Remarkable display on Israeli TV as Dan Margalit mixes it up with Arab-Israeli Knesset member Jamal Zahalka:
Don't they have commercial breaks on Israeli TV? Hand it to the Israelis, they even have seditious louts like this guy in the Knesset. I'm not 100% sure whether that's a strength or a weakness, actually.
This clips shows the true nature of the Arab "narrative". Their true goal is to take over the land of Israel and expel or murder every Jew there.
It's ludicrous to talk about the war dead in Gaza while ignoring the much greater number of murdered Israeli civilians who were deliberately targeted by Arabs. And Cast Lead was entirely the fault of the Gazans - as was pointed out, it would never have happened but for the 8,000 missiles fired into southern Israel over an eight-year period, during which every single Jew in Gaza was expelled in an effort to bring a peace the Gazans refused to accept.
All the Gazans need do to enjoy peace and prosperity is to stop murdering Jews. So simple, but they don't want to stop. Then they complain about the consequences. Too bad for them, it seems that at last Israel is no longer listening.
I'm surprised at Dan Margalit that he lost his cool like that and on air, too. He is a very seasoned TV presenter and should have known better than to engage in this kind of verbal fisticuffs with an invited guest. When the Arab MK inserted his blood libel against Ehud Barak, Margalit should have been at his coolest, and draw him out on it. Handled carefully, here was a chance to let the MK expose himself fully and publicly. Instead Margalit allowed himself to get hot under the collar and came through as unprofessional. Much like some Al-Jazeera interviewer, unfortunately.
They tried to make him "ger toshav" Israeli dhimmitude as written in the law. But what did he do. He ignored them and left and proofed that the heads remain heads and the tails remain tails.
Arabian's comment is again proof that he lives in ancient times. He refers to a term from the Torah, which instructs the Hebrew people of the bible to treat every stranger who lives among them with respect, granting him protection under the law. This was unknown before the Hebrews introduced the idea of human rights into the culture of the ancient middle east.
Of course modern Israel is based on foundational laws that derive from the liberal spirit of the bible and is based on democratic concepts about which Arabian has very little knowledge or understanding. Thus, there is not such term as "ger toshav" in Israel's civil law. It is a religious denomination and its main use is in regulating the status of marriage and death.
You will also notice how incapable Arabian is of commenting without giving relief to the seething animus Arabs are reared upon towards Jews. Just as in my blog, when he was angry at something I said, he referred to Jews as "slaves", a term apparently denoting shame and inferiority per se.
But, as always, it is a felicitous circumstance that Arabian and like-minded posters ventilate in public so that American readers of the blogosphere can become acquainted from up close with the norms and thinking systems that inform the societies they represent.
I will say it again: Dan Margalit did not act professionally. He should not have allowed himself to be provoked by the guest. He should have asked him some well-aimed questions for which the guest could not possible have provided any reasonable or factual support, this exposing himself as a superstitious and undemocratic thug.
1' you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
2' Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
3' [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
4' the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
5' Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger."
Eddie: Jamal Zahalka is not a Jihadist. He is an Israeli citizen and an elected MK. He has extremist positions vis a vis Israel's mainstream political positions. That does not make him a Jihadist, who is motivated by highly reactionary, irrational, and dangerous religious sentiments.
Indeed but you misread my sentence. I don't think this defines Zahalka. He is an irredentist and politically at odds with Israel's policies. that does not yet make him a Jihadist or a traitor.
Trust me on this, Solomon, having traitorous louts that hate you and your culture in the Legislature is not a strength.
This clips shows the true nature of the Arab "narrative". Their true goal is to take over the land of Israel and expel or murder every Jew there.
It's ludicrous to talk about the war dead in Gaza while ignoring the much greater number of murdered Israeli civilians who were deliberately targeted by Arabs. And Cast Lead was entirely the fault of the Gazans - as was pointed out, it would never have happened but for the 8,000 missiles fired into southern Israel over an eight-year period, during which every single Jew in Gaza was expelled in an effort to bring a peace the Gazans refused to accept.
All the Gazans need do to enjoy peace and prosperity is to stop murdering Jews. So simple, but they don't want to stop. Then they complain about the consequences. Too bad for them, it seems that at last Israel is no longer listening.
I'm surprised at Dan Margalit that he lost his cool like that and on air, too. He is a very seasoned TV presenter and should have known better than to engage in this kind of verbal fisticuffs with an invited guest. When the Arab MK inserted his blood libel against Ehud Barak, Margalit should have been at his coolest, and draw him out on it. Handled carefully, here was a chance to let the MK expose himself fully and publicly. Instead Margalit allowed himself to get hot under the collar and came through as unprofessional. Much like some Al-Jazeera interviewer, unfortunately.
Does hamass have 1,400 pictures of the 1,400 dead paleSWINIANS to prove their propaganda?
Not 10 pictures of the same jihadi.
Any pictures of the 400 dead paleSWINIAN children without beards and AK47s?
It must suck to have the sons of pigs an apes kick islamofascist lifted ass.
They tried to make him "ger toshav" Israeli dhimmitude as written in the law. But what did he do. He ignored them and left and proofed that the heads remain heads and the tails remain tails.
Arabian's comment is again proof that he lives in ancient times. He refers to a term from the Torah, which instructs the Hebrew people of the bible to treat every stranger who lives among them with respect, granting him protection under the law. This was unknown before the Hebrews introduced the idea of human rights into the culture of the ancient middle east.
Of course modern Israel is based on foundational laws that derive from the liberal spirit of the bible and is based on democratic concepts about which Arabian has very little knowledge or understanding. Thus, there is not such term as "ger toshav" in Israel's civil law. It is a religious denomination and its main use is in regulating the status of marriage and death.
You will also notice how incapable Arabian is of commenting without giving relief to the seething animus Arabs are reared upon towards Jews. Just as in my blog, when he was angry at something I said, he referred to Jews as "slaves", a term apparently denoting shame and inferiority per se.
But, as always, it is a felicitous circumstance that Arabian and like-minded posters ventilate in public so that American readers of the blogosphere can become acquainted from up close with the norms and thinking systems that inform the societies they represent.
The video is a great example of islamofascist inability to talk calmly, rationally.
Jamal Zahalka starts screaming like a typical jihadi - and storms off like a frightened child.
I will say it again: Dan Margalit did not act professionally. He should not have allowed himself to be provoked by the guest. He should have asked him some well-aimed questions for which the guest could not possible have provided any reasonable or factual support, this exposing himself as a superstitious and undemocratic thug.
Noga, do you REALLY think that the jihadi would seriously consider any question?
jihadis are so emotional.
arabian, why are jihadis, islamofascists, taqiyya mongers so emotional?
Interesting finding, a-propo my comment:
"English translaton of the deciphered text:
1' you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
2' Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
3' [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
4' the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
5' Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger."
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/uoh-mah010710.php
___________
Eddie: Jamal Zahalka is not a Jihadist. He is an Israeli citizen and an elected MK. He has extremist positions vis a vis Israel's mainstream political positions. That does not make him a Jihadist, who is motivated by highly reactionary, irrational, and dangerous religious sentiments.
Nogie, as you succinctly said, "motivated by highly reactionary, irrational, and dangerous religious sentiments"
It is those very traits that define a jihadist.
Indeed but you misread my sentence. I don't think this defines Zahalka. He is an irredentist and politically at odds with Israel's policies. that does not yet make him a Jihadist or a traitor.
Noga, I don't think that street arab is what we would in the US call the "loyal opposition".
I will be so bold as to paint him, correctly in my opinion as a unarmed, for now, jihadi.