I'm was actually surprised to pick up the New York Times to see a picture with the following caption
As one settler was carried off near the market, an officer rushed to pick up the man’s glasses from the ground.
My first response whenever I see the NY Times do anything about Israel is, usually something along the lines of "here we go again." But I was presently surprised when I saw this picture, a classic Jew-in-distress picture of one Jew helping the other.
The pleasant feeling died as soon as I started reading the article.
"Settler"
"Occupied West Bank"
"Palestinian city, Hebron."
I don't expect the NY Times to study the Bible, or learn Jewish history. But I did learn something very interesting yesterday that might cause them to rethink who the 'occupiers' are.
The Arabs call themselves "Philistines," the West calls them "Palestinians." They claim that they are the descendants of the Philistines. Well some good 'ol fashion history for you.
The word "Philistine" in Hebrew is "Pelishtim."
"Pelishtim," means "Occupier."
Case closed.
The pleasant feeling died as soon as I started reading the article.
"Settler"
"Occupied West Bank"
"Palestinian city, Hebron."
I don't expect the NY Times to study the Bible, or learn Jewish history. But I did learn something very interesting yesterday that might cause them to rethink who the 'occupiers' are.
The Arabs call themselves "Philistines," the West calls them "Palestinians." They claim that they are the descendants of the Philistines. Well some good 'ol fashion history for you.
The word "Philistine" in Hebrew is "Pelishtim."
"Pelishtim," means "Occupier."
Case closed.
No comments:
Post a Comment