Israeli Terrorists target Lebanon and Palestinians

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [southnews] Israel targets Lebanon, Palestinians
Date: 13 Jul 2006 02:50:40 -0500
From: Dave

ISRAEL continued its relentless air bombardment of the Gaza Strip today
with a powerful missile strike on the Palestinian foreign ministry,
according to witnesses.

Meanwhile Israeli warplanes and gunboats struck a Palestinian guerrilla
base 10 miles south of Beirut late Wednesday, Lebanese security
officials said, in the closest raid to the Lebanese capital since
fighting erupted in southern Lebanon after guerrillas captured two
Israeli soldiers.

Warplanes flew over the Naameh base in the hills overlooking the
Mediterranean, about 10 miles (16 kilometers) south of Beirut. Gunboats
sailed facing the position, and explosions rang out across the area.

Israel targets Lebanon, Palestinians

From correspondents in Gaza City
AFP 13jul06

ISRAEL continued its relentless air bombardment of the Gaza Strip today
with a powerful missile strike on the Palestinian foreign ministry,
according to witnesses.

Ten children, one of them just four months old, were injured in the
raid, doctors at Gaza City's Al Shifa Hospital said.

The children lived in nearby homes which were badly damaged in the
powerful blast, witnesses said.

The latest strike comes a day after similar Israeli sorties killed 23
Palestinians, including seven children from the same family, making it
the deadliest day since the assault began two weeks ago.

A total of 75 Palestinians have been killed since Israel launched a
massive air and ground offensive on impoverished Gaza in a bid to
release a teenage soldier captured by militants last month and end
rocket attacks.

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas slammed the killings as "total
aggression" and called on the US administration and Middle East quartet
to intervene immediately to ease the crisis.

He said the Israeli "escalation" was "complicating matters", and called
for diplomatic efforts to be given a chance to end the crisis.

He called on the four Middle East peace sponsors, particularly
Washington, to intervene.

The armed wing of the governing Palestinian movement Hamas, which
claimed joint responsibility for the capture of corporal Gilad Shalit on
June 25, swiftly vowed a "strong and painful" response.

Just hours later, the Israeli army opened a new front in the Middle East
crisis, launching a ground and air assault on Lebanon after the Shiite
movement Hezbollah captured two soldiers on Israel's northern border.

"There are people to the north and south of our country who continue to
want to compromise our stability," Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
told reporters.

In going after the foreign ministry, Israel has targeted the offices of
one of the Hamas government's most prominent leaders, long-time Islamist
activist and current foreign minister Mahmud al-Zahar.

In the overnight attacks, Israel said it wounded Mohammed Deif, the
leader of Hamas's armed wing the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades who is
believed to be the mastermind behind a wave of suicide bombings in the
1990s that killed dozens of Israelis.

A Palestinian medical source confirmed that Deif had been operated on
but his life was not in danger, with another three Hamas military
leaders being treated at the hospital.

But Abu Obeida, a spokesman for the Qassem Brigades, categorically
denied Deif had been hurt and slammed the "deceitful information
intended to cover up Zionist crimes".

Medical sources said the nine dead were all from the same family and
included a Hamas political leader, Nabil Abu Salmeeyah, who owned the
house and taught at the Islamic University, his wife and five of their
children.

Two of the children's cousins were also killed when an F-16 jet
demolished the house.

"Our reaction to this massacre will be painful and strong for the
Zionists and we will make the enemy leadership sorry for their crime,"
the Qassam Brigades vowed.

The air strike was preceded by a large-scale incursion into the central
Gaza Strip with Israeli forces penetrating up to one kilometre (more
than half a mile) inside the territory.

Nine more Palestinians died in Israeli attacks elsewhere in Gaza,
including two policemen and seven gunmen, medical sources said.

One of the dead belonged to the Popular Resistance Committees, which
together with the military wing of Hamas and a third group claimed the
June 25 capture of Shalit.

Another five Palestinians died when an Israeli aircraft fired a missile
near Deir al-Balah. The Israeli military said the raid attacked and
identified hitting a group of armed gunmen.

One Gaza security source said, however, that all those killed were
teenagers unarmed at the time. Six other people were wounded.

Israel has flatly refused to negotiate with Hamas or free Palestinian
prisoners in exchange for Shalit, vowing the assault will continue "in
places, in time, in measures" at its convenience.

Aid groups have expressed concern about the difficulties of providing
assistance to 1.4 million people living in Gaza following months of
financial crisis and the suspension of direct Western aid to the
Hamas-led government

_________________________________________
Israelis Attack Just 10 Miles From Beirut

Associated Press Wednesday 12 July 2006

Beirut, Lebanon - Israeli warplanes and gunboats struck a
Palestinian guerrilla base 10 miles south of Beirut late Wednesday,
Lebanese security officials said, in the closest raid to the Lebanese
capital since fighting erupted in southern Lebanon after guerrillas
captured two Israeli soldiers.

Warplanes flew over the Naameh base in the hills overlooking the
Mediterranean, about 10 miles (16 kilometers) south of Beirut. Gunboats
sailed facing the position, and explosions rang out across the area.

The base is run by the Syrian-backed Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine-General Command and was a frequent target of
Israeli attacks in the past.

The latest attack comes after Israeli warplanes pounded more than
30 targets in southern Lebanon and Israeli leaders promised Lebanon a
painful response for the capture of the soldiers.

There was no immediate word on casualties at Naameh.

Hezbollah said its guerrillas destroyed two Israeli tanks that
attempted to cross the border into Lebanon on two different occasions
Wednesday.

Israeli ground troops entered southern Lebanon on Wednesday to
search for two soldiers captured earlier in the day by Hezbollah
guerrillas, Israeli government officials said.

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/07/12/ap2874762.html
__________________________________________-

Lebanon braces for worst as Israel responds to attack

Thu Jul 13, 2006 5:43 AM IST

By Nadim Ladki

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Lebanon braced for spiralling violence on Thursday a
day after Israel vowed a severe response to Hizbollah attacks in which
two Israeli soldiers were captured and eight killed by the Syrian-backed
group.

A statement issued by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's cabinet after an
emergency meeting on Wednesday night said that Israel held the Lebanese
government responsible for the attacks and for the safe return of the
seized soldiers.

But it offered no details about what type of action would be taken.

Hizbollah's bold attack drew Olmert into a second crisis over captured
soldiers. Israel is engaged in a military offensive in the Gaza Strip
after Palestinian militants captured a soldier on June 25.

Israeli aircraft attacked the Palestinian Foreign Ministry in Gaza City
on Thursday, causing a fire in the building, witnesses said. There were
no immediate reports of casualties.

Israel killed at least 23 Palestinians in Gaza on Wednesday, including
nine members of one family in an air strike that destroyed a house where
the army said senior Hamas commanders were meeting.

Hizbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said the soldiers had been
seized to force Israel to release prisoners, but Israel state says the
attack was an act of war and that it would not swap prisoners.

"You don't negotiate with terror organisations," Gideon Meir, senior
Israeli Foreign Ministry official, told Reuters.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said his government had not known
of the Hizbollah attack and did not endorse it or accept responsibility.

Dozens of Israeli air strikes hit a dozen key bridges and suspected
Hizbollah posts on Wednesday, killing two Lebanese civilians and a
Hizbollah fighter as well as disrupting fixed-line communications
between Beirut and south Lebanon.

Bombardment by land and sea added devastation to south Lebanon's road
network.

CIVIL DEFENCE

Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz told his commanders to prepare
civil defence plans because of fears Hizbollah would fire long-range
rockets at Israeli cities and industrial installations in the heart of
the country.

Hizbollah has said it has more than 13,000 rockets capable of hitting
Israeli towns and installations deep into northern Israel.

The Israeli retaliation is set to increase domestic pressure on
Hizbollah, which has refused to disarm in line with a 2004 U.N.
resolution, and international pressure on the Lebanese government, led
by an anti-Syrian coalition, to take action.

The White House condemned the Hizbollah attack and blamed Syria and
Iran, which both back the Lebanese Shi'ite group.

Syria said Israeli actions were to blame for guerrilla attacks.

Two Lebanese civilians were killed in an Israeli air raid on a coastal
bridge at Qasmiyeh. Bombs hit 11 other bridges and at least 25 Lebanese
were wounded, security sources said.

A bridge was hit 16 km to the south of Beirut.

Israeli troops have not struck deep into Lebanon since they left six
years ago after an 18-year struggle with Hizbollah.

"Israel must act with appropriate severity in response to this attack
and it will do so," the Israeli cabinet said. "Israel will respond in a
forthright and severe manner against the perpetrators responsible and
will act to prevent future efforts and actions directed against Israel."

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan led widespread international calls for
Hizbollah to free the two Israelis.

In 2004, Hizbollah swapped a kidnapped Israeli businessman and the
bodies of three soldiers for more than 420 Arab prisoners after German
mediation.

Hizbollah, the only Lebanese faction to retain its weapons after the
1975-90 civil war, is also a political party with 14 members in the
Beirut parliament.

(Additional reporting by Jerusalem bureau)

You WANT war and you make war you get to die for ALLAH! ALLAHU ACKBAR!
It is damn time that the Israelis HIT the Hezbollah until they start
SCREAMING for peace!
OR in the alternative all their screams cease!

Peace has been at hand. The Palestinians could have their own homeland the
second they want it.
And the ENTIRE WORLD would back them and help them. They want WAR! They LIVE
for WAR.
So....... they get the fruits of WAR.. DEATH!

A guy with some crematory ovens had the same exact idea for the jews.

Where? When? The promised land? to the palestinians? Nahhh!

or the ovens and the Warsaw Ghetto!?

"As ye sow, so shall ye reap".

The Palestinians have never been anything but a front for those Arab
societies who hate Israel yet are too cowardly to do anything on their
own.

The fact that the Palestinians have allowed themselves to be used in
this fashion does not speak very well of them--but then again, when
you're in the front lines, so to speak, of a "war" against an enemy
you've sworn to annihilate, you shouldn't be surprised if now and then
that enemy you've targeted for annihilation decides to limit your
war-making capabilities.

Despite the left-wing protestations to the contrary, what is happening
today in Lebanon is, bluntly, justice.

Liam

Balls they can have a state at any time they want. The stinky yids will
oppose every move until they have annexed the West Bank. That's a fact,
Jack.

>
>

That's about what I said.

It's PAYBACK!

No they could have a state TODAY and have the US defend its borders if they
wanted.

A difference is that the people your buddy Dolph was shoving into overs
weren't bombing Bratwurst shops or shelling Stuttgart!

They could have had it in 1948, and they can have it today. Just sit
down and agree to it. End the fukking war!

Difference is that Jews had NO weapons at that time.

Liam wrote:
>
...

You mean that Israel confiscates their land, pushes them to Ghettos,
and treats them like slaves and yet they let some Arabs use them against
the jews?
How can they do that? after so much love sown by Israel?

Imagine, having to go through a military checkpoint to go across the
street, having to beg for water and beg for work and they still allow themselves
to be used against their benefactors in Israel. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha, Right

You mean like the uprise of the Warsaw Ghetto?
Yea, you should not be surprised that those living in the Ghaza Ghetto
decide to go on suicidal attacks.

Jewish Justice?
or is it Nazi German justice learned while serving as jewish guards of
concentration camps?

>
> Liam

How about what the Muslims did to the Jews, when they ran them out of Iran,
Iraq, Yemen, etc?

Who's treated like slaves? Sources? Cites?

Imagine having to resort to such checkpoints because your neighbors are such
homicidal maniacs that they would strap bombs to themselves and die just to
kill you. How come you ignore that little fact?

That's what happens when you dedicate all your energies to trying to find
ways to kill other people, instead of getting jobs and going to work like
normal people.

Most so-called "Palestinians" wound up there after being kicked out of
places like Jordan and Syria, NOT Israel. Learn something about history
before you babble on like a left-wing idiot.

Israelis have given back most of the land they acquired already, idiot.

For acquired read Took.

If I take your property but give most of it back, have I stolen
anything from you?

They didn't give back the water rights, though. Those they kept.

You assume that the Palestinians actually legally HAD the property in the
first place. Most people agree - they didn't!

I do indeed.

> Most people agree -

Most People would include who, precisely?

>... they didn't!

Heh!

History is--always has been--the real enemy of fanatics. Hatred is
fundamentally illogical; hence any fact supporting an argument against
that hatred MUST be ignored, obfuscated or obliterated by the hater, so
he/she/they can, to some point at least, rationalize their fundamental
irrationality.

One does not have to go too far to see this. On this board alone, how
many attempts have been made to twist or ignore the history of the
Holocaust, in order (one assumes) to justify the virulent hatred of
Israel? How many other examples are there elsewhere? Probably countless
others.

So too with the Palestinian issue. The blunt fact of the matter is that
the Palestinians, without casting aspersions on the strength of their
motivation or the extent of their bravery, are in effect the alien
dregs of that particular part of the world, wandering aimlessly until
finally congegrating in a place where their proximity to Israel has
given them their first and only purpose--stooges of the regimes in
Damascus, Teheran, etc.

Those brave leaders--Ahmadinejad, Assad, even Saddam Hussein before he
was toppled--know one fundamental truth. For all their posturing and
swaggering, it has been proven to them time and again that, in a real
war with Israel, they stand about as much chance as a snowball in hell.
So they use their Palestinian proxies to harass Israel--a rocket here,
a suicide bomber there, vitriolic hatred everywhere. It sure beats
risking their own asses, I guess.

Liam

Good summary of the situation... Nice rhyme too:

"My Enemy, My Self" by Yonam Binur (an Israeli jew)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22My+Enemy+My+Self%22&btnG=Google+Search

Did you have such humiliating checkpoints in the East Coast of the USA while
the sharp shooter killers where on the loose?

Read this:
"My Enemy, My Self" by Yonam Binur (an Israeli jew)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22My+Enemy+My+Self%22&btnG=Google+Search

They were not kicked out of "Israel"?
It was just a voluntary evacuation, right?

Egged on by their friendly Cousins. Just as they are today. Bought them
fifty six years of grief and nowhere to live.

Two deranged killers hardly compares to an entire population so damn
barbaric as to strap bombs to their children.
They aren't even human.

Jim E

> I do indeed.

Don this old argument has mold on it. How did the "Palestinians" get the
land? Conquest! How did they lose it? Started another war and lost! BOO
FUKKIN HOO!

>> Most people agree -

In the world who have studied the history of the region Donny. The
Hebrews settled the area first. The area they settled, NOW known as
"palestine" or "Israel" was uninhabited. The places IN the region that were
inhabited are in present day Jordan and Lebanon. There never were any such
people as "Palestinians." The people we CALL "Palestinians" are not
originally native to the area, but in FACT are Persians, Babylonians, and
many other ethnic groups combined that came in with various occupying forces
as civil servants etc. They attained the land by conquest. They initiated
the conflict in 1948 and LOST. BOO HOO!

With rifles up their clackers, I might add.

They don't strap bombs to their children, dickhead. The children do it
without their parents knowledge.

The yids don't consider anyone who is not a yid as human. That includes you
jimmieboi. You're just one of the cattle to them.

How did The Lowered give the Israelis the land?

Extermination of those previously in it.

We can carry that argument back millennia, and it Still won't do
anything to resolve any extant issue.

It's what you get when you get greedy.

No actually the land where the Hebrews settled was UNINHABITED. The
others lived in what we call today Lebanon and Jordan. That was never part
of the Jewish lands, but people with whom they traded and sometimes had wars
with. Usually the other guys started it and the Jews finished it.

A similarity can be seen in more modern history. Follow the history of
the Mormons. They had problems in New York - moved to the boonies of Ohio
were very successful, others wanted their stuff and started giving them
hell. They then moved to a noplace in Illinois and got hell there too after
they built it up. I leave out Missouri - same deal. Finally they moved to
Salt Lake City. Not a soul in a hundred miles. A desert where NOTHING grew.
Land so hard it bent plows.

NOBODY wanted to live there. UNTIL The Mormons settled it and made it bloom.
Then all sorts of loudmouthed assholes wanted it and DEMANDED that the
Mormons get the hell OUT of THEIR land!

Same old song plays over and over and over and over of wanting the other
guy's grass.

Palmyra

Kirtland - not quite the boonies

Nauvoo, Illinois.

St. Louis. Here the church split.

>> How did The Lowered give the Israelis the land?

> No actually the land where the Hebrews settled was UNINHABITED....

No, actually that is Not the case. Read your OT and you'll see the
discussion.

-snip-

Excuse me?!

The name "Utah" did not arise in a vacuum - it derives from the Ute
Indians, some 15,000 - 20,000 of which inhabited the area when the
Mormons arrived in 1847

By the turn of the century, there were but some thousand or so Utes left.

The Mormons weren't solely responsible for that but they were a big part
of that particular extermination campaign.

And clearly -somebody- wanted to live there before the Mormons. The Ute
Indians - who lost their land and often their lives to the Mormons.

A process not wholely dissimilar to what occured in Palestine.

Peace and justice,

If I go to your home and takeover your livingroom, kitchen and a bedroom,
is it too greedy of you if you are not happy to be left with only one bedroom?
is it too greedy of you if you want the whole house and want me expelled?

Jim E wrote:
>
...

I agree, if you strap yourself to a flying machine full of bombs in order to
bomb civilian installations, you are a killer.

> Palmyra

Driven out by violance.

It was then.

> Nauvoo, Illinois.

Uninhabited before the Mormons erected the city.

Not then, that was AFTER the attacks on Nauvoo and the murder of Joseph
Smith. Following his death was a power grab.

I lived in Salt Lake for some time in the 70's. Even then people were
coming in to attack the Mormons. Somebody placed a bomb at the doors to
their temple while I lived there. There were always gangs of people
harassing the people going to the Mormon conferences.

What are you referring to? There were settlements around. But the area
the Hebrews settled was uninhabited.

The UTE tribe did NOT live in the Salt Lake Valley. They lived to the
north.

The Mormons had excellent relations with the natives. There was a great
deal of assimilation (intermarriage).

Rationalization.

No the Utes lived pretty far to the north, around present day Logan
Utah. Some encampments far to the south near present day St. George Utah.
But no settlements between Ogden and Provo that were permanent. ALthough a
cas ecan eb amde that Ute hunting parties roamed the area. The history I see
is that the Utes and the Mormons got on pretty damn well.

Not really, other than the people who came in later to make war on them.

You also might want to go to the following link so as to confirm
Pangborn's story:

http://tinyurl.com/lydld

He seems to have been involved with organized crime all of his life.
His most recent involvement, to my knowledge, seems to be a money scam
called "The A-Team", that purports to be about Men's Rights. It really
attacks Men who are fighting for Men's Rights.

- - -

This has been another enlightening moment, with:

Turin

I have such sites to show you...
------------------------

http://members.fortunecity.com/turinturambar/
http://groups.google.com/group/Men_First
http://mail2world.com/Blog/Tu...@mail2zeus.com

------------------------

"He who changeth, altereth, misconstrueth, argueth with, deleteth, or
maketh a lie about these words or causeth them to not be known shall
burn in hell forever and ever...."

-----

Nope -- it was not. There were Canaanites in Canaan.

The specific OT chapter you want to review is Exodus 13.

I will give you the same warning I've provided to others: Don't take
me on head-up in a discussion of scriptural history.

I grew up with that stuff, immersed in it.

In this case, your assertions -- both times -- have been plainly and
clearly Wrong.

Is the UN going to divide up your house?

> http://tinyurl.com/lydld

Small problem for you STALKER - the Author publicly ADMITTED that it was
a different person with the same name. BOO HOO FOR YOU.

Well how about this TEDDY STALKER let people go to www.a-team.org and see
if that is what it really does...

YOU who makes great claims and attacks everyone doing work, yet CANNOT after
6 years of being challenged to do so, CANNOT name even ONE positive thing he
has ever done for men's rights. ALL you are about Teddy - is HATRED of
women!

Don the Cananites lived in what is present day Jordan. Other tribes lived in
present day Lebanon. The specific lands the Hebrews originally settled
surrounding Jerusalem were uninhabited.

Verse 5? You make the common error of taking statements too literally. In
this case the "land of" refers to a general area. Your FIRST clue should be
the reference to the land of: the Cananites, the Hitites, and the Amorites.
3 different peoples. You aren't paying much attention to biblical
archeology.

Lots of people were. Many miiersed with literal Biblican bullshit. The
Bible wasn't written LITERALLY.

Nope. The LAND OF CANA refers to a general geographical area, much like a
roadsign. In this case IF you think logically the land the Hebrews settled
on could not simultaneously belong to 3 other peoples. Each had their
villages in the geographic AREA........... Neighbors. But where the Hebrews
moved to were NOT "settlements" that belonged to others.

Just as with the Mormons - others lived to the west who weren't Mormons, but
they didn't live in the Salt Lake Valley. As somebody pointed out there were
the UTE Indians, the two branches lived to the north in what is present day
Logan Utah area and the other branch to the South in present day St. George
Utah. NONE lived in the Salt Lake valley. AND add to that the FACT that the
Mormons got on very well with the Utes and the Wasatch Indian tribes to the
west of the Valley.
There was also a third tribe just to the southeast of Salt Lake, bet you
don't know their name either.

I didn't know that. Now I do. See how reasonable I am?

Small problem, though. WHERE did he say that?

Also, I think it's a little strange for two Ken Pangborns to be living
in the same area at the same time. Shit, I think having just one Ken
Pangborn around is strange.

Ideologically, it promotes going along to get along. YOU (the creater
of that scam) are the one who have been attacking the work of genuine
MRA's like myself who refuse to compromise.

All you do is fling out political correctness and empty challenges that
have been repeatedly answered - but just not to your liking.

No, Pangborn. That's YOU.

And, we're not going to play this little game again. I busted you for
the last time when I forced you - using an example of the vaginas in
your own family - to admit that that you would demand the same kind of
justice that I do. It's over. Shut up.

- - -

Showing Pangborn to be a loudmouthed hypocrite on everything, since
1997:

Real? Name ONE positive thing you have EVER done for men's rights
Turdbrain? ONE! In 6 years of challenged you have been TOTALLY UNABLE to
name just ONE thing you have ever done. ALl wer ever hear from you is
HATRED of women and how you want to "GET EVEN" with thewm for your percieved
injuries.

Politically correct? You're full if shit. That's why I have 6 radical
feminist websites attacking me... NOT YOU however!

Sorry Teddy I have named several things I have accomplised, ONE of which
is to have assisted more than 2,000 dads win custody of their kids. I also
do NOT hate women. Even my ex wives Teddy. They may have had problems - but
I don't hate either the live one or the one who passed on. In fact one of
your chief criticisms of me is that I refused to "get even" with my ex wife
in the divorce. You know Teddy - both of my former wives have told people
even AFTER our divorces that they loved me. Deeply! Same with two former
fiance's... Both of whom, fairly recently, have expressed regrets that we
didn't marry. Why is it, Teddy that no women who had had ANY dealign with
you has any kind words to say about YOU?

And what drives you into wild fits of anger and jealousy is that I have
a third wife who adores me! And she is drop dead gorgeous... Not to mention
that she's extremely intelligent. A former tax court magistrate.

Vaginas in my own family? What the hell are you talking about psycho? Do
you ever see how your language shows you for the PIG you are?

-snip-

Don't extrapolate the current location of the Ute reservation with where
they were living and hunting in 1847.

> ALthough a casecan eb amde that Ute hunting parties roamed the area.

Not all that well at all.

http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/american_indians/uteindians.html

My point exactly. In one case, the folks coming to make war on them were
the Mormons and the other white folks, in the other, the folks coming to
make war on them were the Zionists.

Although, in fairness, neither really -wanted- to make war - they just
wanted the original inhabitants to die, go away, or disappear so they
might have the land and resources and establish a society in their image.

War, of course, became necessary when the inhabitants refused to die, go
away, or disappear voluntarily.

Peace and justice,

It staggers the imagination for Anyone to believe that a "land of milk
and honey" would have no other peoples living in it, even in that era.
You may make up whatever you wish, but the Holy Tome itself says that
The Lowered took the land of Canaan (and all those other tribes) and
"gave" it to the Israelites.

It said nothing about it being abandoned or without anyone in it, else
it would be described the way it was.

Sorry -- but the only Written record we have is Exodus 13 -- and that
makes it clear. It was the land belonging to the Canaanites and
Jebusites -- and The Lowered gave the Israelites that land.

It's there in B&W.

>

Some was; some was not. It rather depended on the political message
being provided by it.

But in the case of who was In the land of Canaan before The Lowered
"gave" to the Israelites what was not theirs, that ought to be given
considerable credulity.

You might review, inter alia, the following:

Exodus Chapter 3 -- where in The Lowered told Moses *before* they were
released from Egypt that he would give them the land of the Canaanites
and all the other tribes.

Exodus Chapter 13 -- which you already have had referenced.

Exodus Chapter 23 -- where The Lowered said that his angel would go
into the land of Canaan, and "cut off" the tribes living there
already. The salient verses are:

22But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak;
then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto
thine adversaries.

23For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the
Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites,
the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off.

24Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after
their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break
down their images.

Then hie yourself here:

Numbers, Chapter 13

16These are the names of the men which Moses sent to spy out the
land. And Moses called Oshea the son of Nun Jehoshua.

17And Moses sent them to spy out the land of Canaan, and said unto
them, Get you up this way southward, and go up into the mountain:

18And see the land, what it is, and the people that dwelleth therein,
whether they be strong or weak, few or many;

19And what the land is that they dwell in, whether it be good or bad;
and what cities they be that they dwell in, whether in tents, or in
strong holds;

20And what the land is, whether it be fat or lean, whether there be
wood therein, or not. And be ye of good courage, and bring of the
fruit of the land. Now the time was the time of the firstripe grapes.

21So they went up, and searched the land from the wilderness of Zin
unto Rehob, as men come to Hamath.

22And they ascended by the south, and came unto Hebron; where Ahiman,
Sheshai, and Talmai, the children of Anak, were. (Now Hebron was built
seven years before Zoan in Egypt.)

23And they came unto the brook of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a
branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two upon a
staff; and they brought of the pomegranates, and of the figs.

24The place was called the brook Eshcol, because of the cluster of
grapes which the children of Israel cut down from thence.

25And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.

26And they went and came to Moses, and to Aaron, and to all the
congregation of the children of Israel, unto the wilderness of Paran,
to Kadesh; and brought back word unto them, and unto all the
congregation, and shewed them the fruit of the land.

27And they told him, and said, We came unto the land whither thou
sentest us, and surely it floweth with milk and honey; and this is the
fruit of it.

28Nevertheless the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the
cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of
Anak there.

29The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites,
and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the
Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan.

Does that sound to You like there was no one it it? Clearly the HT
itself says that was Not the case!

Several more chapters of Numbers discuss the period in the wilderness,
but eventually that passes.

Numbers Chapter 21 -- wherein is discussed how the conquest of Canaan
was underway:

23And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but
Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel
into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel.

24And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his
land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the
border of the children of Ammon was strong.

25And Israel took all these cities: and Israel dwelt in all the
cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof.

26For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had
fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of
his hand, even unto Arnon.

27Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let
the city of Sihon be built and prepared:

28For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of
Sihon: it hath consumed ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places
of Arnon.

29Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath
given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto
Sihon king of the Amorites.

30We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we
have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.

31Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.

32And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages
thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there.

33And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and og the king
of bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle
at edrei.

34And the LORD said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered
him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do
to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at
Heshbon.

35So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there
was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.

Gee -- for someone intending to settle in an Uninhabited Place, the
Israelites certainly were doing more than their fair share of
conquest, if the HT is anywhere near correct.

When you get to Deuteronomy, the discussion becomes even more pointed:

Deuteronomy, Chapter 1

28Whither shall we go up? our brethren have discouraged our heart,
saying, The people is greater and taller than we; the cities are great
and walled up to heaven; and moreover we have seen the sons of the
Anakims there.

29Then I said unto you, Dread not, neither be afraid of them.

If there was no one there, whom was there to be afraid of in the
first place? The answer came earlier in this discussion.

Deuteronomy, Chapter 7

Here we find the definitive statement of what really happened in
Canaan -- at the direction of The Lowered, of course. He seems
unacquainted with Your assertion that the land was unoccupied, because
He said:

1When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou
goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the
Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites,
and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations
greater and mightier than thou;

2And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt
smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with
them, nor shew mercy unto them:

Chapter 20

This one makes clear again what the Israelites were to do with the
people who were already living in Canaan

16But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give
thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

17But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the
Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the
Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

There are also some passing references in the book of Joshua in
various places as to the process involved, but the definitive
discussion is to be found in:

Joshua, Chapter 12

1Now these are the kings of the land, which the children of Israel
smote, and possessed their land on the other side Jordan toward the
rising of the sun, from the river Arnon unto mount Hermon, and all the
plain on the east:

Feel more than free to read the entire chapter, which is a discussion
of all the people's that were conquered by Israel when taking
possession of the land you assert was uninhabited.

Face it, child -- you don't Know much about scriptural history.

But you ought to know that your claim the land was uninhabited was
simple, plainly and clearly Wrong.

No modern "archaeology" can undo that. Nor does any undo it.

I'd suggest reading Joshua chapter 10.

Jerusalem was inhabited enough to have a king - "Adonizedec" by name if
the holy tome is to be believed.

And ya' really can't have a king without inhabitants.

Peace and justice,

Why don't you take that up with the Jordanians and Syrians that kicked out
many of these so-called "Palestinians" in the first place? Google "Black
September" - you might learn something for a change. :O|

How about if you strap a bomb to a kid? Or are you going to be your usual
cowardly self and refuse to answer the question?

The UN?
Territories held by the Brits and before that by the Turks were taken by force
by Israeli terrorists, bombers and assassins and their religious fanatics
followers emigrating from Europe.

You mean like the US kids in Iraq? 18yo virgins enlisted under the pretenses
of full scholarships.

WRONG! Infantile and revisionist view of history. Yes various people
came into the Holy Land and took over. The Persians, the Romans, the Turks,
and the Brits. BUT - asshole - the people YOU are calling Palestinians were
brought INTO the area by the Brits etc. Let's cut the shit. The Brits from
1850's to 1960 were only SLIGHTLY less anti-Semitic than Hitler's boys. Not
real much. About the only difference was that Britain didn't build ovens. It
was the British HATRED of the Jews that had them bring in all sorts of
people and by GUNPOINT dispossess Jews living there and give the homes to
the people the BRITISH crowned as "Palestinians" they are a people CREATED
by the British. Much as some effete British General (neo pedophile) created
nations all over the area by making up his own map.

You do so cling to BULLSHIT!

I'm not. The Utes aren't up there any more but were moved south by the
U.S. ARMY! Much AGAINST the wishes of the Mormon authorities at the time who
considered them brothers! Sometimes the Utes hunted in the Salt Lake valley.
But not often since it was BARREN. That didn't stop when the Mormons moved
in.

> > Although a case can be made that Ute hunting parties roamed the area.

> http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/american_indians/uteindians.html

Well read this part....

"Utes found an inhospitable environment and little prepared for them in the
Uintah Basin. Throughout the 1870s these Uintah Utes continued to hunt and
gather in the surrounding country while agents cultivated fields in an
effort to convince them to settle down. Things became more difficult in 1881
when the federal government forcibly removed the Yamparka and Parianuc
(White River) Utes from Colorado to the Uintah Reservation. The following
year the government moved the peaceful Taviwac (Uncompahgre) Utes to the
adjoining two-million-acre Ouray Reservation."

The same article says that Brigham Young policy wit respect to the Utes was
"feed them first - fight only if you must." The rub was the Federal
government rouding up the Indians.

No the Mormons didn't make war on the Indians at all. The U.S. Army did
later!

It boggles the mind that anyone would READ INTO it that there would be!

No you are READING INTO the Bible what you want to find there. My point
is that IF the Bible were saying GO IN AND SLAY THE PEOPLE AND TAKE THEIR
LANDS - that's what it would say. It simply does NOT! How YOU read the Bible
is the common FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN interpretation of the Bible. Which is
to take the Bible LITERALLY - and you can't correctly do that. The Bible has
to be taken in its entire context and with recognition that it does not
always give us all the details. So we can look to ARCHEOLOGY! And Donny,
that is where you REALLY run into trouble, as the Archeological record does
NOT support your view.

>> Lots of people were. Many immersed with literal Biblican bullshit. The

You make the common error of trying to take the Bible literally. Didn't
know you were a Fundie.

>> Lots of people were. Many immersed with literal Biblican bullshit. The

No Donny the Bible can't ever be read literally. A common problem
Fundamentalist Christians TRY to do.

MISTRANSLATION... (King James) He'd give them land AMONG the cannanites.

So IF we take it literally then the Jews didn't do it - GOD sent angels
to do it... What does "cut off" mean literally?

> Then hie yourself here:

Literalist.

No there were people all over - just NOT where the Jews settled. Much
like moving to an area several miles south of Denver and building a home..
Where none exist.

Yeah seems like the Hebrews were trying to peacefully pass and somebody
made war on them they fought back. Gee!

Start a war lose your land.

The end result of making wars, no?

> news:44B618BC...@exchangenet.net...
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [southnews] Israel targets Lebanon, Palestinians
>> Date: 13 Jul 2006 02:50:40 -0500
>> From: Dave
>>
>> ISRAEL continued its relentless air bombardment of the Gaza Strip today
>> with a powerful missile strike on the Palestinian foreign ministry,
>> according to witnesses.
>
> You WANT war and you make war you get to die for ALLAH! ALLAHU ACKBAR!
> It is damn time that the Israelis HIT the Hezbollah until they start
> SCREAMING for peace!
> OR in the alternative all their screams cease!
>
> Peace has been at hand. The Palestinians could have their own homeland
> the second they want it.
> And the ENTIRE WORLD would back them and help them. They want WAR! They
> LIVE for WAR.
> So....... they get the fruits of WAR.. DEATH!

Silly Paleosimians....

IBM

No silly Americans who think the fight has ANYTHING to do with a
Palestinian homeland at all!

Thanks fore answering my question. You're changing the subject like the
coward you are...