Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » News From Israel: Clan Fighting Breaks Out South of Jerusalem City Wall, Police Stay Away

News From Israel: Clan Fighting Breaks Out South of Jerusalem City Wall, Police Stay Away

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

On Saturday night last (4 July 2009), a violent confrontation broke out between two clans living in the village of Silwan, south of the Old City wall of Jerusalem, in the general direction of the Armon Hanetziv neighborhood in the south of the city.

Automatic gunfire raged for several hours late into the night, according to reports from Arutz Sheva and Yediot Ahronot. Two people were reported dead by Jewish and Arab residents sitting in utter fear in their homes, but Yediot Ahronot reported one person dead. Apparently, what was meant by the Yediot Ahronot report was that one person was killed by gunfire as we see below.

According to Yediot Ahronot,

The brawl Saturday initiated when children from the Rajbi and Ouda families started arguing. During the skirmish, armed family members from the two clans opened fire, killing one person. Another person was killed when hit by a car. The two casualties, both members of the Rajbi family, were evacuated to a hospital in east Jerusalem.

As most folks who know anything about Arabs living in the Land of Israel (and Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, for that matter), they divide themselves into clans and occasionally (perhaps more than occasionally) violence breaks out between these clans.

This fight was an example of such clan violence, something which often breaks out in the Hebron hills as well. According to residents in Silwan and the neighboring (Jewish) 'Ir David neigborhood, several vans of border patrolmen stood by during this entire fight, doing absolutely nothing. According to Arutz Sheva,

“It was literally like a war,” she went on. “I think there were hundreds of people shooting. The muazzins [mosque loudspeakers] were blasting all night. People were throwing bottles and rocks. We were all scared."

Devorah’s husband, Yonaton, called the police emergency hotline. “They hung up on me twice,” he said. “I asked them, ‘How do I protect my family? Should we leave our home?’ They told me they couldn’t give me more details and they couldn’t advise us on what do to because they didn’t want to take responsibility for someone getting killed.”

Arab residents seem to corroborate this story. According to Arutz Sheva Arab residents agreed that police did little to stop the fight. “There are shots being fired from M-16s and other rifles,” Dawud told Kol Yisrael (Voice of Israel Radio), holed up in his home to avoid straying bullets.

“Civilians are shooting at civilians and the police are doing nothing,” he said. “Two clan families are battling each other and the police tell them to break their heads. They are shooting on the street and the police are standing by and watching. There are three jeeps of border police officers doing nothing."

A shame there wasn't a Dunkin' Donuts for the border patrolmen to duck into for some coffee.

The Israel police tell a different story entirely. According to Yediot Ahronot, Jerusalem police claimed that they responded properly. Immediately after receiving notice of a disturbance, large units of police and border guard entered the village in order to calm things down. Throughout the entire night, three border guard jeeps patrolled the village. When shooting renewed after midnight, police forces together with the special forces entered, arrested three suspects, and transferred them to the minorities department for investigation.

Considering that both Arabs and Jews seem to agree that the border patrolmen did nothing until the Arab clans stopped shooting at each other, it would seem to this writer that the Israel police were trying to airbrush the picture, something they have been known to do before.

Speaking as one who is a volunteer with the Jerusalem District Police, I can attempt to shed some light on the behavior of the Israel police here.

There is a generic fear in interfering in Arab clan disputes because nothing "the Jews" do will be seen by anyone (not just the Arabs, but also the ever watchful international press) as the right thing. Anything they do will be condemned internationally as the "evil Zionist imperialists" will have been seen once more to "oppress the poor Palestinians," the meme of the international media. Frankly, it's a pain in the neck that the Police Ministry would rather avoid. Thus, while the Israel police vigorously deny it, reports in Arutz Sheva that PA plainclothesmen were sent in to "deal" with the situation seem terribly credible.

In any event, what can be reported reliably is this. The Islamic Student Movement was not on hand to issue press reports to a gushing media. No has-been American politicians or Nobel laureates were on hand to comment on the "terrible situation of the poor Palestinians." This story – news – has been given short shrift in the BBC, CBC, CNN, Agence France Presse, Reuters, and the rest of the mass media – who do not really care about Arabs or any other kind of people, but care terribly about celebrities (particularly of their own creation), who are not really people at all, but bundles of guaranteed site hits.

About Ruvy

Hi!! Thanks for coming to my article! I was raised in Brooklyn, was graduated from the City University of New York in 1978 with a BA in political science and public administration there. I lived in Minnesota for a number of years. There I managed restaurants and wrote stories. We moved with our children family to Israel where we now reside. My work can be found at Ruvy's Roost, Jewish Indy,, and on Facebook under my full name, Reuven Kossover
  • http://www.joannehuspek.wordpress.com Joanne Huspek

    I hope you are staying safe, Ruvy.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Thank you, Joanne. So far, we are managing to.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Note, those of you who are even reading.

    Those “do-gooders” who pretend to care about Arabs are absent here. They do not protest why the Israel Police did not go in to Silwan in force to preserve the peace and to disarmm the clanskilling eachi other; they do not care about the dead victims of a clan war – just as they do not care about Arab women who die in honor killings, or girls whose genitalia are violated and cut apart, or the Arab women who are beaten and abused, or the children who are turned into killers by Arab hate propaganda. They do not care at all. They never did. They do not give a damn about Arabs at all, and have no respect for them – period.

    B’tzelem is not there with its cameras. Perhaps the secular Jews who do not respect G-d fear for their lives should they dare expose the murderous hatreds that rend Arab society in Israel, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. While the secular “people” of B’trelem feel free to incite anger amongst fellow Jewx to make them look bad, they fear for their lives to incite anger among Arabs – knowing that they will be torn apart bone from bone for doing so – just as was Kobi Mandell – and his sin was playing in a cave!

    The “do-gooders” who protest the situation of the “poor Palestinian” ONLY do so when they can stick it to a Jew in the process – revealing the true motive underneath their actions – JEW-HATRED. Whether this hatred is hatred of Jews by non-Jews, or self-hatred by Jews is irrelevant. The same damage is done. The Islamic Student Movement is not there either. There are no Jews to berate, hate, villify, delegitimize or de-humanize. The UN is conspicuously absent. Where are the ever present scum from the united nothings? They are ever present in Hebron, ever present on the roads of Judea and Samaria, ever present in Armon haNetziv? Where are the cowards?

    Where are the ubiquitous British cameramen who incite Jews to violence by filming them on the Sabbath in countless Youtube agitprop telenovelas?

    Finally, where are the intrepid, brave reporters of the BBC? Whey are they not eager to explore what clan violence among Arabs is and why it occurs? Probably, they are sitting in the American Colony Hotel drinking beer – and awaiting the next opportunity to blacken the name of a Jew.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s a family affair, Ruvy, that’s why. You should know better than trying to interfere in a family feud.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    It’s a family affair, Ruvy, that’s why. You should know better than trying to interfere in a family feud

    A family affair Roger? That’s a bit lame, don’t you think? “Family affairs” are settled with screaming and yelling – occasionally someone pulls a knife when the screaming and yelling don’t get the ‘point’ across. There is violence in families, Roger, I’ll grant you that.

    But pitched battles with Kalashnikovs and M16’s? Methinks you are getting beyond a “family affair” because you are infringing on the right of your neighbors to live peacefully. “Disturbing the peace” is a rather understated way to describe a pitched battle, Roger.

    If Mahmoud screams at Ahmed and the whole neighborhood can hear, that’s disturbing the peace, but it could still be looked at as a “family affair” – probably how the police would look at it in Jerusalem. But when Mahmoud and Ahmed call in all their relatives and start using semi-automatics and hand-grenades, you have a civil war, and this challenges the authority of the sovereign – the sovereign here being the State of Israel. That’s why Arabs calling in to Kol Yisrael complained about the Border Guards doing nothing! The sovereign authority charged with keeping the peace was standing there watching the families use proper “anarchist’s” tactics to settle a dispute – without reference to the sovereign or his authority, and this had Arabs in the village of Silwan – as well as Jews in ‘Ir David – rather upset.

    We see here where Cindy’s concept of anarchism leads us rather rapidly. And in this case, the “anarchist” solution cost two lives in one evening. That’s a high price for “freedom” from “oppressive sovereign behavior”. It’s a taste of Gaza – it’s a taste of hell.

    Roger, the reason that the Border Guards did not move in was that there were 12 to 15 guys max, and they would have been mowed down like lawn. Putting down a civil distrubance like this would have required at least 200 soldiers in full combat gear using rubber bullets, to stop those engaging in violence. It would have been a three sided pitched battle, with casualties on all sides. But it would have been over in less than a half hour if the force used to put down the combattants was sufficient. Peace would have been restored and the authority of the sovereign guaranteed. But there is the downside.

    The ISM types wuuld be on hand, along with “Al-Ayush” and “Yesh G’vul” (a pro-Arab Israeli outfit) and would be putting out reports on their Blackberries, Blueteeth and high tech phone platforms from the scene. The headline and lead that someone like Tolstoy’s Cat would pick up on the internet wsuld read as follows:

    4 July 2009, Occupied East Jerusalem:
    Zionist Occupation Forces Use Family Dispute to Go on Rampage in Palestinian Village of Silwan

    Israeli Occupation Forces entered the village of Silwan in overwhelming force at abotu 9:00 Saturday night, in full ccombat gear, using rubber bullets to fire upon Palestinian civilians engaged in a family dispute. Palestinians report two dead, who have been taken to hospitals in East Jerusalem….

    This is the one-ssided reporting you would get from the scene, just like the one-sided reporting you got in the Gaza boat stunt, (Israel Abducts – what kind of baloney ios that?) and the one sided reporting you have been largely getting out of Honduras over the last few days.

    But I’m not done yet, Roger. Let’s look at that “family feud” issue you raise. You bought the agitprop Youtube telenovelas hook line and stinker. When B’tzelem went into Hebron on Sukkot with cars and cameras to incite fellow Jews who are Torah-observasnt, along with that American foreigner from the East Coast who swore like a prostitute, you didn’t call it a family feud then, did you? Even though it was Jew against Jew. That is a double standard, and it about time you recognized why I have such contempt for these foreigners who incite violence in our land and for the secular Jews who are nothing more than lackeys of European and American neo-colonialists.

    They practice a double standard of incitement of Jews and stay away from Arabs – because we do not kill them and Arabs will without hesitation. Perhaps 10 or 20 or 50 dead members of Peace Now or B’tzelem or Yesh G’vul is what it will take to teach these secular “Jews” in Israel not to commit treason against their own brothers. Family feuds, as you indicate, should be kept within the family.

    I would rather not discuss here what might be necessary if that is not sufficient.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t agree with Cindy on anarchism, which doesn’t mean she makes no valid points. What’s one-sided is in the eye of the beholder. Miller’s a/c of the Honduras affair is just as one-sided as the competing accounts. And why should the IDF give a shit if the Arabs kill each other off? It’s no different than the policy of police non-interference in drug wars or blacks killings each other off – so long as the action is limited to the inner city and the ghetto. As to “inciting riots,” that, too, depends on your point of view. One person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. And you do have to admit that the Israeli position is controversial enough, just as is the position of the US which some regard as imperialistic, to generate more than one point of view – even among the Jews. Besides, the Jews aren’t thought of as being oppressed by other Jews; but the Palestinians are believed by some to be involved in a war of liberation. So these are just some of the features which make the two situations disparate.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I don’t agree with Cindy on anarchism

    I know you don’t. The point was to discredit her whole approach, one which disregards the basic idea of a social contract for governance, and to show where the practical application of her ideas would lead where there was a something as simple as a clan dispute that could not be resolved peacefully.

    Secondly, to say the IDF should or shouldn’t care if Arabs kill each other smacks of racism. There are a lot of Druze in the Army and a lot of Cherkessim in the police. These non-Jews have a share in this country, just as do Arabs, particularly Bedouin in the Negev, and Arabs living in the Galilee – not to mention the Arabs who live in Judea and Samaria – my neighbors. So there is an issue of imposing rule of law, and the Police Ministry (and the rest of the government) is too afraid of home-grown traitors and American and European neo-imperioalists to assert that sovereign authority.

    At this point, the Arabs in Gaza will have to prove to me (and lots of other Israelis) that they really do have a stake in this nation. The joy they evince whenever a Jew dies has impressed all of us (except the lunatic peaceniks from T-A) and frankly, so far as I’m concerned, at this point, the Arabs in Gaza can go to Egypt – let them see what a real Arab regime is – and let them find out how unwelcome and unwanted they are in a poor third world country filled with corruption. Let them pay for their bloodthirtiness.

    As for the so-called Arab “freedom-fighters” they are terrorists and rebels, and the term “warlords” apply to them far more than any other. That is what they have described by their behavior – in their bloodthirst against both Jews and Arabs, and in their attitudes of looting, stealing and robbing from their own brethren as well as the Europeans stupid enough to give them money.

    the Jews aren’t thought of as being oppressed by other Jews;

    That is the reality I try to bring to you in most of my articles – that Torah-observant Jews anre indeed oppressed by the secular ruling elite here. That you do not see this – or refuse to see this indicates difficutlties in seeing the reality in front of you in an article.

    And now, dinner calls – so, I must conclude this.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Roger,

    It was not my intention to seem so abrasive in my concluding remarks in the previous comment. I direct you to this analysis of a terror attack in Jerusalem last year. There you will see in detail how the secular regime purposely slams the reputation of Torah-observant Jews, particularly those living in Judea and Samaria. I am dedly serious about this.d

    The regime here favors rather openly a small clique of non-believing Jews; it discriminates against believing Jews (like me), Arabs, Druzim, Cherkessim, MizraHi Jews, Ethiopian Jews, and to a certain degree, Russian Jews. So, this is not whining about me alone here. There is no such thing as “rule of law” or “due process” ubless you are part of the secular, anti-religious elite ruling from the swamps of Sheikh Munis (Tel Aviv), and the pricey suburbs around it.

    Emanuel Rahm hangs with this elite, and reflects its traitorous views. He is a true disappointment to his parents (even if they hide this disappointment openly), who were true patiots. Well, at least 60 years ago they were true patriots. Maybe they too, have changed. I shouldn’t make assumptions.

    These are realities you would never have seen as a teenager here nearly 50 years ago. And I, a proud Jew who lives in the mountains, am ashamed to have to record them.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/elvira-black Elvira Black

    Ruvy, my new computer has a mid of its own, so instead of attempting to compose another lengthy comment that will be erased (hmmm…) I’ll start with this:

    Terrific article; very important one too. We can’t fight demons that we can’t see, and you’ve opened my eyes to a “reality” that doesn’t “exist” in the media (and thus is virtually and literally invisible to millions).

    Thank you for this; better post it before it vanishes again.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/elvira-black Elvira Black

    Reminds me of gang warfare in the States, as well as the dilemma amongst the police department in how to deal with criminals and street violence. A cop can lose his job or worse if it is determined that he fired on a citizen precipitously. Sometimes this is true, but sometimes not, and I can’t imagine a more insanity producing dilemma. No wonder cops sometimes wind up ending themselves.

    I think I’m not the only one who finds it hard to fathom some of the “ethic” wars where both sides seem to look the same, but it just goes to show that we can always find differences greater than our similarities, whether it be rivaling black gang members or Protestants versus Catholics in Ireland or warring Arab families. There’s a reason the Old Testament includes the story of classic sibling rivalry; namely Cain and Abel. N’est pas?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Thank you for the kind words, Elvira. There is so much that is not seen outside of this country because the media refuse to report it. It is not within the accepted “narrative” of “poor Palestinians viciously oppressed by violent religiously fanatical Jews”.

    But there is more. Russian immigrant Jews do not talk to English speaking immigrant Jews and it is important for us two immigrant groups to band together to better the country. The fault is largely (but not entirely) the fault of the English-speakers. For them “Russian Jew” means Natan (Anatoly) Sharansky, a KGB informant who has used and ditched everybody ruthlessly. He is kind of like the Israeli equivalent of what Allen Klein was in the American music industry, suing everybody and buying judges like I buy Oreos.

    But that is another story, possibly an interview with a Russian Israeli journalist.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Perhaps you fail to notice, but Elvira reiterates my comment in #6, comparing the situation to gang warfare and family feud – although tribal warfare is a a better term.

    As regards perceived oppression by an ethnic group with regard to another – that subject is always liable to get more public attention and press than what’s perceived as inner squabbles.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Go re-read my comments in detail, Roger. I answewred you thoroughly in comments 7 and 8. As for Elvira’s comments, the money line is this one – We can’t fight demons that we can’t see, and you’ve opened my eyes to a “reality” that doesn’t “exist” in the media (and thus is virtually and literally invisible to millions).

    What happened in Silwan was “like a gang war” – on speed.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “Torah-observant Jews anre indeed oppressed by the secular ruling elite here.”

    The way of the world, Ruvy, and it’s a secular world. Theocracy is no longer a viable form of government, so those who still believe in it are in the minority. Look at Iran. It’s being run more or less along theocratic lines, so no, thank you. There is no such thing as good or bad fanaticism (or fundamentalism, if you like). The only good fanatic is a dead one. Of course, your political views all spring from a belief in an earthly Messiah. On that we definitely disagree. The Kingdom of God may be already upon us, but only in a spiritual sense. To think of it on any other than the individual or personal level – which is to say, in terms of global or national politics and transforming thus the consciousness of a collective – is a pie in the sky.

    So there you go in a nutshell – the essence of our disagreement on this and many other issues: the metaphysical view of the world and all that it entails.

    And yes, I’ve been comparing the situation you describe to gang warfare.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Roger,

    NOW, we get to the point of the issue. Do Jews have a right to return to their homeland and set up a country or not, and if so, where does that right arise from?

    So, let’s tackle this all head on and be done with it. When we’re done, you’ll see that you do not believe in any form of Jewish state, and that you, if you have any intellectual honesty, want your Israeli relatives in Tel Aviv (Sheikh Munis, stolen from the Arabs – the Tel-Avivians are just “damned settlers on stolen land”, after all) should live under the gentle ministrations of the Arabs in an Arab-run state – or they should get the heck out of the country.

    ZIONISM is an English word at root, coming from the study of English Calvinists of the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. They saw the concept that runs through these prophetic works – return to the Land after a period of exile/punishment. The original Zionists, as it were, were Christian scholars and churchmen living in the late 1600’s who understood the concepts in the Hebrew Bible. The Jews of the day wanted badly to return home, but believed that the messiah had to lead them. Since no messiah was on hand, they were willing to suffer in Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, praying three times a day for the re-building of Jerusalem and the in-gathering of the exiles.

    It was a Serbian rabbi (Rav Alkali, z”l) who figured out in the early 1800’s that Jews should go home by themselves and rebuild the homeland themselves, that doing so would hasten the coming of the messiah who would bring Redemption and freedom. Secular Jews wrote the booklets “Auto-Emancipation”, and “From Rome to Jerusalem” in the mid 1800’s.

    But JEWS never got around to the term “Zionism” until the late 1800’s – 1890, I believe, and it was l’Affaire Dreyfus in 1894 that got a Hungarian journalist to see the light – that it was necessary to have a Jewish State to protect Jews from Jew-hatred even in “liberal” countries like France where he saw Frenchmen screaming a bas lews juifs! when Captain Alfred Dreyfus lost his commission and was chained to be carted off to Devil’s Island.

    When Theodore Herzl went to England to drum u support for his ideas, he disconvered that there were Englishmen who had the concept already down and who had a name for it – “Zionism”.

    So, the bottom line is this. Our claim to the Land comes from our conquest and occupancy of it 3,200 years ago, from our continued residence in it until about 1000 CE, when Crusaders massacred one group of Jews and when Moslem rulers forced Jews to either convert to Islam or leave, AND the prophetic books that foretell our return. In spite of this there has been a continuous Jewish prsence in OUR land. All this Arab tripe about a “Palestinian” prophet Jesus, etc. is just garbage, and they all know it.

    As to legal rights, these do not arise from the Bible – not everyone respects the Bible as authoritatrive, and not everyone reads it the same way either.

    The legal rights of the Jewish People to full sovereignty over ALL of the lansd of Israel arise from the “Resolutions on Palestine” adopted on 24-25 April 1920, in San Remo, Italy by the victorious powers who divided up the Middle East after the Great War. They, the victors, divided the spoils of war.

    These Resolutions are the only real international law applying to the Land of Israel, and everything that has followed to contravene or contradict these Resolutions are null and void – including Resolutions 181 of the UN General Assembly (1947), dividing the remnant of the Palestine Mandate in two, and Resolution 242 of the UN General Assembly (1967), attempting to undo the victory of the IDF in the Six Day War.

    There is no such a thing as Palestinian land and no such an animal as a Palestinian. It’s all baloney and all the Arabs know it.

    Let’s drive this home with a sledge-hammer.

    “I don’t think there’s a Palestinian nation. There’s an Arab nation. I don’t think there’s a Palestinian nation. That’s a colonial invention. Since when were there Palestinians? I think there’s only an Arab nation. Until the end of the 19th century, Palestine was the southern part of Greater Syria.”

    Nota bene, these words were spoken not by some Jewish nationalist, nor even a Jew at all, but by former MK Dr. Azmi Bishara in an interview with Yaron London several years ago. Bishara is a leader of Israeli Arab citizens who openly identify with the enemy, and who was forced to flee Israel under suspicion of aiding HizbAllah in wartime.

    So, there is NO PALESTINE, AND NO PALESTINIANS! It is all a lie, and it is time you understood what the ARABS are telling you. They will lie to you as long as you buy their lies – but they occasionally tell the truth – and here the former MK was telling the truth.

    These arguments all hang together, Roger. If you accept these arguments, you see that there is a sovereign right to rule all of the Land of Israel reserved for Jews alone, enshrined in international law – even if the the sitting regime in Jerusalem is too stupid or too cowardly, or too traitorous to assert it. If you do not, than the entire settlement of my people here is based on lies and fabrications designed to defraud the rightful owners of the land, the Arabs, of their patrimony. You can’t sit in the middle for there is no middle between lies and truth. So either you are for me – or you are against me.

    From al of your comments, you aere against me – and if you have any intellectual honesaty, you will be telling your relatives in Tel Aviv to join you in America, as they have no right to live on stolen Arab land.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re raising all kind of issues like Zionism or political autonomy, the question of rights, of Jews, Palestinians, whatever – all of which is beside the point I’m making. And I’m certain the arguments you’re making all hang together, as you say.

    My only point was – it’s a secular world and a secular government, if only evidenced by the fact that the theocratic view point (like the kind you’re advancing) is a minority. So whatever your beliefs about the reign of Messiah in the present or future times, that’s not the reality of the situation. Which isn’t to criticize your beliefs, only to say they’re divorced from reality in that that’s not how the state of Israel is being run, or ever likely to be run. And to say that the only way to be “for you” – and by that you mean of course “all the right thinking Jewish folk” – is to subscribe to what I regard as your idiosyncratic viewpoint is the height of arrogance.

    Notice, I don’t get here into any discussions are to rightful or wrongful ownership of the land. My point, again, it a very narrow one – but as usual, you somehow find it necessary to quote chapter and verse.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I see you cannot follow the reasoning at all, Roger. So let’s spoon-feed the pablum down. First a little sugar…. There we go. Now, open wide….

    The base reasoning for Jews to return here is “religious”, found in books of prophecy predicting a return of the Jewish nation. In a “secular world”, that reasoning is invalid, no matter how I dance around or stand on my head to make it otherwise. The secular regime in Israel refuses to recognize G-d and discriminates against Him and His Will at every opportunity. It is His Will that there be a Jewish state here, not the decisions of gentiles divvying up Turkish property in 1920. But in a secular world that decision of gentiles is what I have to use to carry my arguments for me. So they are oulined above.

    YOU allege that I ought to be discriminated against because YOU say I advocate a theocracy. I advocate no such thing. But YOU assume I do.

    YOU state the way the State of Israel will be run will never be from the hand of the messiah. That sir, is the height of arrogance asserted from the depths of ignorance. You are not a prophet and neither am I.

    Neither of us are as yet blessed with the knowledge of the future.

    But some of us have the brains to see a prediction coming true when it slaps us in the face. The Jewish sages foretold two things.

    1. That the Jewish people would return and resurrect the Jewish state that had been destroyed by the Roman savages.
    2. That the government of that resurrected state would be contemptuous of G-d and His Will, that arrogance would rule the land and that in the end of days the nation would be ruled by a “generation with the face of a dog”. This canine reference is not a compliment, Roger.

    Prophecy is only worth listening to if it comes true, and the words of the Jewish sages, written nearly two millennia ago, are coming true in spades.

    The stick in the pablum going down your throat right now is that in YOUR “secular world” the prophecies of MY religious sages are coming true.

    As for your comments elsewhere on this general topic, you are definitely not defending your relatives in Tel Aviv. The intellectually honest thing for you to do would be to tell them to leave stgolen Arab land – you obviously do not accept the legitimacy of the Jewish State.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Ruvy,

    I don’t question the idea that the motive to set up the state of Israel was religious, nor do I make any claims the Jews have no right to that land. So the only issue at hand – you happen to believe in the coming of the Messiah in this here, temporal world, whereas I don’t (and I’m guided here by Christian interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures (Isiah I and II) along with New Testament writings. So there’s no arrogance here, only different belief-systems.

    And insofar that your view of the Messianic prophesies has the temporal world as their context, to that very same extent you anticipate a reinstitution of theocracy. Nothing wrong with my logic here or inability, as you say, “to follow reasoning.”

    Again, I haven’t questioned the legitimacy of the Jewish state, nor its autonomy, only the theocratic form you claim it will eventually take. Well, I disagree with your interpretation of history and say that the state will remain secular (for the reasons I’ve just stated).

    Also, I did not condone any kind of discrimination against those Jewish people who happen to think like you – only stated the rather obvious fact that you are a minority and that your voice will be drowned in the sea of secularism.

    PS: It takes time for these comments to post, but I’m certain it’s only temporary.

  • http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/110295 ahmedabdelfattah

    Jerusalem Represents Neither a Religious Nor a Historical Problem

    Ismail Imadudeen
    July 15, 2009

    Religiously speaking, Jerusalem remains the holiest city for the Jews, a spiritual center for Christians and the third holiest city in Islam; it is the place where many Jewish monuments and heritage reside, same as for Christians and Muslims. It is a land that witnessed many conflicts and wars. And it is the land where the Romans banned the Jews to enter for hundreds of years.

    History reveals that there had been no better time for the Jews in Jerusalem, except that of King David, than that during the Islamic era, when they were allowed to come back and perform there prayers and rituals in freedom for about four centuries. However, when the Crusaders invaded the Holy City in 1099 AD, both Muslims and Jews were killed in great numbers.

    Years went by before the Islamic Ottoman Empire took over the city for another four hundred years, and the Jews were allowed again to perform their prayers and live normally as pure citizens within the Islamic Empire. In 1917, the British got hold of the city and other Arab territories, and they carried out a strange policy of dividing the Arab world into pieces based on ethnic and/or historical backgrounds. No one that time had ever imagined that there could be any plots or plans to create a special Jewish state within the Arab world, as the Jews were considered as citizens of full rights in their respective Arab countries. In fact, the Jews were Egyptians, Syrians, Palestinians, Yemani, Morocans, etc; they were simply a core part of those societies, same as Christians or Muslims. While the Arab world had been divided on ethnic and/or historical backgrounds, Israel was allowed to be created on religious backgrounds, the reason that alienated them in the region, as Israel was seen as an implanted state established mainly to serve the colonialist interests.

    Nonetheless, albeit Israel was created based on a UN resolution, Jerusalem remains an occupied land under the International Law thus far, i.e. Jerusalem is not Israeli, under the relevant UN resolutions.