Article

2005-09-02 Israel-Palestine

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2005-09-02 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Like I said, there's no satisfying these asswipes.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-09-02 00:06|| 2005-09-02 00:06|| Front Page Top

#2 Didya get that in writing, Mahmoud?

Posted by mojo">mojo 2005-09-02 01:31|| 2005-09-02 01:31|| Front Page Top

#3 Why can't Isreal bomb these meetings when they are taking place? Even just take a sniper shot from a mile away, there's guns that can make the distance.

Posted by Charles 2005-09-02 01:53|| 2005-09-02 01:53|| Front Page Top

#4 Israel essentially holds that mosque hostage. But it does them no good unless they make it clear under what exact circumstances they will demolish it.

In addition to razing it, it is the cultural and religious prerogative of Israel to re-build the Jewish temple on that site. Doing so is the ultimate legitimacy of the Jewish state to the Jewish people around the world. For once the temple is up and running, and yes, performing sacrifices, arguments about the messiah coming or whether or not the temple can be rebuilt are moot.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-09-02 11:54|| 2005-09-02 11:54|| Front Page Top

#5 Ah. I see the paleos are back on track with their version of the roadmap.

Posted by PlanetDan">PlanetDan 2005-09-02 14:09|| 2005-09-02 14:09|| Front Page Top

#6 I'd love to lay an artillery barrage all over palestine.

Posted by Shuns Pheack8314 2005-09-02 15:20|| 2005-09-02 15:20|| Front Page Top

#7 Anonymoose, the Jews are not going to rebuild the Temple. We've evolved past that form of worship -- that's why we invented prayer services around 400 B.C. Perhaps the Ultra-orthodox would like to, but they are such a tiny minority that their voice is generally ignored, even if that perfect Red Heifer should suddenly appear. Only if a provable Messiah should come, who can demonstrate direct and legitimate descent down the male line from King David (no bastards or adoptions allowed), will the notion even be contemplated.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-09-02 17:47|| 2005-09-02 17:47|| Front Page Top

#8 Ratz, my descentd is kinda vague before 1800, I assume they were human. Us black angus out of the question?

Posted by Shipman 2005-09-02 18:46|| 2005-09-02 18:46|| Front Page Top

#9 Me, too, Shipman. But I'll bet with that Black Angus in your ancestry, you are one good looking gentleman! Although I imagine you might be grateful that hairy masculine backs are coming back into fashion. (No, I do not understand the trend, but I didn't understand the trend toward dolphin-like hairlessness either.)

Posted by trailing wife 2005-09-02 19:24|| 2005-09-02 19:24|| Front Page Top

#10 disturbing, TW. That's all I can add...

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-09-02 19:35|| 2005-09-02 19:35|| Front Page Top

#11 But it is our beloved Shipman, Frank. What else could I have said? ;-)

Posted by trailing wife 2005-09-02 23:41|| 2005-09-02 23:41|| Front Page Top

00:01 Zhang Fei
00:00 3dc
23:50 Red Dog
23:48 .com
23:41 trailing wife
23:39 Fred
23:38 Homer
23:38 .com
23:36 ed
23:27 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
23:24 Jan
23:17 .com
23:16 LC FOTSGreg
23:09 49 pan
23:05 ed
23:03 Jan
23:03 Stephen
22:53 Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom
22:52 Homer
22:48 Jan
22:46 Alaska Paul
22:44 Jan
22:36 Alaska Paul
22:32 Jackal