Intifada 3.0

HughJass

Senior Member
Reaction score
3
The Israeli government has indicated that it will press ahead with a plan to enlarge the Jewish prayer plaza at the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, despite warnings that the move risks triggering a third intifada.

Israeli officials rejected this week a Jerusalem court’s proposal to shelve the plan after the judge accepted that the plaza’s expansion would violate the "status quo" arrangement covering the Old City’s holy places. Islamic authorities agreed to the arrangement after Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967.

The site eyed by Israeli officials is located at the Mughrabi Gate, an entrance to the mosque compound known as the Haram al Sharif, the most sensitive site in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Inside are Al Aqsa Mosque and the golden-topped Dome of the Rock.

Earlier encroachments by Israel on Islamic authority at the site have triggered clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians. A heavily armed visit to the compound by Ariel Sharon in 2000, shortly before he became prime minister, to declare Israeli rights there sparked the second intifada.

continued


Props to the Israeli government. They seem to have quite the penchant for world war 3 these days....
 

Hammy070

Established Member
Reaction score
0
The irony is rather profound - here lies a place of central importance to three great world religions - you'd think their stated ideals of peace, love and harmony among the children of Adam would be most pronounced.

Yet we regard the site as a possible trigger for WW3!

It's a glorified playground dispute, as Stephen Fry said - these people need a visit from the smack fairy. :smack:
 

The Gardener

Senior Member
Reaction score
25
Intifada 3.0... being caused by Apartheid 2.0

Bantustans... For The Loss!

mapmv.jpg
 

somone uk

Experienced Member
Reaction score
6
Christianity, Islam and Judaism are worship the same bloody god it's just 1 chooses to call it God, 1 calls it Yahweh and 1 calls it Allah
and all 3 of them are wrong as proven here:

Epicurus.jpg
 

Hammy070

Established Member
Reaction score
0
Ian Curtis said:
rofl, you can't assess god.

We certainly can, we created God in our own image.

The reason why God and religion are fundamentally unchanged for 2 thousand years is because of writing. Without writing, human beings have awful memories.

Before writing, gods were many, ever changing and very flexible. Once written, nothing changes. The most one can hope for are varying 'interpretations'.

Ironically writing has excelled every field of logic and science, but kept religion firmly in the bronze age. Notice how religions without commandments tend to have the least headlines.
 

Hammy070

Established Member
Reaction score
0
In fact the very subject of this thread is a perfect example.

Semitic leaders once thought the bit of fertile land just across the horizon would be a decent promised land. And Lo! It was written. At the time it was probably logical, I mean...since they're all at its' doorstep, not much in the way of resistance - why not? Who can stop us? And Lo! The promised land it becomes.

A bunch of wealthy people on another continent read 2500 year old war propaganda, this time...though - probably the worst idea they could have thought of.
 

somone uk

Experienced Member
Reaction score
6
Ian Curtis said:
rofl, you can't assess god.
of course you can, if he gave people free will so you can't hold him responsible for the actions of others but he also "created the universe" so i could assess him based on the laws of physics, he made the universe this way so i could for example hold him accountable to the first and second law of thermodynamics which makes it a pain in the arse to power the world
in other words i could say it's god's fault that perpetual motion doesn't work

also god tested Abraham, i propose that if god was all knowing that testing Abraham would be redundant because he should already know the outcome of the test otherwise he wouldn't be all knowing

as an atheist i have always seen religion as a way of escaping the fact that there are things about the universe that we neither know nor comprehend
the way i see it is if you met a man that spoke an incomprehensible archaic language, the religious approach would be to instantly yell incomprehensible noises back and disregard the man's reaction whereas the scientific approach would be to slowly and carefully try and learn the language using trial and error
 

Aplunk1

Senior Member
Reaction score
9
Hey G, I noticed under your Avatar it says Woodland Hills. Did you move from the LBC to north LA county?
 

Ian Curtis

Established Member
Reaction score
4
I didnt mention God as being the catholic god or any other. I mean a power that transcends human experience and created the universe. God cannot be assessed empirically. Just imagine, if someone proved its existence beyond doubt, then we all would be (rationally) forced to believe. It cannot also be reasoned with arguments regarding its omniscience, we don't know its designations or its goodness or evilness.
We ( societies) made up gods that are faulty through reason, but if we don't know its purpose how can we question if what religious people believe is true?
I dont think there is any way of confirming or denying God as I described (not that old man with white beard)
 

The Gardener

Senior Member
Reaction score
25
Aplunk1 said:
Hey G, I noticed under your Avatar it says Woodland Hills. Did you move from the LBC to north LA county?
Yes sir! I moved back up to my old neighborhood in teH San Fernando Valley. My work moved my office from LB up to West LA. Most of my friends, and most all of my family are up in either in WLA, the SFV or in Ventura county, so I decided to relocate.

SFV and LB are SO different, demographically, culturally, etc... I'm still not sure I've done the right thing! I'm about 50/50 on it...

The upside of Woodland Hills is much more upscale, more affluent, more suburban, much prettier of a neighborhood (trees, hills, lots of green space)... whereas Long Beach is hard core urban, more population density, more industrial and not very "pretty", but its more funky, more diverse, people are more laid back and cool, you have the beach down the street, and there's more a sense of community because the high density forces you to bump into people all the time. LB is just a really fun place to live, but WH is more "grown up" so to speak. Down side of Woodland Hills is that with the upscale-ness comes the douchebag factor... it is off the charts up here. People are *** holes on the roads, people wearing fancy sweats and cologne at the gym, people dressing up to go buy their groceries, etc. After seven years or so in LB, I am not used to that!! haha
 

Aplunk1

Senior Member
Reaction score
9
Very cool, G. I'm chillin' in my old crib. That is to say, Souf OC. :D Having lived in NYC for a while (and Las Vegas), I notice these subtle and major changes everywhere. The upside to leaving NYC and getting back to OC is, most notably, the lack of Italians. I couldn't take any more Jersey Shore-wannabe's in NYC. And don't get me started on the annoying NYC accent. "Dare-Ehk Jeee-taaH".

I'm actually debating attending your Alma Matter for a post-bach degree, or heading back to NYC/Chicago for it. Just enjoying the peace and quiet for now.

Actually, I got a girlfriend flying down to OC. If I were to seek an ocean-front hotel anywhere in Southern California (including San Diego), would you know of any places? I was thinking Hotel Del Coronado, but that's like $400/night. That's a bit much for my stretched budget. :) Thanks, G.
 

oni

Senior Member
Reaction score
0
I was thinking Hotel Del Coronado, but that's like $400/night. That's a bit much for my stretched budget. Thanks, G.

If you stay in room 10, don't look under the bed......................................
19_under_the_bed-from-fear-series.jpg


You could have a CCS.......................
 
Top