Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The State of Israel - A Surrogate Crusade?


Raptor Witness

Recommended Posts

I keep hearing over and over on these boards that the "Crusaders" have all gone home.

Have they really?

Isn't Israel just a surrogate crusade, created by Christian Colonials as part of the Balfour Declaration in 1917?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And Hamas/Hezbollah is the spearhead of the Islamic Crusade to regain Andalucía.

Along with Muslim populations in other countries that refuse to assimilate and demand Sharia Law. That’s Crusades with colonialization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I should've made this a poll to see how many understand the purpose of the Crusades.

So let's see what first pops up in the first definition, which appears on Google.

After all, definitions are what define law in the West, and real motives often have to be extracted. We'll call it Christian law as opposed to Sharia law.

Crusades:

Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - "The Crusades were military campaigns sanctioned by the Latin Roman Catholic Church during the High Middle Ages and Late Middle Ages. In 1095, Pope Urban II proclaimed the First Crusade with the stated goal of restoring Christian access to holy places in and near Jerusalem."

"Christian access to holy places?"

What do you think Christian access would be like under "Sharia law, or whatever the Palestinians decided to follow in the future?

And hasn't it been an unending series of military campaigns, which have been required to maintain that state, all supported by the Christian West, and by "support" I mean billions in aid, much of it military?

I wouldn't be surprised but what it's at 1 trillion or more by now.

Granting Israel statehood, guaranteed "Christian access."

Unless someone here has another motive in mind. I seriously doubt that guilt over World War II, alone, would have been enough.

How else does one account for the appearance of the Jewish state where none had existed for almost 2000 years. It didn't just appear out of thin air. It took money, a lot of money.

It still takes a lot of money.

My support for Israel, doesn't mean I have to be blind to see what's really going on.

It's the equivalent of the Europeans funding a state for the American Indians in the western US, which in effect would make them surrogate warriors.

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God works in Mysterious ways his miracles to achieve. You don't give Him credit OR glory for what he is doing RW. I wonder if you will even after they survive what's coming on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A more eloborate view on the declaration and circonstances can be found here:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p389_John.html

Intriguating.

For me it is not necessary to have a fixed and ever expanding homeland for Jewish people called Israel, the movement is international and will be.

Children of the house of Israel can not be confined and limited to what we understand as Jewism or a state like Israel.

I can understand the story of the state Israel can come accross as a kind of colonization, this doesn't make one popular unless there is something to put against or to fight with.

I'm not sure if it is a Christian colonization. Why should Christians strive for permanent asylum for the foo's of the Christ, unless they got tricked in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God works in Mysterious ways his miracles to achieve. You don't give Him credit OR glory for what he is doing RW. I wonder if you will even after they survive what's coming on them.

I believe very much in the miracle of how Israel will be saved, and if you'll note, I did call it "their land."

Miracles are my speciality, especially those which threaten the survival of not just Israel, but all the rest.

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that the Europeans will support my proposal to declare independent statehood for all the American Indian Reservations in the U.S.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe very much in the miracle of how Israel will be saved, and if you'll note, I did call it "their land."

Miracles are my speciality, especially those which threaten the survival of not just Israel, but all the rest.

What threatens us is US and our attitude toward our Creator I think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What threatens us is US and our attitude toward our Creator I think.

If you ask most Christians in the U.S. if they will welcome the plagues that will soon destroy U.S., would they say, "Yes?"

They welcome God saving Israel, but they will reject the destruction of their own land by the same pair of hands.

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you ask most Christians in the U.S. if they will welcome the plagues that will soon destroy U.S., would they say, "Yes?"

They welcome God saving Israel, but they will reject the destruction of their own land by the same pair of hands.

I think they will not "welcome" the destruction but they will understand why it is happening and pray for all who are harmed in it. At least that is my belief. I don't hate those who willfully bring about their own doom. I feel sad for them. And let's not forget that Israel is only about 33% "saved". The remnant will be small. In fact ALL the earth will have a frightfully small group who survive to see wisdom.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they will not "welcome" the destruction but they will understand why it is happening and pray for all who are harmed in it. At least that is my belief. I don't hate those who willfully bring about their own doom. I feel sad for them. And let's not forget that Israel is only about 33% "saved". The remnant will be small. In fact ALL the earth will have a frightfully small group who survive to see wisdom.

We can always petition for more, as Abraham did before the Lord of the Earth destroyed Sodom.

Yet, did a thousand bloodied in Russia by a fiery meteor change their minds?

Perhaps it is time they know who sent it, because it was perfectly timed; as perfect as the rescue of the House of Israel, will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you use the same logic as the Balfour Declaration, noted in the OP, you can see that it's not really any different than asking for the same deal, for the American Indians.

Each tribe with land of their own, as established by the Congress deserves independent statehood, just as much as the Israelis, and I welcome European support of my proposal.

It's time each and every one of these reservations, declares statehood.

Who can deny them this, given the precedent setting case that we've already seen set?

16605137671_37c8ba02f3_b.jpg

Source:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Israel wasn't created by the Balfour Decleration.

Israel wasn't created by the United Nations decleration.

Israel was created by the Jews clumping together and declaring a state, and then defending that state.

Self determination: THAT is the "precedent setting case"

The American Indians tried that, and failed. Possibly because they where not a united whole, but a number of individual - often competing - tribes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel wasn't created by the Balfour Decleration.

Israel wasn't created by the United Nations decleration.

Israel was created by the Jews clumping together and declaring a state, and then defending that state.

Self determination: THAT is the "precedent setting case"

The American Indians tried that, and failed. Possibly because they where not a united whole, but a number of individual - often competing - tribes.

It was actually created by Britain at the end of WW2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you use the same logic as the Balfour Declaration, noted in the OP, you can see that it's not really any different than asking for the same deal, for the American Indians.

Each tribe with land of their own, as established by the Congress deserves independent statehood, just as much as the Israelis, and I welcome European support of my proposal.

It's time each and every one of these reservations, declares statehood.

Who can deny them this, given the precedent setting case that we've already seen set?

Except that is no precedent setting case. If you use the same logic as the Balfour Declaration then that would mean that the US plays the part of the Ottoman Empire and then lost a portion of its territory by treaty. Just for argument’s sake let’s say that’s all lands west of the Mississippi. Then this conquering nation for its own reasons decided to return hereditary lands back to the Indians. That will be problematic. What conquering nation would want to give up that territory? But let’s say that they do, many hereditary lands are east of the Mississippi. For example, the Cherokee that are found in Oklahoma today, their hereditary lands are in Georgia. So based on your premise, they become the Fellahin, squatters on land that doesn’t belong to them. Let’s say that the Osage, who were the original inhabitants of NE Oklahoma, claim their hereditary lands. This would displace the Cherokee. What would the Cherokee elders say? I don’t think any Cherokee would be happy. But let’s say that the Osage declare statehood but are willing to coexist side-by-side with the Cherokee. Do you think that the Cherokee would be willing to do that? It depends on the history between the two. What if there is just too much conflict between the two and the Cherokee reject the offer? Armed struggle would probably erupt as the conquering nation wouldn’t have enough forces to maintain the peace. Eventually, they would just pull out of the area and leave the locals to their own solutions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel wasn't created by the Balfour Decleration.

Israel wasn't created by the United Nations decleration.

Israel was created by the Jews clumping together and declaring a state, and then defending that state.

Self determination: THAT is the "precedent setting case"

The American Indians tried that, and failed. Possibly because they where not a united whole, but a number of individual - often competing - tribes.

Is that roofie I am listening to who always claim how Israel is a legitimate state after wining some vote in UN ? :unsure2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also an established premise that possession is 9/10 ths of the law. The American Indians who are sitting on their respective reservations have already been in possession for plenty long to set up an independent state.

The ability to defend territory shouldn't be the limiting criteria. After all, the Israelis couldn't defend themselves without U.S. support, and they are FAR more costly and problematic for the American People.

The American Indians deserve the same deal, and we certainly owe far more to them than to Israel.

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that roofie I am listening to who always claim how Israel is a legitimate state after wining some vote in UN ? :unsure2:

No, this is his evil twin, who eats your car and spills your beer.

Ummm...... Jeem.... when have I ever stated that the legitimacy of Israel as a state grew out of a vote in the UN ?

There is also an established premise that possession is 9/10 ths of the law. The American Indians who are sitting on their respective reservations have already been in possession for plenty long to set up an independent state.

The ability to defend territory shouldn't be the limiting criteria. After all, the Israelis couldn't defend themselves without U.S. support, and they are FAR more costly and problematic for the American People.

Umm.... I really don't think THAT is true RW ? The Israeli's defended themselves pretty well without US Military aid. In terms of cost, the bulk of that "aid" has to be spent on American equipment. Effectively, the majority of US Military Aid to Israel is actually a US taxpayer-funded "gift" to benefit various US aerospace companies. As for being "problematic" for the American People, then I would have to say that.... ummm...... ummmm.... yeah... OK... you've got me on THAT one; they probably ARE.... ROFL...

Your suggestion appears to be that the Native American tribes would be a better benefactor of the Aid Money than the Israeli's. Hmmm..... you may have a point.

Imagine if the NA Tribes had gotten all of those F16's and tanks and whatnot, instead of the Israeli's ?

Now that WOULD give the FBI something to worry about - to say nothing of the Pentagon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, this is his evil twin, who eats your car and spills your beer.

Ummm...... Jeem.... when have I ever stated that the legitimacy of Israel as a state grew out of a vote in the UN ?

Umm.... I really don't think THAT is true RW ? The Israeli's defended themselves pretty well without US Military aid. In terms of cost, the bulk of that "aid" has to be spent on American equipment. Effectively, the majority of US Military Aid to Israel is actually a US taxpayer-funded "gift" to benefit various US aerospace companies. As for being "problematic" for the American People, then I would have to say that.... ummm...... ummmm.... yeah... OK... you've got me on THAT one; they probably ARE.... ROFL...

Your suggestion appears to be that the Native American tribes would be a better benefactor of the Aid Money than the Israeli's. Hmmm..... you may have a point.

Imagine if the NA Tribes had gotten all of those F16's and tanks and whatnot, instead of the Israeli's ?

Now that WOULD give the FBI something to worry about - to say nothing of the Pentagon.

The idea of a boozed up Creek or Choctaw driving an M1 Abrams is a frightening prospect :w00t: I am of Cherokee descent and my sister married a Creek so I'm allowed to diss them!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also an established premise that possession is 9/10 ths of the law. The American Indians who are sitting on their respective reservations have already been in possession for plenty long to set up an independent state.

So some arbitrary amount of time is all that matters? Sounds like you are backpedaling now; seems that hereditary lands of the Cherokee don’t matter to you now. In that case, then where does this idea come from that America should return land to the Indians in the first place? America has certainly occupied this land long enough to own it. Taking it to the next step, don’t you think Israel has been there long enough to claim the 9/10ths?

The ability to defend territory shouldn't be the limiting criteria. After all, the Israelis couldn't defend themselves without U.S. support,

It is a very limiting criterion. If you can’t defend yourself, then there is no nation. The ’48 borders were a joke when it came to self-defense. But they defended themselves very well without us. We didn’t start supporting them militarily until the early 70s. Prior to that, Muslim nations received more aid from us. It was primarily the Soviet Union and France that provided military aid to Israel. Today, the support they do get from us is nominal. Mostly in the form of contracts to develop missile defense systems (note: defensive weapons, not offensive).

and they are FAR more costly and problematic for the American People.

How is it problematic? Costly? USAID runs about $30 billion a year of which about 1/4th goes to Israel, Egypt, and Jordan. Which in itself is negligible to our budget.

The American Indians deserve the same deal, and we certainly owe far more to them than to Israel.

The American Indian does not deserve the same deal. The Indian has been absorbed into the American culture or the American culture has been absorbed into Indian culture, depends on how you view it. What culture is England? Celtic, Saxon, Norman or what? The Celts were the American Indian of Europe so should modern European nations return their territory to the Celts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to fairness, for other claims of "indigenous status," I can see the blindness here resulting from a religious motive.

if religion if the underlying difference in attitude here, this suggests that in effect, the State of Israel amounts to another, albeit, surrogate Crusade.

It should also be obvious by now that these are not stupid Muslims who believe this. They can see U.S. lying to ourselves.

I don't say that it's a surrogate Crusade because I want to see Israel removed from their land.

I'm speaking the truth, because that's what the Holy Spirit does. It speaks truth to power with real power to back it up. A nation without self-examination is already Spiritually dead.

In the end, God doesn't rescue Israel for their sake, and that is written in the Torah. He utterly despises them for what they're doing. So why are Christians so blind to this? Ans. Because it's a surrogate Crusade, giving them access to their holy places.

We are as guilty for doing to the American Indians, as what the Palestinians are doing to Israel. The only difference is, the American Indians gave up for fear of genocide. So who are we to preach to anybody about land rights for indigenous peoples, in the face of genocide?

Edited by Raptor Witness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.