holy One".
en.wikipedia.org...
Hermon was the original "mountain of Israel",

“As the LORD commanded Moses his servant, so did Moses command Joshua, and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the LORD commanded Moses. So Joshua took all that land, the hills, and all the south country, and all the land of Goshen, and the valley, and the plain, and the mountain of Israel, and the valley of the same; [Even] from the mount Halak, that goeth up to Seir, even unto Baalgad in the valley of Lebanon under mount Hermon: and all their kings he took, and smote them, and slew them. Joshua made war a long time with all those kings.”
Joshua 11:15-18

edit on 17-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Was Mexico City was only given back in exchange for Califas, Arizona, Etc.
Read between the lines 'ranter for the cross'. which really is 'ranter for mon bite'



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Never heard about that and will read further ,however Megiddo is most certainly not the same as Hermon.
Megiddo:
en.wikipedia.org...
Hermon:
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 

. . . Megiddo is most certainly not the same as Hermon.

Right, one is a valley, and the other is a mountain.
The question is if John meant Megiddo or not.
If he did, I think he would have just said so.
The more persuasive argument to me is that he meant the mountain.
If you accept that, then you can more easily see it as connecting the "gathering" of the kings of the earth, to a judgment by God from this high place associated with ideas of the heavenly and the gods or god.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Carreau
 



Hey look! Here is the PLO UN logo and it has removed Israel from the map completely. This must be very upsetting for you as well and I'm sure you were going to post a thread all about it next huh?

So the Palestinians made a logo using the land that they lived on BEFORE Israel was created. Its not like it contains territories belonging to other countries.
But... I guess you need to lose your home to make room for somebody else to understand.


Hypocrite. Your pro Muslim and anti Jewish threads aren't even interesting any longer, just tedious.

Its really hard to be "anti-Jewish" when my prophets and Messiah are Jewish.

Try again.
edit on 17-6-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

Carreau : Here is the PLO UN logo and it has removed Israel from the map completely.


The "P" in PLO stands for Palestine.
What is shown in green on the Logo is Palestine.
Why include the zionist regime illegally occupying part of it?


Exactly. He seems to be have a problem with Palestinians making a symbol of the land that they occupied before the Zionists showed up.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

GargIndia : I have no problem with expansion of a State.


So then you would support the expansion of Pakistan into Kashmir?
Just militarily overrunning neighboring countries to annex their land is against international laws and is a war crime.


*claps*

Brilliant response.
Except, Israel wasn't even a neighboring country. It is a completely foreign entity with European roots that was installed in the middle eat.



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Carreau
 


Somebody rewrote torah which says Judaism frontier star from river Nile to river Euphrates. Prophet Josph lived in Sinai. Than Phrouh made children of Isreal slaves. Than prophet Musa(Mooses) came to free children of Isreal from Phrouh. Isreal is another name of Prophet Yacoub(Jacoub).
They children of Isreal(12 tribes) refuse prophet mooses to conqure Jerusalem.

They need Egypt because their ancestor lived their. They also need Medina (Prophet Muhammed) Masjid, because Jews lived Medina.

They also need Babili



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

GargIndia : I have no problem with expansion of a State.


So then you would support the expansion of Pakistan into Kashmir?
Just militarily overrunning neighboring countries to annex their land is against international laws and is a war crime.


*claps*

Brilliant response.
Except, Israel wasn't even a neighboring country. It is a completely foreign entity with European roots that was installed in the middle eat.



Pakistan has used every means to annex Kashmir. It has failed to do so despite using all means. What is "international law" doing in this.

USA has been fighting wars and crossing international borders all the time. Which "international law" stops that?

Israel exists as a State today. It has neighbors. Is it NEWS?



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GargIndia
 

What is "international law" doing in this.

I think the whole apparatus has veered off into the ditch thanks to the US/UK support of Israel irregardless of its nonconformity with so-called international norms.
edit on 18-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


As far as I can see, disputes between States are being resolved through force. Where is UN? UN has been reduced to another Superpower tool.

This is the problem with our world. It is still about military force, spying, sabotage, and slavery. Material progress has been achieved but not much else.

As regards expansion of a State - the European Union is a prime example of expansion or coming together of States to form a political union. It is not necessary that expansion comes from military means.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 05:12 AM
link   
Hi. I've lived in Israel for eight years, and until stumbling across this thread, I confess I'd never noticed the weird shape on the back of the 10 agorot coins in my pocket. I'm probably not alone there, but that's no excuse for ignorance, so I felt compelled to look into it for myself. After a bit of searching around, I've identified the following:

1) The 5-agorot coin which was contemporary with the 10-agorot coin until withdrawn in 2008 also depicted an ancient Jewish coin:

en.numista.com...

2) The new commemorative 'Tel Megiddo' coin contains something similar too - a partial image of a 2700-year-old Jewish seal:

www.boi.org.il...

www.bible-history.com...

3) Israel isn't the only country which incorporates ancient coin designs into new ones, for example Japan is currently issuing a range of special 500-yen coins which include on one side a picture of a much older Japanese coin:

www.mint.go.jp...

So perhaps the 10-agorot coin isn't so completely abnormal, though I can't deny that the shape at the top left does remind me of Israel, even if the rest of the outline bears no obvious similarity to any other geographical features of the Middle East. And we can't ignore that the Bank of Israel has chosen in its wisdom to use the 10-agorot design as its logo, in preference to several other possible candidates.

I'm not really sure what conclusion to draw, so I'm just laying out the facts. And in case it helps, I might also note that I've never yet met anyone here who declared a desire for a Greater Israel extending from the Nile to the Euphrates, but I have encountered a good number who expressed the belief that Israel should be allowed to keep the West Bank, with justifications ranging from the original design of the Jewish homeland in the 1917 Balfour Declaration and 1920 San Remo agreement, to the reality of how surrendering the Gaza Strip hasn't worked out well for citizens on either side. As for me, I'm a two-state solution supporter myself - I hope we get there one day, and somehow find a way to sort out the numerous messes elsewhere in the Middle East too. Inshallah/Bezrat Hashem...

Phil, reporting from the inside



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 05:22 AM
link   

MysterX
Palestinians and Gazans get their rightful lands back,


I do not think Jordan will be happy giving the Palestinians a lot of land back...



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join