Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
Re: HSIG - Judea And Samaria versus The West Bank -
6/10/2009 2:50:05 AM
 Hello Friends,

There are so many issues that need to be discussed and covered but after seeing today's Dry Bones it brought again to a head the bias of main stream media in their "reporting" from the area.

Different terms for the same thing are part of their expertise. The example that Dry Bones used today is "settlement" versus "village". One is for the Arabs and the other for the Jews living in Judea and Samaria.

BTW, another example of distorting the truth by MSM is the usage of "extremists" rather then terrorists. Something B Hussein adopted as well (see his infamous Cairo speech).

Now there will be those that are ignorant of the facts that will say that this is occupied territory but they would be wrong. When the area was partitioned Judea and Samaria was part of Israel and the then Trans Jordan (puppet kingdom of the UK) attacked and captured this area. They changed the name to the West Bank cos Judea and Samaria were mentioned in all the documents prior to that as being part of Israel and they wanted to legitimize their claim by renaming it. So after the 6 Day War when Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem were united the real name was "born" again.

Ignore history and the Bible if you will but there is no getting around facts as you'll see from the below article and maps.

Shalom,

Peter



The terminology that the media uses conveys so much! And we, the consumers of their news reports, are often so uninformed and/or unthinking that we swallow the hook embedded in the tidbits that they feed us. So it is that, on the West Bank, Jews live in "settlements" while Arabs live in towns, villages, and cities. And while we're at it there's the term "West Bank" itself.

Like most folks, I'm comfortable with "West Bank" as a neutral, innocent, geographical phrase ..while the use of "Judea and Samaria" is politically motivated and is what the "settlers" and right wing Israelis call it ...right?

Actually that's wrong! It's another rewrite of history that we've swallowed. Consider the following:

Dry Bones

http://www.contender.org/articles/gstart001.htm

Why is Judea and Samaria Vanishing?

By Dr. Steve Carol

Have Judea and Samaria been figuratively lost? Judea and Samaria are the historically biblical names for the highland regions of the Land of Israel, with Samaria in the north and Judea to the south. They are the definitive and proper political and geographic names for the region and have been in general use since Clearchus, a disciple of Aristotle. These two areas have no other names. These names were used during the League of Nations Mandate period. They appear in British government documents, United Nations documents including the UN Partition Plan of 1947. They appear in U.S. State Department documents, including a July 18, 1948 map. Even as late as 1961, the Encyclopaedia Britannica refers to “Judaea” and “Samaria” in an article on “Palestine” (Vol. 17, p. 118).

Trans-Jordan illegally invaded Judea-Samaria in 1948 and as a result of its aggression occupied that region. It then unilaterally annexed the area on April 4, 1950, which was recognized by only two nations, the United Kingdom and Pakistan.
The Arab League, their Muslim supporters, anti-Israel elements and anti-Semites, deliberately sought to rob the region of its correct political and geographic name. They had to fabricate a brand new name for they could find no other name for the territory. Mislabeling was their technique of disinformation and de-legitimization. The “West Bank” was the name concocted by King Abdullah I of Trans-Jordan and his British advisors, allowing the king to annex land outside of his artificially “created” kingdom. He then changed the name of his kingdom twice, first to “The Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan” but that was quickly rejected since it gave the appearance of a kingdom only along the banks of the Jordan River. The name then was changed again to the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.” The term “West Bank” eradicates all Jewish historical connection to the area. It is a sad commentary that many in the West, including the political left, many Israel’s supporters, some Israelis themselves, as well as the naïve and self-delusional who think the name does not matter, have acquiesced to this unilateral change of names and use it in common parlance. But the name does matter. Similarly, the Arabs insist on calling the Persian Gulf, the “Arabian Gulf” and Iran’s Khuzistan province, “Arabistan.” Why then doesn’t much of the world call the Persian Gulf “Arabian?” Is there a double standard at work here?

Besides the political origins of the phrase, one must wonder from a geographical perspective how wide a river bank can be? A river bank may be a few feet or so, but not some 30 miles deep from the river! Just because a new name is invented, does not mean the world should adopt it in common usage. Does an aggressor get rewarded with the additional bonus of a geographic name change designed to eradicate the historic name of a region? In March 1939, Germany renamed the present-day Czech Republic, “Böhmen und Mähren” after seizing that land by aggressive act. During World War II, Germany invaded, occupied and annexed part of Russia calling it “Ostland.” Do we use those terms today? Do we call Mexico the “South Bank” because it borders on the Rio Grande? Should we rename Serbia, the “West Bank” (of Europe) because it lies to the west of the Danube River and re-designate Poland the “East Bank” due to its location east of the Oder-Neisse Rivers?

Long before most of media capitulated to protests over Danish cartoons and statements by the Pope, the media and many in the world, out of fear and intellectual laziness agreed to obfuscate the truth by surrendering the use of the name Judea-Samaria and adopt the term “West Bank.”

The Roman emperor Hadrian in 135 CE after suppressing the Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba, attempted to eradicate Jewish nationhood, statehood and any connection to the Land of Israel. He renamed the territory “Palestina” - after the Philistines, the ancient adversaries of the Israelites. Seeking to erase the Jewish connection to Jerusalem the Romans razed the city and named the city built atop the rubble, “Aelia Capitolina.” Nevertheless as late as the 4th century, the Christian author, Epiphanius, referred to “Palestina, that is Judea.” Despite this “Palestina” is still Israel, Aelia Capitolina is still Jerusalem and the West Bank is still Judea-Samaria.

Dr. Steve Carol
Prof. of History (retired)
Senior Fellow Center for Advanced Middle East Studies http://www.camesinfo.com/
Official Historian “Middle East Radio Forum” http://www.middleeastradioforum.org/
Scottsdale, Arizona

Below: I've circled the Judea and Samaria regions on this detail of a French map of the area from 1791.

Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Helen Elias

801
1370 Posts
1370
Invite Me as a Friend
Re: HSIG - Judea And Samaria versus The West Bank -
6/10/2009 5:23:09 AM


Thank you, Peter, for the interesting piece of history.  I still have a lot to learn about Israel and the surrounding area.

Helen
zhebee@yahoo.com
Spend $4 and get back $10 every time you spend. Contact me (Helen) at this email »»» zhebee@yahoo.com
+0
Geketa Holman

858
2080 Posts
2080
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 100 Poster
Person Of The Week
Re: HSIG - Judea And Samaria versus The West Bank -
6/10/2009 7:59:09 AM
Hi Peter ,

Yep, the media are so good at pandering to the leftist agenda no matter where it is in the world. Is this something like calling the "Marxist Communist"  here in the US democrats? :)

Shalom,

Geketa

Hear, O Israel the L-rd our G-d,the L-rd is one http://www.DHGBoutique.com
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
Re: HSIG - Judea And Samaria versus The West Bank -
6/10/2009 9:51:21 AM

Hi Geketa,

That about covers it. MSM knows no bounds and is very accomplished in giving shades to their "reporting" that suit their needs.

MSM, is way left of center to put it mildly and that should be obvious and evident to all by now.

Shalom,

Peter

Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
Re: HSIG - Women's Rights In Islam and Shariah Law - Not What BHO Claims
6/10/2009 9:55:02 AM
Hello Friends,

One of the points raised by B Hussein in his infamous Cairo speech was the equality of women under Islam. His only complaint was that women aren't allowed to study in Islamic countries. What a joke. I wonder what Koran and world the great pretender is living in.

But since his main objective was and is to appease Islam, his liege and prove beyond a doubt that he is their man in the White House it doesn't surprise us very much.

Below please read the article about the true rights women have in Islam and that's only the tip of the iceberg.

Remember, the list below doesn't include honor killings that are happening everyday world wide including the US.

Shalom,

Peter



Dear Peter,

In the very near future we will begin the launch of our 2009 “Stop Shariah Now” campaign. This will be an integrated grassroots, lobbying and public relations effort designed to raise public awareness and push for public policies that expose Shariah law and its infiltration into the United States.

Shariah Islamic law is infiltrating America through vehicles such as Shariah compliant finance products offered by major financial institutions, including UBS, AIG, Citibank and HSBC. It has been reported to us that members of the Muslim Students Association in southern California have been seen chanting their demands for Shariah law during public demonstrations. We have also seen reports that estimate between 50,000 and 100,000 Muslims in America are practicing polygamy, a practice allowed under Shariah law.

Recently, a report surfaced on the internet that Lisa Ashton, a flight attendant with British Midland Airways, was fired for refusing to wear a traditional Islamic robe and walk behind male colleagues while in public in Saudi Arabia. This is the consequence of Shariah law in a society and a Western nation’s effort to bend over backwards to accommodate it.

The next time you hear someone claim that Islam affords equal rights and protections to women, pull out the “Top 10” list below. You might want to add that in one of the hadith (the sayings and traditions of Mohammed), Mohammed claimed he was given a look into hell and saw that it was filled mostly with women because they were ungrateful to their husbands (Sahih Bukhari 2,18,61).


Top 10 Quran quotes every woman MUST SEE

January 11, 2008 by Infidelesto on • Comments

http://infidelsarecool.com/2008/01/11/top-10-quran-quotes-every-woman-must-see/


Tell every woman you know about these verses. The oppression of women that Islam advocates is not only disturbing, but is direct contrast with everything that Western civilization stands for when it comes to the rights of women.

These are referenced from an article published from the American Thinker in 2005. Each one goes into much greater detail if you are interested in reading more on each verse. The article is here: Top 10 rules in the Quran that oppress women

10. A husband has sex with his wife, as a plow goes into a field.

The Quran in Sura (Chapter) 2:223 says:

Your women are your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like . . . . (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur’an, Oxford UP, 2004)

9. Husbands are a degree above their wives.

The Quran in Sura 2:228 says:

. . . Wives have the same rights as the husbands have on them in accordance with the generally known principles. Of course, men are a degree above them in status . . . (Sayyid Abul A’La Maududi, The Meaning of the Qur’an, vol. 1, p. 165)

8. A male gets a double share of the inheritance over that of a female.

The Quran in Sura 4:11 says:

The share of the male shall be twice that of a female . . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 311)

7. A woman’s testimony counts half of a man’s testimony.

The Quran in Sura 2:282 says:

And let two men from among you bear witness to all such documents [contracts of loans without interest]. But if two men be not available, there should be one man and two women to bear witness so that if one of the women forgets (anything), the other may remind her. (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 205).

6. A wife may remarry her ex-husband if and only if she marries another man and then this second man divorces her.

The Quran in Sura 2:230 says:

And if the husband divorces his wife (for the third time), she shall not remain his lawful wife after this (absolute) divorce, unless she marries another husband and the second husband divorces her. [In that case] there is no harm if they [the first couple] remarry . . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 165)

5. Slave-girls are sexual property for their male owners.

The Quran in Sura 4:24 says:

And forbidden to you are wedded wives of other people except those who have fallen in your hands [as prisoners of war] . . . (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 319).

4. A man may be polygamous with up to four wives.

The Quran in Sura 4:3 says:

And if you be apprehensive that you will not be able to do justice to the orphans, you may marry two or three or four women whom you choose. But if you apprehend that you might not be able to do justice to them, then marry only one wife, or marry those who have fallen in your possession. (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 305)

3. A husband may simply get rid of one of his undesirable wives.

The Quran in Sura 4:129 says:

It is not within your power to be perfectly equitable in your treatment with all your wives, even if you wish to be so; therefore, [in order to satisfy the dictates of Divine Law] do not lean towards one wife so as to leave the other in a state of suspense. (Maududi, vol. 1, p. 381)

2. Husbands may hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives (quite apart from whether they actually are highhanded).

The Quran in Sura 4:34 says:

4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (Haleem, emphasis added)

1. Mature men are allowed to marry prepubescent girls.

The Quran in Sura 65:1, 4 says:

65:1 O Prophet, when you [and the believers] divorce women, divorce them for their prescribed waiting—period and count the waiting—period accurately . . . 4 And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. As for pregnant women, their period ends when they have delivered their burden. (Maududi, vol. 5, pp. 599 and 617, emphasis added)


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!