10 point plan for Israel
Looking at the map of Israel last evening and reading up on it, there are a number of steps I think Israel should take:
1. Complete the defensive dome against rockets in the southern territory, with every rocket fired from the Gaza responded to with two Israeli strikes.
2. Complete the rebuilding in East Jerusalem, including the ring settlements.
3. Remove the two eyesores from the Temple Mount and begin the rebuilding of the Temple or at the very least, repaint that Dome in a dull colour which blends in with the city.
4. Reinforce Har Megiddo as the gateway for the Via Maris.
5. Complete the settlement on the West Bank and cease calling it West Bank.
6. Create a demilitarized zone between Gaza and Egypt, dig wherever tunnels are known of and fill them in.
7. Create a maritime ring along the entire coast of Israel, including just outside the territorial waters of Gaza.
8. Move into and build barriers and military installations in the buffer zone bordering the Lebanon.
9. Reinforce the Golan Heights.
10. Tell everyone else to butt out and mind their own business.
That should just about take care of it. Game-on. I asked Chuckles if he could think of anything to add or subtract and he replied:
11. I would suggest that exploiting their newly found seabed gas and oil deposits would be a smart move as well.
Filed under: History & Culture














Here is something that has not been tried. I would love to sit back and watch it and what happens.
Send in a team of Feminists to negotiate a peace deal.
Think I am nuts?
Well, Feminists have been telling we cloth-eared men that women are ‘naturally’ superior communicators. Apparantly they excel at negotiating and conciliation. They are ‘peace-makers’ and ‘nurturers’. They excel at ‘conflict resolution’, we are told.
So, let them at it. Let them wheel and deal with the Hamas leaders. Heck, most feminists are lefties who seem to think that the Palestinians are the good guys. It should be a doddle for them.
I propose that we don’t wait for Ju-liar Gillard to get thrown out of office as a complete dud, but send her NOW, to head a negotiation delegation. She could have a life-line to a redemption of her meltdown career.
She could be joined at the table by such luminaries of the movement as say Germaine Greer and Harriet Harman, indeed there are a large number to choose from, all having demonstrated their superb skills and ability to change (whoops, I almost said manipulate then, but that would be sexist – and womynipulate is still a bit of a mouthful) people’s minds.
Come along Gals, before we spend a friggin’ fortune on defensive walls and hole-filling expiditions.
Israel good,Palestine bad,Jews good,Muslims evil,have I got it now? Oh good I’ll get out my portable nukes and sort it all out and then Jesus can continue to boil in excrement(Talmud, not me,look it up)
James, I have several questions I’m afraid.
The State of Israel was clearly a creation of Them helped in no small way by the terrorist activities that resulted in many of the local inhabitants to either flee or be removed from their land. What, in your opinion, justified this and subsequent land captures? It seems you wish this to be continued by further expansion on the West Bank. Again what do you think justifies this? Please add any Biblical justifications you think are relevant. I say this because it seems you support the destruction of the mosque on the Temple Mount and the rebuilding of a temple there. Do you not think this will lead to an outbreak of serious violence and most likely war across the Middle East and perhaps even beyond? Do you think this and any subsequent loss of life would be justified?
You’re a Christian. Jesus in Matthew 24 prophesied the destruction of the Temple which then occurred in 70AD. A temple which was, amongst other things, was completely superfluous. The animal sacrifices were merely part of the old Covenant that pointed towards the sacrifice of Jesus himself on the cross. His blood atoned for all of our sins making the sacrifice of animals in a temple unnecessary. If God destroyed the second Temple and if any sort of physical earthly temple was not now required why would God want a new one to be built? Many of those who take a ‘futurist’ view of prophecy seem to consider a rebuilding of a third temple a precursor to Jesus Christ’s return. Is this your view and if so where in the Bible is a third temple being rebuilt prophesied?
When the Israeli’s ‘strike back’ should they do it randomly putting at risk women and children? If not who should they target?
I have more but I’ll spare you them for now. Nixon makes a good point though. The (Babylonian) Talmud appears to be the primary spiritual resource of the majority of Judaism. Have you researched the Talmud at all and if so what are your thoughts on it.
Regards,
Harry.
Harry, it was clearly tongue in cheek and I thought you’d drop by.
A mid-east, Jewish and Biblical scholar would know that if 3 and 4 were implemented, then that’s the first of the all in-wars leading to Armageddon.
Whilst I’m sure that’s the Rothschild/Nethanyahu long-term plan, there is the little matter of the red heifer and cornerstone first.
http://www.templeinstitute.org/red_heifer/red_heifer_contents.htm
As for the Dome, they appear to be digging under as we write.
Then we have the issue of exactly where the temple is anyway. From my book, this part written in about 2006, which quotes various sources:
And then the Christian take. From my own book again [about 2006]:
They’re the theories anyway. So it doesn’t much matter really where the Temple is as long as the Jews believe it is in the right place. Some sort of false messiah can make that happen. As to what I believe personally, it doesn’t much matter – I can’t know according to the Bible – hence no point speculating.
By the way, the Them view is, for what it’s worth is below [Centrex Radio interview - 2000]. Just because I reprint this transcript, it doesn’t mean I accept it. I’m just a scholar, that’s all – I read things, note them and move on:
And:
I need to reiterate that it doesn’t much matter if it does occur this way – it’s whether they believe it will – that creates a certain self-actualizing tendency, like self-fulfilling prophecies.
That’s what we’re really dealing with here.
“When the Israeli’s ‘strike back’ should they do it randomly putting at risk women and children? If not who should they target?”
Was ‘randomly putting men at risk’ not worth the mention? Is that a wad of misandry in your back pocket or is it your arse hanging out?
Your question crossed with my reply, Amfortas. Harry knew I knew much of the above so his question was also tongue in cheek.
Mmm, ok Amfortas. Surely you could see that I wasn’t enamoured by the idea of any sort of ‘strike back’. My failure to mention men, rather than being misandrist, was more to emphasise the horror of indiscriminate attacks and their targeting of the innocent in the sense that the vast majority of the protagonists, on both sides, are men. You had a point and you’re welcome to make it but the additional insult wasn’t really necessary.
James, I suspect I’ll have a slightly longer response to your comment but it’ll have to wait until tomorrow evening. I really should go to bed : )
Harry, my apologies. The pints are on me.
You will notice that my suggestions far above took neither side in a complex and error/angst-ridden history.
I have a piece coming up on Sunday which includes much of the above and some of this:
http://revolutionharry.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/pied-pipers-of-truth-movement-how-about.html#more
That piece and the comments below are well worth a read in the interim, especially about Brian Gerrish.
Talmud – huge area and then Kabbalah and Ashkenazis.
Amfortas, that’s fine, no problem. As it happens I made the mistake of not realising James’ original article was somewhat tongue in cheek.
James, I’ll make a comment on your newer article that deals with the above.