Is Obama the Antichrist?

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: Factoid @ 11/19/2008 3:48:01 PM

    It appears that the number is 616 not 666
    See link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/616_(number

    As Everyone Knows :-)

    • Posted By: mrjungles @ 11/26/2008 7:15:54 PM

      I prefer 667... The neighbor of the beast...

  • Posted By: HermioneGordon @ 11/21/2008 11:30:38 PM

    In Hebrew-- the language of the Old Testament and many Second Coming prophecies--www is---666!

    And, yes, there is a rapture in Thessalonians, including in the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. It's definitely in there. International alliances are all falling into place....

    • Posted By: karelles @ 11/26/2008 10:03:46 AM

      Um... there is no letter W in the Hebrew alphabet. None. Period. Run along and find another lie.

  • Posted By: TONYAYB @ 11/25/2008 10:44:34 PM

    WELL SINCE SOME HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA IS THE ANTICHRIST AND HAVE BROUGHT IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE PUBLIC....THEN THERE SHOULD BE NO EXCUSE ON JUDGEMENT DAY WHY SOME HAVE NOT ACCEPTED JESUS CHRIST AS THE LORD AND PERSONAL SAVIOUR.....BE YE ALSO READY!!! ALSO BEFORE THE ANTICHRIST CAN COME INTO THE EARTH.....JESUS CHRIST MUST FIRST COME AND REMOVE HIS CHILDREN FROM THE TRIBULATIONS TO COME!

    • Posted By: epryor @ 11/26/2008 8:33:11 AM

      If you believe the Bible, then the antichrist will arise north of Isreal in Magog (not in the US) as in the prophesies in Daniel and Revelation. The armies of the antichrist will rise up against Isreal so explain how Obama would make the US go to war with Isreal.
      Ezekiel refers to the Antichrist as Gog, the chief prince, from the land of Magog. Magog is north of Isreal and probably includes some of the territory represented by present day Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbajan, and Russia near the Black Sea.
      Isaiah referred to the Antichrist as the Assyrian and the king of Assyria.
      The antichrist is also called the "king of the north". America is not north of Israel. (see Daniel chapter 11).
      The historical King of the North which occupies a great deal of Daniel chapter 11, beginning with verse 6, is the ancient King of Assyria. Verses 6,7,8,11,13,15 specifically refer by title to this ancient king, who is not an American. The historical "king of the north" (to be distinguished from the prophetic "king of the north") was the king of Assyria. (see Daniel chapter 11).
      Revelation 20:7-9
      7. And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, :8. And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
      9. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. (KJV)

  • Posted By: Toki7 @ 11/26/2008 2:58:18 AM

    Pfft, Canada. They're not even a real country anyway.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Llgunu-FlX4&feature=related

  • Posted By: Concerned Canadian @ 11/26/2008 1:17:57 AM

    Whether Barack Hussein Obama, the Muslim from Chicago is the anti-Christ makes no difference. Bottom line is you are now watching the decline of the USA as the number one superpower of the world ...thats a
    guarantee....the USA with their gross negligence of fiscal accountability over the last decade has made allies into enemies...forget about the wars the US are in...you guys made some big time enemies because of your effing credit crisis and corruption....oh well...history repeats itself don't you dummies know that yet...every empire falls...and now its the USA's turn and good riddens...I can run the United States 10 times better than you stupid monkeys with my eyes closed !! Oh ya...America...please do not insult Christians, the Vatican and the Islam nation..use the Quran for the inauguration and not the Bible because contrary to popular belief...your effing lousy new President is a Muslim...and there's no denying it.....man you Americans are dumb....I mean really really dumb...and all queer too !!

  • Posted By: textom74 @ 11/25/2008 6:34:01 PM

    This is a putrid way to make sales or ratings, it is a mean-spirited way to stir up trouble. Why Mr. Editor????

  • Posted By: textom74 @ 11/25/2008 6:29:23 PM

    How ridiculous. what this country needs now is some heavy duty science education. The masses have been poisoned, dangled and twisted so long about faith, rapture and the anti-christ BS. When will they ever learn? I say never and that is evident right here on this board. Too, what in the name of righteousness is Newsweek doing perpetrating this fallacy? Get over it, the voters just made history and we have an opportunity to show the whole planet that we can 'Overcome' tenured predjudice and hatred. President to be Obama has enough problems entering office without scumbags playing games and especially giving credence to the ill-advised.

  • Posted By: textom74 @ 11/25/2008 6:21:31 PM

    Please folks, get some real science and understanding of your world into your gray matter. The infection is not about Obama, it is the cloak of racism and the lure of a fantasy afterlife. Get over it and get moving towards making this world a better place. Barrack is more American than the 'apple pie' slanderer's who have made a mess of the world already....Shush!!!!!

  • Posted By: paulte @ 11/20/2008 1:00:23 PM

    Obama as the Antichrist? Sounds good to me but I kinda doubt it! The only thing that would make one wonder (if one believes in such thngs) is the apparent ease with which a black man actually won the White House. Who would have thought so, huh? Was he aided by Satan? Id there is to be an Antichrist, hw will be in league with satan. Of course his pro-choice position is extreme and pure evil. This character wouldn't even vote against! People who do evil or facilitate evil on the earth will enter the eternal flames!

    I have no doubt about the reality of hell and damnation. But I am skeptical about the notion of an Antichrist. The Book of Revelation engages in a certain type of writing called apocalyptic and it is not to be taken literally. There's plenty of evil today but there has always been evil. There is plenty wrong with America but let us not forget that some of the worst evil like abortion and pornography comes from the Supreme Court and not from legilative bodies. Also, the evil of gay marriage is coming from state courts.

    • Posted By: epryor @ 11/20/2008 1:30:15 PM

      Do you think Jesus established a place of eternal hellfire and brimstone for someone to burn forever? Does not sound very Christian. The Isrealites did not believe in Hell until they encountered the Greeks. If you look at Greek mythology, the compartments of Hell are the same. Hell is actually a mistranslation. Everywhere that the bible says Hell, it is translated from Sheol, which was a place of the dead where both good and evil went to after death. Hell is also translated from Ghenna, a trash dump where trash was burned. Everywhere the translators saw the words Sheol and Ghenna, they tranlated them into Hades which was the Greek Underworld. This is how Hell as a place of damnation and eternal flames was born. There are people who have never heard the name Jesus and died. What happens to them? It is very reasonable to believe there is no Hell.

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 1:13:27 PM

        Here is what happens to those who haven't heard of the gospel.... God is a just God and will judge accordingly to the knowledge of each or what is put in the conscience......Selah!

        Rom.2
        [11] For there is no respect of persons with God.
        [12] For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
        [13] (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
        [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
        [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
        [16] In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

    • Posted By: PPC7 @ 11/22/2008 12:23:55 AM

      Why do we keep calling him a black man? His mother was white, and he was raised by his cracker Grandparents.

  • Posted By: davejohn @ 11/19/2008 12:01:19 PM

    MonHom, where could I start here? How about Obama's racist church that posted the charter of manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group's official charter ??? which calls for the murder of Jews ??? to America's Declaration of Independence? Do you know that Jesus was a Jew and that Christians are to LOVE the Jew?! did you know that? Did you know that his church endorsed (and before you say..yeah but he left..yeah, but..not until his poll numbers began to plummet) Louis Farrakhan, a man who's religion, Nation of Islam says that Jews weren't made by God but by a scientist in a lab? (look it up if you don't believe me) How about Obama's rejection of his state's version of the Born Alive Baby Protection Act? how is that Christ like? did you know that Obama said that we were only one justice away from reversing Roe V Wade but..he ran on the promise that he would prevent that from happening? is that Christ like to you? Do you not know that God says that he hates hands that shed innocent blood? Obama has that blood clear up to his elbow! Did you know that Obama called Christ a liar when he denied and said that there was more than one way to God?! Jesus said that he was the only way to God, so...who do I believe? Obama or Jesus Christ? I'm going with Jesus myself! Nope..I'm sorry..there is nothing remotely Christ like in Barack Obama!

    • Posted By: epryor @ 11/19/2008 12:20:24 PM

      Obama's church is not racist. You just heard those snipits on Fox News that they wanted you to hear. The sermon was about how the government failed it's people, and how Jesus does not. I and other people heard the whole sermon and It was uplifting. underhanded of them to play just the inflammatory parts of his sermon. I could place a mic in your house, edit it and make it look like you hate Santa Clause. As for the Isreal-Palestinian conflict, do you know what happened to the Palestinians? Their homes- destroyed, their land-taken. Just like the American Indian. Obama rejected the Born Alive Baby Protection Act because there was already a law on the books. That Hamas stuff sounds like an outrageous lie.

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/19/2008 2:50:08 PM

        We are a congregation which is unashamedly black and unapologetically Christian,??? says the Trinity United Church of Christ???s website in Chicago. ???We are an African people and remain true to our native land, the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.???
        That???s just the beginning. The church has a ???non-negotiable commitment to Africa,??? according to its website, and its pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. subscribes to what is called the Black Value System.
        While the Black Value System includes such items as commitment to God, education, and self-discipline, it refers to ???our racist competitive society??? and includes the disavowal of the pursuit of ???middle-classness??? and a pledge of allegiance to ???all black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System.??? It defines ???middle-classness??? as a way for American society to ???snare??? blacks rather than ???killing them off directly??? or ???placing them in concentration camps,??? just as the country structures ???an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.???

        • Posted By: epryor @ 11/19/2008 3:12:06 PM

          Some of that does sound crazy, but not antichrist crazy. I still see nothing racist about being unashamedly Black. You might say, what if I went to a church that was unashamedly White. The problem is that society makes some Blacks feel ashamed of their color. If there is one race you don't want to be in America, it's Black. Most Black stereotypes are negative. The church is just saying that it is OK to be Black and I am not ashamed. It is not an exclusionary statement. Rev. Wright was a Marine who served his country and is not anti-White or anti-country. He just wants America to take a less aggressive stance against other countries and against other races.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 1:08:35 PM

            You can gloss over anything that you want but when you only promote one race it is called racism period.... it is like the KKK saying they are not ashamed of being white and start promoting that culture and blame others for there oppression. This is what Rev. Wright has done and blames America or shall I say White America for the problems that blacks face today.

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/19/2008 6:01:56 PM

        The bulk of what are called "Palestinian Arabs" are members of families who migrated into the Land of Israel beginning in the late 19th century. Palestinian nationalism is a mislabeling of Arab nationalism. Arab nationalism exists, although it is closely bound up with Islamic nationalism and even Islamism. Palestinian nationalism, however, is a phantom. It is nothing more than genocidal hatred of Jews!
        The Arab assaults and aggressions against Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1968, and 1973 had nothing to do with Palestinians. The Palestinian terror campaign would itself be easy to suppress today and eradicate if the Middle East conflict were really a Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel would simply obliterate the terrorists and expel their supporters to Syria and Lebanon. The Middle East war continues because it is really an Arab-Israeli war, not an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also in large part a war between barbarism and civilization. In many ways an Islamic religious jihad against the Jews.

        • Posted By: epryor @ 11/19/2008 8:25:17 PM

          It does not matter what you call them, Arabs or Palestinians. They lost their homes to people who were not even from that region of the world (since Biblical times). That is called stealing.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/20/2008 4:54:17 PM

            Here is what you fail to realize ..... that is the history of how Israel became a nation. You also failed to realize that this land was not under Arab control but British control at the time ....also some of the Arabs began selling land to the Jews....

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/20/2008 4:30:25 PM

            In 1923, the British divided the "Palestine" portion of the Ottoman Empire into two administrative districts. Jews would be permitted only west of the Jordan river. In effect, the British had "chopped off" 75% of the originally proposed Jewish Palestinian homeland to form an Arab Palestinian nation called Trans-Jordan (meaning "across the Jordan River"). This territory east of the Jordan River was given to Emir Abdullah (from Hejaz, now Saudi Arabia) who was not even an Arab-"Palestinian!" This portion of Palestine was renamed Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan and would again be renamed "Jordan" in 1946. In other words, the eastern 3/4 of Palestine would be renamed TWICE, in effect, erasing all connection to the name "Palestine!" However, the bottom line is that the Palestinian Arabs had THEIR "Arab Palestinian" homeland. The remaining 25% of Palestine (now WEST of the Jordan River) was to be the Jewish Palestinian homeland. However, sharing was not part of the Arab psychological makeup then nor now.
            Encouraged and incited by growing Arab nationalism throughout the Middle East, the Arabs of that small remaining Palestinian territory west of the Jordan River launched never-ending murderous attacks upon the Jewish Palestinians in an effort to drive them out. Most terrifying were the Hebron massacres of 1929 and later during the 1936-39 "Arab Revolt." The British at first tried to maintain order but soon (due to the large oil deposits being discovered throughout the Arab Middle East) turned a blind eye. It became painfully clear to the Palestinian Jews that they must fight the Arabs AND drive out the British.

            • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/20/2008 4:33:13 PM

              The Palestinian Jews were forced to form an organized defense against the Arabs Palestinians.... thus was formed the Hagana, the beginnings of the Israeli Defense Forces [IDF]. There was also a Jewish underground called the Irgun led by Menachem Begin (who later became Prime Minister of Israel). Besides fighting the Arabs, the Irgun was instrumental in driving out the pro-Arab British. Finally in 1947 the British had enough and turned the Palestine matter over to the United Nations.
              The 1947 U.N. Resolution 181 partition plan was to divide the remaining 25% of Palestine into a Jewish Palestinian State and a SECOND Arab Palestinian State (Trans-Jordan being the first) based upon population concentrations. The Jewish Palestinians accepted... the Arab Palestinians rejected. The Arabs still wanted ALL of Palestine... both east AND west of the Jordan River.
              Our Palestinian Cousins started the '48 war, and in so doing released the warlike appetites of a nation of survivors, a people with no place to run, who had repressed their rage for millennia, and had now earned full title to it!

              • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/20/2008 4:34:44 PM

                On May 14, 1948 the "Palestinian" Jews finally declared their own State of Israel and became "Israelis." On the next day, seven neighboring Arab armies... Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Yemen... invaded Israel. Most of the Arabs living within the boundaries of the newly declared "ISRAEL" were encouraged to leave by the invading Arab armies to facilitate the slaughter of the Jews and were promised to be given all Jewish property after the victorious Arab armies won the war. The truth is that 70% of the Arab Palestinians who left in 1948 ??? perhaps 300,000 to 400,000 of them ??? never saw an Israeli soldier! They did not flee because they feared Jewish thugs, but because of a rational and reasonable calculus: the Jews will be exterminated; we will get out of the way while that messy and dangerous business goes forward, and we will return afterwards to reclaim our homes, and to inherit those nice Jewish properties as well. They guessed wrong; and the Arab Palestinians are still tortured by the residual shame of their flight. Their shame is so great because in their eyes running from Jews was like running from women. So much for the blatant lie about Jews throwing out all the [Palestinian] Arabs!
                The remaining 30% either (1) saw for themselves that these Jews would fight and die for their new nation and decided to pack up and leave or (2) were driven off the land as a normal consequence of war.

                When the 19 month war ended, Israel survived despite a 1% loss of its entire population! Those Arabs who did not flee became today's Israeli-Arab citizens. Those who fled became the seeds of the first wave of "Palestinian Arab refugees."

                • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/20/2008 4:39:49 PM

                  The Arab propagandists and apologists almost never mentioned that in 1948, Arab armies launched a war against a one-day-old Israel. Instead he focused on the main consequence of that war: the creation of Arab refugees, stating that Israel "short of genocide" expelled 800,000 of them. This not only disagrees with UN estimates of a bit over 400,000 refugees but also ignores the fact that most of the Arabs/Palestinians were encouraged to leave by the Arab World itself!
                  The end result of the 1948-49 Israeli War of Independence was the creation of a Jewish State slightly larger than that which was proposed by the 1947 United Nations Resolution 181. What remained of that almost-created second Arab Palestinian State was gobbled up by (1) Egypt (occupying the Gaza Strip) and by (2) Trans-Jordan (occupying Judea-Samaria (a.k.a. the "West Bank" of the Jordan River) and Jerusalem. In the next year (1950) Trans-Jordan formally merged this West Bank territory into itself and granted all those "Palestinian" Arabs living there Jordanian citizenship. Since Trans-Jordan was then no longer confined to one side of the Jordan River, it renamed itself simply "Jordan." In the final analysis, the Arabs of Palestine ended up with nearly 85% of the original territory of Palestine... called Jordan but in reality their ARAB "Palestinian state! But that was still not 100% and thus the conflict between Arab and Jew for "Palestine" would continue through four more wars and continuous Arab terrorist attacks upon the Israeli citizenry. It continues to this very day.

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/19/2008 6:00:42 PM

        The Middle East war is not now and never was a conflict between Israelis/Jews on the one hand and Palestinians on the other. In fact, the Arab-"Palestinians", while currently the perpetrators of most of the anti-Jewish atrocities, were never a very important part of the conflict. In fact, before about 1970, virtually no one in the world considered the Middle East conflict to be one between Israelis and Palestinians.
        The term "Palestinian" itself had referred to Israeli Jews back in the 1940s, and had been slowly deconstructed and redefined to refer to the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. The Middle East Conflict was always a war by Arabs against Jews, not a conflict between Israelis and "Palestinians." The war was repackaged as a conflict between Jews and Palestinians as a public relations gimmick by the Arab fascist regimes. These regimes had never had any interest in "Palestinians," in creating a "Palestinian" state, or in "Palestinian nationalism" before 1967. That is because Palestinian nationalism did not and DOES NOT exist. The Palestinians were a regional group of Arabs having virtually no cultural nor national distinctive traits separating them from Syrians, Lebanese, and Jordanians. They are all basically Arabs!.

      • Posted By: maryvogt @ 11/19/2008 12:38:43 PM

        Thank you for responding rationally to that unbelievable drivel.

  • Posted By: epryor @ 11/20/2008 9:28:35 PM

    bojack27--
    The standard Zionist position is that they showed up in Palestine in the late 19th century to reclaim their ancestral homeland. Jews bought land and started building up the Jewish community there. They were met with increasingly violent opposition from the Palestinian Arabs, presumably stemming from the Arabs' inherent anti-Semitism. The Zionists were then forced to defend themselves and, in one form or another, this same situation continues up to today.
    What really happened was that the Zionist movement, from the beginning, looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the indigenous Arab population so that Israel could be a wholly Jewish state, or as much as was possible. Land bought by the Jewish National Fund was held in the name of the Jewish people and could never be sold or even leased back to Arabs (a situation which continues to the present).
    The Arab community, as it became increasingly aware of the Zionists' intentions, strenuously opposed further Jewish immigration and land buying because it posed a real and imminent danger to the very existence of Arab society in Palestine. Because of this opposition, the entire Zionist project never could have been realized without the military backing of the British. The vast majority of the population of Palestine, by the way, had been Arabic since the seventh century A.D. (Over 1200 years)
    In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didn't matter. The Arabs' opposition to Zionism wasn't based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people
    And I think that the Palestinians left for a variety of reasons, including getting out of a war zone.But whatever the circumstances, Israel went beyond its rights in passing laws to prevent the Palestinians from returning after the war. International law requires countries to allow people who flee a war back to their homes when the war ends. Israel was specifically enjoined to do so by the United Nations after the war, but did not comply. This was the beginning of the Palestinian refugee crisis, which remains the most vexing issue between the two peoples to this day.

    • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 10:41:39 AM

      Palestinians Who Remain in Refugee Camps
      There are eight refugee camps within the Gaza Strip, all under Palestinian Authority control. About 470,000 Palestinians ??? roughly a third of Gaza???s Palestinian population ??? live in the camps, built by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. Even after receiving $6 billion in aid over the last decade from the international community, including the United States, the Palestinian leadership has not built a single house for these refugees.
      As part of the disengagement initiative, the Palestinian Authority and Israel agreed that Israel would destroy Israeli homes. Palestinian leaders said they would prefer to replace the homes so that they could build new, more practical housing to accommodate many of the Palestinians living in refugees in camps.
      Background: The Palestinian Refugees
      Although most of the Arabs had left Israel by November 1948, there were still those who chose to leave even after hostilities ceased. An interesting case was the evacuation of 3,000 Arabs from Faluja, a village between
      Tel Aviv and Beersheba:
      Some impartial observers felt that with proper counsel after the Israeli/¬Egyptian armistice, the Arab population might have advantageously remained. They state that the Israeli Government had given security guarantees of both person and property. However, no effort was made by Egypt, Transjordan or even the United Nations Palestine Conciliation Commission to advise the Faluja Arabs one way or the other (New York Times, March 4, 1949).

      How Many Refugees?
      Many Arabs claim that 800,000 to 1,000,000 Palestinians became refugees in 1947/¬49. The last census was taken in 1945. It found only 756,000 permanent Arab residents in Israel. On November 30, 1947, the date the
      UN voted for partition, the total was 809,100. A 1949 Government of Israel census counted 160,000 Arabs living in the country after the war. Meaning no more than 650,000 Palestinian Arabs could have become
      refugees. A report by the UN Mediator (Who/When) on Palestine arrived at an even lower

      • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 12:23:10 PM

        figure ??? 472,000.
        Israel's Attitude Toward Refugees
        When plans for setting up a state were made in early 1948, Jewish leaders in Palestine expected the population to include a significant Arab population. From the Israeli perspective, the refugees had been given an opportunity to stay in their homes and be a part of the new state. Approximately 160,000 Arabs had chosen to do so. To repatriate those who had fled would be, in the words of Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, "suicidal folly."
        Israel could not simply agree to allow all Palestinians to return, but consistently sought a solution to the refugee problem. Israel's position was expressed by
        David Ben¬-Gurion (August 1, 1948):
        When the Arab states are ready to conclude a peace treaty with Israel this question will come up for constructive solution as part of the general settlement, and with due regard to our counter¬claims in respect of the destruction of Jewish life and property, the long-term interest of the Jewish and Arab populations, the stability of the State of Israel and the durability of the basis of peace between it and its neighbors, the actual position and fate of the Jewish communities in the Arab countries, the responsibilities of the Arab governments for their war of aggression and their liability for reparation, will all be relevant in the question whether, to what extent, and under what conditions, the former Arab residents of the territory of Israel should be allowed to return.
        The Israeli government was not indifferent to the plight of the refugees; an ordinance was passed creating a Custodian of Abandoned Property "to prevent unlawful occupation of empty houses and business premises, to administer ownerless property, and also to secure tilling of deserted fields, and save the crops....
        The implied danger of repatriation did not prevent Israel from allowing some refugees to return and offering to take back a substantial number as a condition for signing a peace treaty. In 1949, Israel offered to allow families that had been separated during the war to return; agreed to release refugee accounts frozen in Israeli banks (eventually released in 1953); offered to pay compensation for abandoned lands and, finally, agreed to repatriate 100,000 refugees.
        The Arabs rejected all the Israeli compromises. They were unwilling to take any action that might be construed as recognition of Israel. They made repatriation a precondition for negotiations, something Israel rejected. The result was the confinement of the refugees in camps.

        • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 12:41:26 PM

          Despite the position taken by the Arab states, Israel did release the Arab refugees' blocked bank accounts, which totaled more than $10 million. In addition, through 1975, the Israeli government paid to more than 11,000 claimants more than 23 million Israeli pounds in cash and granted more than 20,000 acres as alternative holdings. Payments were made by land value between 1948 and 1953, plus 6 percent for every year following the claim submission.
          After the Six-Day War, Israel allowed some West Bank Arabs to return. In 1967, more than 9,000 families were reunited and, by 1971, Israel had readmitted 40,000 refugees. By contrast, in July 1968, Jordan prohibited persons intending to remain in the East Bank from emigrating from the West Bank and Gaza.
          Arab Attitudes Toward the Refugees
          The UN discussions on refugees had begun in the summer of 1948, before Israel had completed its military victory; consequently, the Arabs still believed they could win the war and allow the refugees to return triumphant. The Arab position was expressed by Emile Ghoury, the Secretary of the Arab Higher Committee:
          It is inconceivable that the refugees should be sent back to their homes while they are occupied by the Jews, as the latter would hold them as hostages and maltreat them. The very proposal is an evasion of responsibility by those responsible. It will serve as a first step towards Arab recognition of the State of Israel and partition.
          The Arabs demanded that the United Nations assert the "right" of the Palestinians to return to their homes, and were unwilling to accept anything less until after their defeat had become obvious. The Arabs then reinterpreted Resolution 194 as granting the refugees the absolute right of repatriation and have demanded that Israel accept this interpretation ever since.

          • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 12:46:09 PM

            One reason for maintaining this position was the conviction that the refugees could ultimately bring about Israel's destruction, a sentiment expressed by Egyptian Foreign Minister Muhammad Salah al-Din:
            It is well-known and understood that the Arabs, in demanding the return of the refugees to Palestine, mean their return as masters of the Homeland and not as slaves. With a greater clarity, they mean the liquidation of the State of Israel (Al-Misri, October 11, 1949).
            After the 1948 war, Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip and its more than 200,000 inhabitants, but refused to allow the Palestinians into Egypt or permit them to move elsewhere.
            Although demographic figures indicated ample room for settlement existed in
            Syria, Damascus refused to consider accepting any refugees, except those who might refuse repatriation. Syria also declined to resettle 85,000 refugees in 1952-54, though it had been offered international funds to pay for the project. Iraq was also expected to accept a large number of refugees, but proved unwilling. Lebanon insisted it had no room for the Palestinians. In 1950, the UN tried to resettle 150,000 refugees from Gaza in Libya, but was rebuffed by Egypt.
            Jordan was the only Arab country to welcome the Palestinians and grant them citizenship (to this day Jordan is the only Arab country where Palestinians as a group can become citizens). King Abdullah considered the Palestinian Arabs and Jordanians one people. By 1950, he annexed the West Bank and forbade the use of the term Palestine in official documents.
            In 1952, the UNWRA set up a fund of $200 million to provide homes and jobs for the refugees, but it went untouched.
            The plight of the refugees remained unchanged after the Suez War. In fact, even the rhetoric stayed the same. In 1957, the Refugee Conference at Homs, Syria, passed a resolution stating:
            Any discussion aimed at a solution of the Palestine problem which will not be based on ensuring the refugees' right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as a desecration of the Arab people and an act of treason (Beirut al Massa, July 15, 1957).

            • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 12:48:28 PM

              The treatment of the refugees in the decade following their displacement was best summed up by a former director of UNRWA, Ralph Garroway, in August 1958: "The Arab States do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a damn whether the refugees live or die."
              Little has changed in succeeding years. Arab governments have frequently offered jobs, housing, land and other benefits to Arabs and non-Arabs, excluding Palestinians. For example, Saudi Arabia chose not to use unemployed Palestinian refugees to alleviate its labor shortage in the late 1970's and early 1980's. Instead, thousands of South Koreans and other Asians were recruited to fill jobs.
              The situation grew even worse in the wake of the Gulf War. Kuwait, which employed large numbers of Palestinians but denied them citizenship, expelled more than 300,000 of them. "If people pose a security threat, as a sovereign country we have the right to exclude anyone we don't want," said Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, Saud Nasir Al-Sabah (Jerusalem Report, June 27, 1991).
              Source: UNRWA
              By the middle of 2003, the number of Palestinian refugees on UNRWA rolls had risen to 4.1 million, several times the number that left Palestine in 1948. In just the past three years, the number grew by 8 percent. Today, 42 percent of the refugees live in the territories; if you add those living in Jordan, 80 percent of the Palestinians currently live in ???Palestine.??? Though the popular image is of refugees in squalid camps, less than one-third of the Palestinians are in the 59
              UNRWA-run camps.
              During the years that Israel controlled the Gaza Strip, a consistent effort was made to get the Palestinians into permanent housing. The Palestinians opposed the idea because the frustrated and bitter inhabitants of the camps provided the various terrorist factions with their manpower. Moreover, the Arab states routinely pushed for the adoption of UN resolutions demanding that Israel desist from the removal of Palestinian refugees from camps in Gaza and the West Bank. They preferred to keep the Palestinians as symbols of Israeli "oppression."

              • Posted By: bojack27 @ 11/25/2008 12:50:14 PM

                Now the camps are in the hands of the Palestinian Authority (PA), but little is being done to improve the lot of the Palestinians living in them. Netty Gross of the Jerusalem Report (July 6, 1998) visited Gaza and asked an official why the camps there hadn't been dismantled. She was told the Palestinian Authority had made a "political decision" not to do anything for the nearly half a million Palestinians living in the camps until the final-status talks with Israel took place. In fact, between June 2000 and June 2003, the number of Palestinians living in camps in the PA has increased by nearly 50,000 (8 percent) and the overall number of refugees has grown by 11 percent.
                For decades the refugees have held the UN responsible for ameliorating their condition. Though many Palestinians are unhappy with the treatment they have received from their Arab brothers, most refugees focus their discontentment on "the Zionists," whom they blame for their predicament rather than the vanquished Arab armies

                http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/apps/nlnet/content.aspx?c=hsJPK0PIJpH&b=913019&ct=1226383&printmode=1

  • Posted By: aggressiveprogressive @ 11/25/2008 9:28:26 AM

    from "Cheers & Jeers" : It's bad enough that the article feeds the existing hatred against Obama, and blacks in general, by the cuckoo nut jobs who think assassination (or a good old-fashioned lynchin') can't come soon enough. It's bad enough that the article implies Obama has a secret "evil agenda," with nary a mention that Bush's agenda virtually destroyed our country and weakened world stability... 'nuf said

    • Posted By: Blackcourt79 @ 11/25/2008 10:23:34 AM

      Oh right... how could we forget that any hatred directed at Obama would have to be because he's a black man... couldn't possibly be that he has made all kinds of promises and is now retracting them one after the other... couldn't possibly be that he is a Marxist or anything logical like that. Come on now... you're as crazy the people you are crticizing.

      • Posted By: epryor @ 11/25/2008 11:36:14 AM

        sorry for the double post within a post. Was having trouble. Here's the post--
        Did you see the Palin rallies? People openly said they would not vote for a Black man. A woman on NPR said the same thing. A republican group put his face on a food stamp with ribs, watermelon and fried chicken. A McCain advisor who quit said he would "paint the White House Black" and Ludacris would be in his cabinent. Children on a school bus chanted "assinate him". I have heard open discussions in the news and on YouTube to the effect that he should be assinated. People in a rural store were taking bets as to what date he would be assinated. I have heard open discussions in the news and on YouTube to the effect that he should be assinated. These things occured before he even had a chance to break any promise. You can't just say these things are because of his policies, because they are the similar to Clinton's policies. People with intellect LOVE him--just look at his economic team- even republicans like them. And as for the socialist/marxist comment, just look at his team--do you really think they are Marxist? Do you think Tim Geithner (former president of the NY federal reserve) and Larry Summers are Marxist? Do you even know what Marxism is? No one wants the government to take over and run any privately owned company. Government help in the form of money does not equal socialism/marxism, whoever believes this should review their middle school lessons.

      • Posted By: epryor @ 11/25/2008 11:28:08 AM

        Did you see the Palin rallies? People openly said they would not vote for a Black man. A woman on NPR said the same thing. A republican group put his face on a food stamp with ribs, watermelon and fried chicken. A McCain advisor who quit said he would "paint the White House Black" and Ludacris would be in his cabinent. Children on a school bus chanted "assinate him". I have heard open discussions in the news and on YouTube to the effect that he should be assinated. People in a rural store were taking bets as to what date he would be assinated. There have been Did you see the Palin rallies? People openly said they would not vote for a Black man. A woman on NPR said the same thing. A republican group put his face on a food stamp with ribs, watermelon and fried chicken. A McCain advisor who quit said he would "paint the White House Black" and Ludacris would be in his cabinent. Children on a school bus chanted "assinate him". I have heard open discussions in the news and on YouTube to the effect that he should be assinated. People in a rural store were taking bets as to what date he would be assinated. There have been These things occured before he even had a chance to break any promise. You can't just say these things are because of his policies, because they are the similar to Clinton's policies. People with intellect LOVE him--just look at his economic team- even republicans like them. There have been These things occured before he even had a chance to break any promise. You can't just say these things are because of his policies, because they are the similar to Clinton's policies. People with intellect LOVE him--just look at his economic team- even republicans like them. And as for the socialist/marxist comment, just look at his team--do you really think they are Marxist? Do you think Tim Geithner (former president of the NY federal reserve) and Larry Summers are Marxist? Do you even know what Marxism is? No one wants the government to take over and run any privately owned company. Government help in the form of money does not equal socialism/marxism.

  • Posted By: dccpa @ 11/25/2008 8:53:15 AM

    I am shocked Newsweek has given tehese ignorant bigoted ideas any forum to be taken seriously. Doesn't your editor feel any responsibility when spreading obsurdity. There are plenty of people who believe a lot of crazy things...they shouldn't be validated.

  • Posted By: scottgman @ 11/24/2008 10:20:26 AM

    I am embarrassed for Newsweek. It is truly shameful that Newsweek published a "serious" discussion of whether Obama is the anti-christ. Give me a break. This article should have been an expose on the ridiculous (and bigoted) superstitious beliefs that some Americans hold. I live in the middle of the Bible Belt and I am well aware that there are a substantial number of people who believe in this nonsense. But I read Newsweek with the expectation of serious discussion about serious topics. Not this drivel. What's next Newsweek? A story about whether Casper the Friendly Ghost is really friendly?

  • Posted By: Minnesota612 @ 11/24/2008 9:47:10 AM

    I'd like to report abuse. It's the abuse of your pages with drivel like this. I expect this kind of b.s. crazy stuff from the Inquirer, not from Newsweek. Lisa Miller, crawl back in your hole, put a tin foil hat on to keep the CIA out, and leave the rest of the world alone.

  • Posted By: Hildybel @ 11/23/2008 4:08:46 PM

    what a steaming pile of bull hockey! People actually believe this? Jeeze louise - we are in more trouble that I thought. Get a frigging life! Worry about a meteorite falling on you head - a lion escaping the zoo and eating you while you sleep, a black hole gobbling the solar system, the freaking economy, for crying out loud! This is so silly it makes my teeth ache. The freaks who believe this have all the reasoning power of a bowl of hair. I'm amazed anyone can be that dumb and still have motor function!

  • Posted By: RO in Reno @ 11/23/2008 2:10:08 PM

    Good Lord how can Obama be the Anti Christ? GW Bush is, and there can only be one.

  • Posted By: gingerella @ 11/22/2008 11:17:44 PM

    omygod. I surely hope this country does something SOON about the state of (non) education in this country today. To think so many can be so incredibly ignorant is almost beyond belief. Beginning with Sara Palin I might add. But Lisa Miller is right behind her. Trading on the FEAR that you can impose upon not only yourself, but on anyone with whom you might come in to contact. FEAR is what this kind of belief system gets you.

  • Posted By: Ebbtidecheque @ 11/22/2008 9:12:11 PM

    I'm a christian, but this idea is just ridiculous. Imho. Peace.

  • Posted By: elleneyegreen @ 11/22/2008 10:01:15 AM

    Total, 100% agreement with you LIberty Belle. I wrote to the editor last week and have not heard a peep, as expected. Nor anything else from the fear-mongerer lisa miller - the swine with cloven hooves...

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse