Monday, March 15, 2010

MPACUK: ‘Is your MP a Zionist?’

So enquires the self-styled, self-appointed, self-absorbed Muslim Public Affairs Committee (a sort of Islamist BNP), as they list Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs and prospective MPs who are members of their respective Conservative/Labour/LibDem Friends of Israel.

Without even defining the term, analysing any statements or even bothering to mention the fact that some of these politicians also happen to be members of various ‘Friends of Palestine’ groups, MPAC suggests that they are somehow ‘enemies of Islam’ merely by virtue of expressing friendship towards Israel.

They even single out the Conservative candidate for Harrow East, Bob Blackman, as a ‘strong supporter’ of Conservative Friends of Israel, though there is no indication, other than his attendance at a recent CfI reception, of why he is ‘stronger’ than, say Robert Halfon.

Foolishly, they omit the name of David Cameron, who, while apparently not a member of Conservative Friends of Israel, is one of the few who has stated unequivocally that he is a Zionist, expressed pride that he is, and helpfully expounded what he means by the term.

Moreover, he has also said that his belief in Israel is ‘very deep’ inside of him and ‘indestructible’.

By expressing his love for Israel, Mr Cameron gave his unequivocal imprimatur to the Conservative Friends of Israel, to the accomplishments of Lord Balfour, and to the Christian Zionist movement. When he spoke of ‘the right of Israel to exist, to defend itself and to live in peace and security’, he affirmed not only the Jewish national homeland but also the unique contribution that Judaism has made to the culture and history of all mankind.

It sounds as though MPAC might have omitted a ‘strong supporter’ of Zionism, which is quite an omission considering he is likely to be the next prime minister.

But without any context, commentary or explanation for publishing this list of names, one is left to infer that MPAC are conveying a (not-so-)subliminal message to the Ummah that Muslims ought not to vote (at the very least) for these politicians.

Especially the ‘strong’ ones.

I you want to understand MPAC’s take on Zionism, have a look at their article on the ‘Zionist scam’.

With a description which could have been lifted directly from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, they refer to Zionists as ‘the masters of human psychology and propaganda’ who have used their mysterious enlightened knowledge ‘to devastating effect’.

We are told that the Zionists’ principal weapon of defence is ‘the slur “anti-Semite”’, by which they ‘neutralise’ the enemy. And so the ‘Zionists get lots of access and pro-Palestinian Muslims get none. The perfect gag with no clues left behind, no finger prints, no need to march, no need to burn flags, or riot to silence the opposition…. it’s almost genius’.

Zionism, they aver, is a ‘scam’. The cry of anti-Semitism is ‘an old trick that Zionists have used against Muslims for some time now.’

And they conclude:

‘The Jewish community, thanks to many of them adopting the evil political ideology of Zionism, has a large amount of Islamophobia and Muslim-hatred within it.’

Observe the ease with which they segue from Zionists and Israel to ‘the Jewish community’.

And then they exhort Muslim groups to ‘stop either hiding or apologising and start to go on the offensive’.

And what might these ‘backward Muslim groups’ to which they refer understand by the incitement to ‘go on the offensive’?

The comment thread assists:

Zionists are the biggest anti-semites as they have for the last 60 years murdered-tortured and humiliated millions of arab semites daily.
They are the biggest racists and bigots when jews from anywhere in the world can come and live in occupied palestine yet millions of palestinians refugees have no right of return.

Killing innocent people and stealing their land and harvestiing their organs is the worst type of anti-Semitism and it is encouraged by and actioned by the state of Israel. Israel is the most anti-Semitic rogue terrorist state out there.
It preys on the Semite Palestinians so get your facts right you zionist apologist.

Nice, huh?

So, while incidences of anti-Semitism increase exponentially in the UK; while Coptic Christians continue to be slaughtered and persecuted; while plucky little Israel is assailed by every Gentile nation on earth, and even presently by the United States of America; while the building and dedication of synagogues even in ‘democratic’ Egypt are limited; it is only in Jerusalem that Zionism may be understood, appreciated and celebrated.

Israel has just completed the rebuilding of one of the most symbolically important synagogues in history. The Hurva was in its time not only the tallest Jewish landmark in Jerusalem and an architectural archetype for synagogues around the world; it was also a forum for public assemblies: ‘In that synagogue the city's Jews held a memorial service for Queen Victoria; celebrated the coronation of King George V; thrilled to the orations of such Zionist leaders as Theodor Herzl and Zeev Jabotinsky; and, in 1942, conducted a mass prayer service for the victims of Hitler's genocide.’

‘The reconstruction of this most storied of Jerusalem's synagogues may or may not be attended by a failure of imagination or by the pious illusion that the original still stands. What is clear is that the inauguration of the old-new Hurva — twice destroyed, and now twice rebuilt — represents a deep and irrepressible Israeli urge to heal and rebuild, not in order to obscure memory but to preserve it.’

This expresses something of the essence of Zionism.

But Zionism, according to MPACUK, is an ‘evil political ideology’.

Can you imagine the cries of outrage and squeals of ‘Islamophobia’ if a Jewish group (or, actually, a group of any non-Islamic faith) were to publish a website article listing all the members of political ‘Friends of Palestine’ groups, leaving us to infer that the Palestinian cause is somehow amoral and these politicians are not worthy of our votes?

Dare one suggest that Islamophobia does not actually exist, or is 'a scam'; that it is merely a slur by Islamists to ‘neutralise’ the opposition in order to further a political agenda?


Anonymous philip walling said...

I don't think we should be getting into this; it's on a fault line in global human relations, intractable and, I'm tempted to say, one is as bad as the other at causing endless cruelty and human misery.

15 March 2010 at 08:40  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Oh, and I meant to say, that Christ taught us to forgive our enemies and pray for those that hate us, but there's little sign of that between these two Semitic peoples.

15 March 2010 at 08:44  
Anonymous Trencherbone said...

Muslim hatred of the Jews has nothing to do with Israel. It is intrinsic to Islam and goes back to the foundation of the death-cult.

15 March 2010 at 08:46  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your Grace

Thatcher understood why she loved the Jews for we Christians know that we have been grafted onto their vine.

"Those who bless my people will be blessed and those who CURSE my people will be cursed."

Every time one curses, attacks or slanders Jews one automatically receives the curse on one’s family for four generations.

I wonder what Cameron’s motivation is?

15 March 2010 at 09:07  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

What is there to say without falling into one of two categories, or even both anti-Semite and Islamaphobic. They both have a powerful tendency to get on my tits to be honest, but if I have to choose then Islam loses every time: sorry guys but it's all the stone throwing, beheading and the silly desert clothing; it's backwards, dangerous and it basically sucks.

15 March 2010 at 09:34  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Isn't this stupid list and it's raison d'etre incitement to racial and religious hatred courtesy of the peace loving Muslims? Enquiring minds want to know...

15 March 2010 at 09:35  
Anonymous graham Wood said...

Mr Singh. I normally agree with almost all that you post, but not on this occasion. You say:
""Those who bless my people will be blessed and those who CURSE my people will be cursed" - & etc.

I think you are mixing up your Covenants.
The "curse" of Gen. 12:3 was primarily an OT Covenant directed against heathen nations which would oppose the God of Israel and his people. It no longer applies for we are now under an entirely New Covenant, of our Lord Jesus Christ. The curses and anathemas of national Israel do not apply today.
Israel today is a largely secular, Godless, and militaristic nation, and not to be conflated with the "Israel" of the OT.
I suggest none of this is relevant to the ongoing debates about the relationship between Israel and her Arab neighbours.
People are blessed or cursed not by how they treat todays Israel, but rather how they respond to Christ's claims upon their lives.

15 March 2010 at 10:10  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Marvellous Mr Wood!

I agree. Mr Singh has uncharacteristically gone astray here.

We are under the New Covenant, which I was trying to hint at earlier.
It is those who respond to Christ's call who are saved; there's precious little of that on either side in the Middle East.

15 March 2010 at 10:21  
Blogger jdennis_99 said...

I don't get this - why does anyone, anywhere, think that the existence of Israel and the existence of Palestine are mutually exclusive concepts?

Israelis have a right to exist in freedom, and to defend that freedom accordingly. So do Palestinians. OK, the Palestinians have it worse off - Israel is engaged in an illegal occupation of their territory. But the destruction of Israel is not a precondition for a free Palestine, nor vice versa.

15 March 2010 at 10:29  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

An interesting article let down by the cheap ‘a sort of islamist BNP’ jibe worthy of a prospective member of the marxist NUJ. Judging by the overwhelming number of positive BNP comments that I read in the Friday and Saturday editions of the main online ‘news’ papers regarding the crude Mugabe-style attempt by Labour/EHRC to crush the BNP it would appear that people are at long last waking up to the fact that the real fascists are their own government and the islamists. Having voted Tory at every general election I’m quite frankly appalled that the Conservatives under Cameron have not and, it seems, will not be opposing the very real and growing threat of islamo-fascism. This would surely lead to outright victory and not a hung parliament. Instead, just like Labour, they ignore their loyal core voters and pander to the islamic vote at every level. I’ve a bloody good mind to vote BNP myself at the general election.

15 March 2010 at 10:46  
Anonymous graham Wood said...

jdennis_99 said...

I don't get this - why does anyone, anywhere, think that the existence of Israel and the existence of Palestine are mutually exclusive concepts?

Quite agree with this, and it bears out what most enlightened politicians have understood and worked for over the past few decades.
There appear to be two solutions:
A That the Israeli government give all Palestinians and Arabs within Israel full equality and rights of domicile as enjoyed by their Jewish neighbours.

B OR, the two State solution which many continue to push for, nd which is possible, but for obfuscation for political ends by both Palestianian and Israeli leaderships.

The seeming insurmountable barrier still remains, and that is Israel's ongoing claim - to territorial possession of "the land" under the Old Covenant. (unfortunately stimulated and supported by naive "far right" fundamentalist Christians mainly in the USA and UK based on a mis-reading of biblical "prophecy)

In any event, possession of the land was always conditional on Israel's obedience to God - which they forfeited again and again.
Hence the Captivity, and later, the terrible events of AD70 when the Roman Armies destroyed Jerusalem and Israel was ejected from the land.

15 March 2010 at 10:53  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

The statement that Israel has a right to exist doesn’t stand up. The Balfour stitch-up created an insoluble dispute and Israel’s continued occupation and settlement building on land that the conquered during the Six day War is unconscionable. If Germany had won WWII and occupied part of the UK would those of who resisted the occupation have been freedom fighters or terrorists’; is this not the same as Hamas refusing to recognise the State of Israel?

And guess what at the heart of this disaster is religion, yes all three of the “great” religions ensuring that people cannot live together because of ridiculous Biblical claims and competing versions of an Iron Age myth.

15 March 2010 at 11:11  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

I wonder that if or when oil becomes redundant/obsolete, how many of us will give a toss about either Israel or Palestine?

What good reason was there for the "Balfour stitch up" anyway? Oil manipulation and a foothold in the Middle East. Without Israel we would have lost the Middle East to other dangerous nations, and we would be over run with stone-throwing beheaders.

15 March 2010 at 11:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Walling and Mr Wood

I only wish I had studied theology.

It seems to me that although the prohibition on eating shrimps, for example, no longer applies to us the moral precepts of the Old Testament do.

The law allowed for oaths and ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’; but it is written in the New Testament ‘… swear not al all…’ and ‘… resist not evil…’ The law forbids adultery but Christ forbids lust; the law prohibits murder but Christ forbids anger – it appears that Jesus is more radical than the Old Testament.

It seems to me that we are permitted to eat shrimps (banned in the Old Testament) and to see moral precepts in the Old Testament as a guide to moral behaviour (the prohibition on homosexuality, for example).

Is cursing Israel wrong? Assuredly it is: it is what comes out of the mouth of a man that pollutes him and not the shrimp that enters his stomach.

15 March 2010 at 11:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Davis, feel free to read some history. The Balfour declaration had exactly nothing to do with the creation of the State of Israel. It was one of many such declarations - the Kaiser made one and so did Faisal one of the heads of the minute percentage of Arabs who sorta fought on the UK side in WW1. The British just happened the last of many people who had control of the place before Israel came into being. Most Israeli Jews came AFTER 1948 because in 1939 at the peak of the need for a safe haven for Jews, the British shut down all immigration as a result of Arab violence.

So to follow your analogy, the Nazis would have been right to "resist" as freedom fighters the occupation of their land by Britain, France, USA and Russia? Or maybe Germans today should be fighting the Poles for East Prussia? Because unlike Palestine that actuall was an independent kingdom. Not that it makes any difference, Hamas has regularly and repeatedly said it will not accept the existence of the State of Israel. Repeatedly and clearly, especially when pathetic apologists for terrorists try and claim otherwise.


15 March 2010 at 12:02  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Davis you know nothing about this subject: so shut yer gob.

15 March 2010 at 12:05  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Balfour Declaration of 1917
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the declaration regarding the relationship between the Dominions and Great Britain, see Balfour Declaration of 1926.

Arthur James Balfour.The Balfour Declaration of 1917 (dated 2 November 1917) was a formal statement of policy by the British government stating that

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."[1]
The declaration was made in a letter from Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, a Zionist organization. The letter reflected the position of the British Cabinet, as agreed upon in a meeting on 31 October 1917. It further stated that the declaration is a sign of "sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations."

The statement was issued through the efforts of Chaim Weizmann and Nahum Sokolow, the principal Zionist leaders based in London; as they had asked for the reconstitution of Palestine as “the” Jewish national home the declaration fell short of Zionist expectations.[2]

15 March 2010 at 12:09  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Mr Singh,

Now, now, sarcasm is so unbecoming.

Is 'Israel' not a metaphor in this context? and is there not a world (literally) of difference between 'Israel' and modern Israel?
And did the Jews not reject the Christ?
And is Christ not making it clear that none of us can avoid sin: a man can no more prevent himself feeling lust than he can prevent himself feeling pain. (He can try not to put it into effect, and not shout about it if he succeeds).
That it is only through the Sacrificial Death of Christ that we are saved and it is impossible through our own efforts.

15 March 2010 at 12:10  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Those who bless my people will be blessed and those who CURSE my people will be cursed."

Every time one curses, attacks or slanders Jews one automatically receives the curse on one’s family for four generations.

This is simply typical of the vindictive arrogance of the Abrhamic religions, whose adherents assume without shame, that some fantasised gruesome penalties of death and worse, are prescribed not only for the perpetrators of 'offensive' transgressions against their beliefs, but also upon their innocent unborn children as well. And just for bad measure impune that their peacenik god will ensure that the punishment is valid not only in this life but also in the so-called hereafter It matters not to them that the 'offender' may neither subscribe to their religion, any other or none at all.

And all claim at the same time to be loving and peaceful - Don't make me laugh! - Talk about hate crime and incitement for do-badders - Religionists wrote the book(s) on this topic!

Gimme Harry Potter any time, at least they don't pretend to be any thing other than made up stories.

As for Israel's right to exist - they have more of an historical case for that, than the Arabs of Gaza and West Bank. These territories were borne from the outcome of the usual reasons for the existence/expansion of nation states - as Spoils of War: in Israel's case, wars they did not start.

Balfour and Sykes/Picot carved up this outpost of the Ottoman Empire when IT backed the wrong side in WWI. They 'lost' their ruling powers over this land by default. The Arabs were allocated Jordan as their home land and the Jews were allocated far more of Palestine than they now hold. The Arab countries and Egypt were still not happy to accept their newly drawn enfranchised states and wanted the lot. That is simply not cricket!

15 March 2010 at 12:11  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Jared Gaites said...
“What good reason was there for the "Balfour stitch up" anyway? Oil manipulation and a foothold in the Middle East. Without Israel we would have lost the Middle East to other dangerous nations, and we would be over run with stone-throwing beheaders”.

My dislike of religion is pretty much universal but it becomes loathing in the case of Islam. However the existence of Israel and its uncritical support over decades by the USA is the main cause of Islamic/Arab anger. Perhaps they would not have become “stone throwing beheaders” if the USA had had a more balanced foreign policy.

It is interesting to remember that unlike the recent attacks, the terrorist atrocity against Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics was not committed in the name of Islam. The PLO was motivated solely by their desire to punish Israel for Israeli treatment of their people.

Another “coincidence” is the parallel rise of militant Islam and US Christian Neo-Conservatism as epitomised by that oaf GW Bush.

15 March 2010 at 12:15  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

The Balfour Declaration (stitch-up) on The Jewish Ministry of Forrign Affairs web site.

15 March 2010 at 12:17  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...


It's called de-stabilisation of the Middle East. Why? Go figure.

15 March 2010 at 12:20  
Blogger English Viking said...

Your Grace,

''..the accomplishments of Lord Balfour...'' ???

Was the complete betrayal of his declaration an 'accomplishment'?

Cameron is a chameleon. He is an Ultra when talking to the Jews and Taliban when talking to the 'peace loving' muslims. He deserves nothing more than absolute contempt for his craven opportunism, just as the other liars in the other parties do.

Borders change, especially during wars. When three nations attack a tiny neighbour in a completely unprovoked attack (unless you count the existence of Jews a provocation), and that tiny neighbour hands you your backside in 6 days, you have to suffer the consequences, one of which will be the loss of land you risked during your illegal attempts at stealing Israeli land.

There is no such country, nor race, as Palestinians. Not now, not ever before now. There have been districts of Empires, there have been provinces, but never a country and never a race, unless you want to call the Jews 'Palestinian' when Israel was renamed this by the ruling Roman Empire, as part of the punishment for their rebellion in AD70 (before Islam). This name was chosen in order to cause the maximum offense possible to the Jewish Israelis, as it was the the name of their bitter enemies and terrible idolators, the Philistines.

There are, of course, Arabs, Syians, Lebanese and others who allow themselves to be used like pawns by terrorist organisations, who think that they are 'Palestinian', but they are wrong. There are, of course, those in the West (mostly unwashed, lefty, ignorant, tree-hugging socialists and silly women who let themselves be led in such stupidity more easily than they ought) who think 'The Jooos, the Jooos, they are the monsters, so therefore the poor oppressed, dignified in their suffering, resolute in the face of oppression muslims should be allowed to parade their idolatry through the City of David, but they are also wrong.

I long for the day that Israel achieves complete victory over her enemies, and drags them to their knees. Then we will have some civilisation in the Middle East, instead of all the suicide bombing, AK 47 toting, Westerner beheading, roadside bomb planting, Olympic athlete slaughtering, aeroplane hi-jacking insanity we have now.

15 March 2010 at 12:31  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

English Viking (whatever that might be)

Israel was never a nation defined by borders but a nation as in a tribe. The promised land was never called Israel - not ever. So the Romans may have formed a nation called Palestine, but it was not the renaming of Israel.

15 March 2010 at 12:46  
Anonymous Mikec said...

It is unusual on this website to have so much Historical naivety.

Islamic Violence against Jews in Judea and Samaria predates any involvement by the USA.

The Mufti inspired pogrums of 1922 and 1929 killed about 300 Jews including young children bashed to death in their homes, the USA at the time was not even a member of the League of Nations.

The Mufti spent the war in Berlin.

The current State of Israel is as legal and legitimate as it can be - Read UN resolution 181.

Israel is the frontline in the defense against the worst excesses of Islamic fanaticsm, it does/did not choose to be and will do almost anything not to be, short of surrendering.

In 1947 Britain under Atlee and Bevin was locking up Jews, fresh out of the Nazi Death camps, in concentration camps in Israel (Atlit), Cyprus and Mauritius. It is this action alone which shocked the world into voting for a Jewish state. This is not taught in British schools.

And as for cursing - in 1922, Britain was the largest Empire the world had ever known, But it started cursing the Jews and Israel.

And look at it now.

Also 'Replacement Theology' is unsupportable from the scriptures. Jehovah does not go back on his covenants like mankind does. He has never said that He has replaced Jews with Christians. He also never replaced Passover with 'Easter' (Ishtar) and Yule is not when Yehushua was born, It was a mithratic feast in pagan Rome.

For information about the New Covenant read Jeremiah 31 v 33 and Hebrews.

15 March 2010 at 12:53  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jdennis_99 said...

"I don't get this - why does anyone, anywhere, think that the existence of Israel and the existence of Palestine are mutually exclusive concepts?"

Read the Quran, the Sira, the Hadiths, (upon which the Hamas charter is written), the rulings and commentaries of prominent Islamic scholars past and present and you'll soon understand why they are mutually exclusive cooncepts.

15 March 2010 at 13:22  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Walling

Israel can be used as a metaphor, I suppose, in the sense that as Joshua conquered the Promised Land we are to conquer or master sin.

I think there is a difference between ‘Israel’ (the Church) and modern Israel (the nation-state (and the difference is likely to decrease as more Jewish people become ‘Judaeo-Christians’))? If you mean old Israel and modern Israel I think there are more similarities than there are differences (one is that most Jewish people reject the Messiah).

It is clear that temptation comes to all men. Sin lurks at the door and wishes to master us but we must master it. I think ‘feeling lust’ is different to feeing pain. We must ‘not listen to the Devil’ we must not dwell upon evil thoughts rather capture them and submit them to Christ.

For example, when we examine Eve’s wrong-doing: she listens to the Devil’s questioning sowing seeds of doubt in her mind; she stares at the forbidden fruit (and thinks how good it would be to become wise); she takes the fruit.

Is this not what we men do: stare at the pretty woman; lust is born inside of us and then seduce her?

I have always regarded pain as God’s megaphone to wake up a deaf world.

15 March 2010 at 13:37  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Israel became a nation about 1300 BCE, two thousand years before the rise of Islam. The people of modern day Israel share the same language and culture shaped by the Jewish heritage and religion passed through generations starting with the founding father Abraham.

Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 BCE, the Jews have had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

The Arab nations are represented by 21 separate countries. There is only one Jewish nation with a tiny country, Israel. The combined territories of Arab countries is 650 fold greater than Israel. Their population is 50 fold greater than Israel. During the late 1990s the average per capita GDP in Arab countries was $3,700 versus $18,000 for Israel.

This despite the fact that many Arab countries have world's richest oil resources.
Proving that the average Arabic(Islamist) state is a classic basket case without the West’s demand for the black sticky stuff.

15 March 2010 at 13:50  
Blogger English Viking said...

Jared Gates, (whatever that might be)

Semantics, and incorrect ones at that.

Israel was originally a person (Jacob), to whom numerous promises were made by the Lord God.
Israel most certainly was a country, defined by borders, which most certainly included ALL the currently disputed land, plus a whole lot more. Read the Bible and you will read of numerous mentions (hundreds) of the Kings of Israel, the land of Israel and the Governments and ruling systems of this country. Surrounding nations recognised it as a nation when they paid tribute.

England is named after the tribe which dominated it, the Angles. They formed it into a country. The same with France, the kingdom of the Franks. The children of the person, Israel, so dominated the promised land that the people and the land became synonymous.

To pretend that the nation of Israel did not exist, ever, is plainly ludicrous.

15 March 2010 at 13:52  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Don’t blame MPAC, Your Grace, for harbouring nasty thoughts about Jews. Blame, instead, the deity and the prophet directly responsible, Allah and Mohammed. MPAC, in common with all practising Muslims, are only following orders as laid down in the Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177, Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, “The Hour [of the Last Judgment] will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say, ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’”

Can you be a Muslim without being intolerant of Jews? I rather think not.

15 March 2010 at 14:30  
Anonymous graham Wood said...

Mikec said:
"Also 'Replacement Theology' is unsupportable from the scriptures. Jehovah does not go back on his covenants like mankind does.

This reflects a very odd theology.
The 'scriptures' express progressive revelation and the purposes of God.
You are right that God does not go back on his covenant promises, but he does fulfill them.
The New Covenant REPLACES the Old (you cannot have two running covenants), and I suggest you are right to refer to Jer.31:31, but go on and look at v.32 i.e. NOT according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in Israel.
The same verses are quoted in Heb. 8:8-13. V.13. indicates that the Old is now "obsolete".
In effect Jesus does not 'abolish' the Old Covenant, but he fulfills it. So, all four aspects of the original covenant God made with Israel are fulfilled -
1.the land
2.the nation.
3.the covenant relationship between God and his people (now being the spiritual seed of Abraham), and
4. the blessing promised to all the peoples of the world - all of these find their fulfillment in Jesus Christ.
Thus, Paul can speak of Christians as being "The Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16)

15 March 2010 at 14:38  
Anonymous Anguished Soul said...

Mikec thank you. You are right, the Lord Almighty does not go back on His covenants. Replacement theology has always been a curse upon the Church and led many to backsliding.

The Lord has always treated Israel and the Church as two distinct entities. The first as an adulterous wife, divorced, the second a virgin He has never known before. He states in His word that He takes back His divorced wife (Israel). He doesn't cast her aside forever.

Also, it is us the Church who are grafted into the olive tree (Israel), not the other way round.

15 March 2010 at 14:41  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Johnny Rottenborough said...
“Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177”

The thing I find utterly bizarre about all you religious nuts is how you continually refer to scripture. Whether your own or the other lot(s), can you not see how utterly absurd it is to give credibility to any of this nonsense. It was all written a long time ago by people who believed in magic. It may have been updated into poetic language by Tyndale in the case of the Bible but made up twaddle all the same.

15 March 2010 at 14:48  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

English Viking

Wrong again.

Israel was a person, then a tribe, which got assimilated and lost, leaving behind the kingdom of Judah, which in turn became assimilated. To pretend otherwise is ludicrous.

The modern state was invented, to pretend otherwise is ludicrous.

15 March 2010 at 14:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Davis

I learn more from these posters than I get from the pulpit on a Sunday morning.

And will you please stop writing 'Davis's twaddle'?

After all you have no objective basis.

15 March 2010 at 14:52  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

D. Singh said...
“After all you have no objective basis”.

Scripture is no more objective than an advert for wrinkle removing cream, both assume the gullibility of those who read them.

15 March 2010 at 15:15  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Graham Davis (14:48)—I agree with your comments about scripture; I was trying to illustrate how the world looks to those Muslims who do believe in the uniquely divine nature of Islam’s scripture. Given that they constitute a rapidly increasing proportion of our population, it’s in the interest of all non-Muslims—whether atheist, agnostic or believer—to understand the Muslim psyche.

I should have arranged for a man carrying a red flag to walk in front of my comment...

15 March 2010 at 15:18  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Are we really prepared to argue over whether the Jewish nation was originally called Israel or Judah (or both ?). Any minute now Mr. Davis will notice and then he'll start talking about wrinkle removing cream... oops too late.

15 March 2010 at 15:25  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its all Machavellian party politics if you ask me, now when the East India Tea Company raised its own private Army to subdue the Indian continent, yes that was facist, the body politic corporation we live under as subjects, yes that is fascist.

The question we need to ask is simply, do we want a Jewish dominated fascism or a Muslim dominated fascism, because lets face it, the Subjugated Anglo Saxon/Celtic Nations will never be allowed a Fascist State of their own.

15 March 2010 at 15:34  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

Johnny Rottenborough

Point taken, I jumped the gun

15 March 2010 at 15:49  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

It's faith, stupid said...
“Any minute now Mr. Davis will notice and then he'll start talking about wrinkle removing cream... oops too late”.

Not really a premonition as my post preceded yours, nice try though.

15 March 2010 at 15:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Gaites, check out the immigration figures for the Mandate under the British. One half-hearted declaration and 30 years trying to backtrack. The Nazis in 1930 were responsible for most of the immigration under the mandate before the British caved under Palestinian Arab pressure just in time to let those Jews be denied safe haven during the Holocaust.

Also during the key period of Israel's existence the backers of Israel were respectively the USSR and France. The US only backed Israel once it had won the six day war.

As for oil being the reason, when the Balfour Declaration was made less than 5% of the world's oil came from the Middle East.

But hey who cares about facts right?


15 March 2010 at 15:57  
Blogger English Viking said...

Jared Gaites,

Wrong again!

Israel was a person, who fathered 12 sons, who each were allocated a territory, apart from Levi, the forefather of the priestly tribe.
The person Jacob (Israel) became twelve tribes, which became a Kingdom under Saul, which became the nation of Israel under David, which split into two nations after Rehoboam, Solomon's son, spoke harshly to the people and threatened to increase their already high taxes.

Joseph, Jacob's (Israel's) favourite son, received a double portion, each in the name of his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. He did not personally receive a territory in his own name. Thus were born the 12 tribes of Israel, which, as I said before, went on to so dominate the Promised Land that the people of Israel and the land became synonymous.

You falsely claim that the tribe of Israel 'was lost' when in reality there were twelve tribes and were not lost, then incorrectly conflate the Kingdom of Judah with the the Kingdom of Israel, and then further compound your ignorance by stating that Judah was 'assimilated'.

Judah was the southern part of the Kingdom of Israel, comprising the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, which came into being as a result of the infighting between royal houses and rejection by the ten northern tribes (Israel) of Solomon's son, Rehoboam, (son of David by Bathsheba), of the tribe of Judah. The two kingdoms co-existed but Judah actually outlasted the Northern Kingdom of Israel, which fell to the Assyrians. Judah eventually fell to the Babylonians, and the inhabitants (not all of them) were deported. They were eventually allowed to return to their homeland, including ALL of Jerusalem. Judah NEVER assimilated, that's why Christ is referred to as the Lion of Judah, because the tribe still existed in his earthly days.

The apostle Paul knew and referred to himself as being of the tribe of Benjamin, in New Testament times.

The Temple, along with vital records, were destroyed in AD70 by the Romans. It is now not possible to use these to ascertain which tribe a modern Jewish descendant would belong to, although a good guess can be made by looking at some surnames, eg. Levi.

I never said that the MODERN state of Israel was not created. Recreated would be a more accurate term. You said Israel as country never, ever existed, which is demonstrably false.

The Holy books of Genesis, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (amongst others) contain a wealth of information on these subjects. Perhaps you should study them before you make any more silly comments?

15 March 2010 at 16:24  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Mr Davis said...
"Not really a premonition as my post preceded yours, nice try though."

You mean you are not going to fall for my cheap magic trick?

Darn it.

15 March 2010 at 16:32  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Your grace makes a political point but what if Israel was more theological in its meaning, surely the land of Israel is close at hand to all those who believe .

Just a thought!

15 March 2010 at 17:01  
Anonymous jeremy hyatt said...

Just one question.

Does the Israeli flag with the swastika merging into the Star of David (or vice versa)come from the MPACUK? If so then it is a disgraceful propoganda act by them and to be condemned. If not, to post it in the context of a posting their activities is a disgraceful piece of McCarthyism.

Which is it?

15 March 2010 at 17:33  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Jeremy Hyatt,

No need at all for the aggressive or demanding tone.

If you bothered to click the first hyper-link and scrolll down, or even the fourth hyper-link ('Zionist scam') and simply look, all will be revealed.

15 March 2010 at 17:44  
Anonymous Atlas Shrugged said...

Here we are yet again talking much and understanding less then nothing.

We should be preaching PEACE not division based on dis-information. Please remember there are no rights and wrongs worth considering especially in this case.

There is only good and evil.

God is good. Good is truth. Truth is LOVE.

Evil is untruth. Which, like disinformation, propaganda, incitement to violence, and deliberately manipulated divisions among ordinary people, are all works of the Devil herself.

15 March 2010 at 17:46  
Anonymous philip walling said...

Mr Singh,

I disagree that we can master ourselves to the extent that we can prevent ourselves from sinning. Rather like crawling over a battlefield pocked with shell holes, if we clamber out of one sin we fall into another. WE cannot avoid it. We cannot make ourselves perfect; we are fallen creatures, tainted indelibly with sin and only Christ's death redeemed us from it.

I do not think we can make ourselves more acceptable to God by bargaining with Him and saying 'look at me I'm a good person because I've stopped sinning' in this way or another.

15 March 2010 at 18:22  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Look, it's as simple as this : ''There can be only one!"

You choose your side, is all.

15 March 2010 at 18:23  
Anonymous len said...

Replacement Theology was first established at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD, but the idea was preached as early as the late first century CE by some of the ‘Church Fathers'. During the last 1600 years, Reformations and Revivals have come and gone, new denominations have sprung up, but this root of Replacement Theology which continues to produce its anti-Semitic fruit, has not been cut off. This is a great stumbling block to the Jews as it prevents them from recognizing their own Messiah, Yeshua. As the prophet Isaiah says: "...Remove the obstacles out of the way of my people" Isaiah 57:14b.

Christians need to sever themselves from this lie and be grafted into God’s true Olive Tree - a tree which is deeply rooted in the unconditional Covenants of God. Replacement Theology robs us from understanding the heart of God. It robs us from the security of truly trusting in His faithfulness. By understanding God’s everlasting commitment towards Israel , we understand something of who God is. Gentile believers in Yeshua are not supposed to be an entity outside of, or instead of Israel , but are to become part of the Commonwealth of Israel . God does not have two Frameworks, He has only one - Israel - His everlasting possession. He has given His Name to no other. This is the 'Framework of Torah', in which Yeshua was born and in which the early believers operated. The true Torah observant Messianic Community is within the Household of Israel . To believe in Replacement Theology is to sever oneself from the root and to become part of another framework instituted originally by Rome .

15 March 2010 at 18:27  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

English Viking

I cannot argue with you seeing how you confirm what I said.

"The two kingdoms co-existed but Judah actually outlasted the Northern Kingdom of Israel"

Are you on drugs, or is the mead flowing copiously?

15 March 2010 at 18:53  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

I suppose you could argue that when Joshua slaughtered his way through the promised land that God was fully behind him, and that there is no reason not to assume that this new oppression has the full backing of God. Maybe the the Balfour declaration was God's new Joshua......Yawn.

15 March 2010 at 19:00  
Blogger English Viking said...

Jared Gaites,

Judah IS Israel, DOH!

You cannot argue with me because you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.

As I said in the beginning, semantics and trying to pretend that the Kingdom of Israel did not exist prior to 1948 is ludicrous.

I notice you are yawning. Perhaps it is past your bedtime? I'm sure that Sixth Form must be exhausting.

PS Your parents must have thought more of the ways and purposes of The Lord God, they named you after Moses.

15 March 2010 at 19:42  
Anonymous Mikec said...


If you would read Deuteronomy, you would understand why Joshua (son of Nun) was ordered to slaughter the inhabitants of the Canaanite Kingdoms, this was because of the presence of 'Anakim'

Anakim and Nephilim (Giants) are the products of the Joining of Angels with mankind as described in Genesis and which was the reason for the flood.

Yehovah sanctions the killing of Anakim and Nephilim on sight. King David sent out teams with lengths of rope, and orders to kill anybody who was taller than the rope (2 Samuel 8 v 2).

There is a terrible ignorance of Tanach (OT) which is a shame as it is was the only scripture that was around at the time of Jehoshua. So the references to 'the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of Yehovah', and that it is 'Quick and sharp, sharper than any two edged (aka Roman 'steel') sword', refer to Tanach not the 'New Testament'.

BTW the 'New Covenant' is actually 'Renewed Covenant' had it been translated properly

15 March 2010 at 20:27  
Anonymous Mikec said...

Zion, Ariel and Zion are the names for the 'City of Yehovah', a Zionist is one who wants to live in the city of Yehovah.

If it were the 'Church' which was/is important, and Israel is of no consequence. Can anybody inform me why at the second coming, Yehoshua sets foot on the Mount of Olives and re-enters Jerusalem by the (blocked up) East Gate?

The Greek word Ekklesia, only took on the meaning 'Church' in the second century AD, at the time of Jehoshua, its meaning was 'the called out'. This was a direct translation of the Hebrew word 'Miqra' which is a 'summons' in the sense of being summons to a convocation. Thus the implied meaning is that the Ekklesia are those invited to Yehovah's appointments i.e. the seven Jewish Feasts (the 'love feasts' of Acts).

15 March 2010 at 21:41  
Anonymous Huldah said...

A tour de force Your Grace.

Why is it that a JEWISH homeland should be so offensive to so many people? After all, many independent homelands were created between and just after the World Wars - all the modern Middle Eastern states, for example as well as India and Pakistan.

In fact 8 million people were made into refugees as a result of the last-mentioned and there was (and is) no international outcry about that.

Could it be that the survival of the Jewish people and their return to their ancient homeland rattles the cages of those who prefer to dismiss any hint that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob might just exist?

Naturally, it could just be coincidence that Israel was 'born in a day', that the Northern and Southern kingdoms of David's Israel are once again united under one leader, and that Jewish people have gathered from the North, South East and West and 'rebuilt the ancient ruins'.

How inconvenient that these prophecies - which form an overarching theme of the Hebrew Scriptures - appear to be materializing before our very eyes.

It's enough to make yer average unbeliever spit!

15 March 2010 at 22:47  
Anonymous Atlas Shrugged said...

Why is it that a JEWISH homeland should be so offensive to so many people? After all, many independent homelands were created between and just after the World Wars - all the modern Middle Eastern states, for example as well as India and Pakistan.

I strongly suspect you did not really want an answer to that question, but I will try my best to give one anyway.

Let me try by stating a few well established and documented historically based TRUISMS.

The State of Israel could not have come into existence without a lot of help coming from the highest of high places.

The State of Israel could not have sustained its existence for more then a few mouths without a lot of help coming from the highest of high places.

The State of Israel would be at peace if these people from the highest of high places wanted the State of Israel to be at peace.

History has shown us time and time again that people that are in very high places get to stay in these very high places by dividing the common people as much and as often as they can get away with.

History has shown us time, and time again that Wars and violent conflicts are an extremely profitable and highly effective method of dividing and therefore ruling the common people.

History has shown us time and time again that Wars and other violent conflicts are ALWAYS caused by the people at the very top of society. For example Kings, Queens, or more often Priesthoods, with a lot of essential help from there bankers.

History has shown us time, and time again that the mass media talks utter bullshit, when not also telling bare faced lies.

What makes you believe that the world is essentially run any differently today, then it most clearly was thousands, if not 10's of thousands of years ago?

I hope I have helped clear a few things up for you.

16 March 2010 at 01:03  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Thanks to English Viking and all who have clarified the origins and rights of Israel to its homeland. The Kingdom of Israel was not dreamed up by twentieth century politicians, as I hope the latter-day insurgents to this site must now admit!

Neither, by the way, was the Swastika: an ancient symbol of life that pre-dates the Roman Empire and probably even ancient Egypt. Witness also a Celtic manifestation, a triskele, found on the emblem of the Isle of Man.

Further still, the Israeli flag itself (not the one posted here) displays not a swastika, but a Shield of David: a symbol for God.

For those who wish to perpetuate alienation between Christians and Jews, I would like to point out that, according to Matthew (5.17), Christ said: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
From another angle we might say that the Ark of the Covenant contained hidden Wisdom of the Law of Moses, and the Gospels reveal it. Christ was Himself a Jew: I believe that those who persecute them, persecute Him.

If we believe in Christ, then He requires us to keep the Law. I may take slight issue with one or two or our regular posters, because I believe that keeping the Law requires acts of Will on our part. Yes, we could not act rightly (justly) without Grace and Redemption from God. We cannot, however, sit back and say: "I can do anything I like now that Christ has redeemed me." We must have the humility and the will to justify our candidacy for redemption. We must act and live accordingly, in light of God's Gift.

Sorry for the long post - but I have one more point to make for those who apparently believe that they can render all history irrelevant by re-inscription. As they so rightly point out, the unlettered can view writing (scripture) as a form of magic: it does, after all, transform the absent and invisible into the present and material. Their mistake, however, is to suppose that all literacy has always been used as sleight of hand. We Judaeo-Christians, instead, have a long tradition of using it in the search for Truth.

Those who prefer to use script at the other end of the spectrum should not be surprised if we reject their dicta -- indeed, their own scripture.

btw, I can't help wondering how they'd have fared in the Iron Age they so deride. I'd have thought it was just their pagan cup of tea!

16 March 2010 at 03:35  
Anonymous GTGTWG said...

Which ever way you look at it, Palastinians are treated less than human by Israel. Why is this? And why do the US and British governments support this? Other than the odd boo ha, ha, of course!

16 March 2010 at 05:30  
Anonymous Huldah said...


"'Why is it that a JEWISH homeland should be so offensive to so many people?' I strongly suspect you did not really want an answer to that question"

Why should you suspect that?

Thanks for your exposition of 'coincidence theory'.

You have to admit, though, that the resemblance of modern events to Bible prophecy is inconvenient for people who bash the Bible, eh?

16 March 2010 at 06:04  
Anonymous Mikec said...


Isreal doe not treat the anybody as less than Human, however Hamas and the PA do.

These tyrannical organisations wield power over the people thanks to the US and EU (not Britain as it has no say any more).

Sections of the media give a hightly coloured account of what is actually going on, but that is dealt with above.

Israeli citizens of the Muslim religion are probably the only 'free' Muslims in the Middle East. Prior to the 'intifada' Judea and Samaria (West Bank) had an enormous growth rate, which, of course, was why Arafat had to do something about it...

"People with full bellies don't make revolutions"

Hamas and the PA can exploit their people and blame it on the Israelis, They are supported by 'aid' from the UK and EU and a self destructive western media.

Websites such as 'memri' and "honest reporting" are a good source of accurate information.

16 March 2010 at 06:57  
Anonymous len said...

The Jewish people are the most persecuted people on Earth.
Because they carry the record of God,because Gods plan for salvation was outworked through the jewish people.
Israel is a tiny strip of land but it
features importantly in prophesy.There is a war going on between the outworking of Gods plan for Israel and the satanic opposition to this plan.
The 'church' should be standing with Israel and for gods plan for Israel not claiming this title for itself.

16 March 2010 at 08:08  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

Judah was Israel - dear oh dear.

16 March 2010 at 10:16  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

English Viking

You're not one of these BNP morons by any chance?

16 March 2010 at 10:20  
Anonymous It's faith, stupid said...

Jared Gaites

Your argument over whether Israel was ever a kingdom was tenuous at the best of times. It has now descended into farce.

16 March 2010 at 10:47  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

It's not my argument - I don't really care too much; I would happily see all of them wiped off the map. They were both kingdoms as far as I can gather - separate ones at that. Both wiped out and reinstated by farce. Who gives a shite about jews....not me. But like I said I dislike Islam intensely because it is being rammed down my throat.

This idea that the Jews are nice people though is rather amusing. Fart in the wrong direction and you become a gas chamber Nazi. Very boring. The level of hysteria in here is also amusing...I like it.

16 March 2010 at 11:06  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

@JG said:-

.....I would happily see all of them wiped off the map. ... Fart in the wrong direction and you become a gas chamber Nazi....

Sounds like he already is.

16 March 2010 at 11:32  
Anonymous len said...

Jared Gates,
Your views are just as odious as one of your farts.

16 March 2010 at 13:25  
Blogger English Viking said...

Jared Gates,

No, I'm not one of those 'BNP morons'. I have not at any time voted for the BNP, although you might consider joining one of the far-right parties, what with your desire to Israel 'wiped of the map', and you not 'giving a shite about the Jews'.

You sound a bit like Ahmedinajad.

Your not one of those Labour morons, are you?

16 March 2010 at 13:48  
Anonymous len said...

As a Christian have had far better insults than that thrown at me, but the only thing stronger than hate is love,
Bless you.

16 March 2010 at 20:50  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Jared win this weeks star prize for vileness. Congratulations.

17 March 2010 at 01:22  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

And I am not even trying. Such sensitive creatures. I love this blog, it gets the vilness flowing. God and Len love me at the very least.

17 March 2010 at 11:29  
Blogger English Viking said...


And me.

17 March 2010 at 13:50  
Anonymous jeremy hyatt said...

Cranmer - Okay, I've now scrolled down.


17 March 2010 at 16:38  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Jared....I am reminded of my old labrador. However, he at least has sound and honest reasons for rolling in shit.

20 March 2010 at 18:41  
Blogger adrian said...

If the conspiracy theories are wrong Can anyone explain this

The British Olympics

20 March 2010 at 23:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Zionism is a racist ideology, it is colonization disguised as religion. To support Zionism is to support the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.

Jews should have a homeland, and they did for hundreds of years under Ottoman rule, and again they will have it under Palestinian Rule. But to ethnically cleanse a people and colonize their land is an affront to human dignity, and an affront to the idea of an international legal system.

And so mpacuk is right in exposing these MP's with their rejection of International law and support of Jewish Colonization of Palestine

24 March 2010 at 00:08  
Anonymous len said...

Who are The Palestinians? Moslem/ Arabs in that area started calling themselves “Palestinians” nearly 40 years ago. “Palestinian” refers to people who live in Palestine: Arabs (“Arabic speaking peoples”), Bedouins, Druze, Christians, and Jews. No people or nation ever ruled as a sovereign national entity on this land there is no Palestinian language or culture in past history. Palestine, as a country does not presently exist. No Arab nation has their historical roots on the land and no one have claim to this territory other than the Jews. The Jewish rule of this land extended over a period of over 2000 years. Israel became a nation in the land in 1312 BC. God gave them the land in a covenant (Deuteronomy 29:1-30:20) and they lived there.

24 March 2010 at 19:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...







THANK Theodor Herzl

30 March 2010 at 01:01  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older