Digging Up Graves At Ancient Palestinian Cemetery In East Jerusalem

 Soon all the History of Moses and his people will become forgotten. Only a memory will remain. Palestinian Jerusalem is older then Israel, in history. Excavation work at the ancient Palestinian Bab Al-Rahma cemetery, outside the walls of the Old City in East Jerusalem.

 Officers from Israel’s Nature And Parks Authority (INPA) plan to build a national park on parts of the cemetery’s land.

According to Maannews: Wafa reported that INPA staff began digging up graves and land in the cemetery around 20 days ago. Officials returned on Sunday to continue digging, which Wafa noted was “for the benefit of building a national Israeli park on parts of the cemetery’s land.”

 In 2015, the Bab al-Rahma cemetery was subject to demolitions after Israeli authorities announced plans to seize parts of the cemetery for a national park trail in 2015. 

The fate of Jerusalem and its holy sites has been a focal point of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for decades, with numerous tensions arising over Israeli threats regarding the status of non-Jewish religious sites in the city, and the “Judaization” of East Jerusalem.

The United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization’s (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee adopted a resolution in July 2017 reaffirming the international body’s non-recognition of Israeli sovereignty in East Jerusalem, and condemned Israeli policies in the Old City.



The Ringworm Children - Khazar Eugenics for Biblical Israelites

A terrifying documentary about the abduction and wholesale murder of Shephardic Israelite children in Israel, using massive exposure to X-rays. This was done under the pretense of "treating" the children, ripped from their parents upon entering Israel, for ringworm. (Chillingly reminiscent of Europeans being rounded up and "de-loused" in "showers" in the Nazi death camps.) Other Shephardic children were used for "medical experiments", while still others were stolen to be raised by "racially superior" Ashkenazi-Khazar parents.

 For those who do not know, the majority of northern European "Jews" are not biblical Jews at all (i.e., descendants of Jacob.) Rather, they are descended from Khazars of central Asia. Their religion is not centered on the Bible (Torah) as one might suppose, but rather upon the Babylonian Talmud. It is not uncommon for these Talmudic Khazars to believe that they are genetically or racially superior to the Shephardic Jews. However, the Shephardic Jews are much more often actually descended from Israelite ancestors.

This documentary was filmed in Hebrew (subtitled in English) in 2001. It is safe to say that everyone you are watching is now dead.


The Ringworm's Children (Part 1 of 5)- YouTube

Views: 246

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

 I agree

Thank you

Khazar Eugenics for Biblical Israelites

Since there were no People known as Palestinians in the ancient world... the graveyard they are digging up is not Palestinian... No amount of revisionist history can erase the truth as recorded in scripture and the ancient text... Palestine has never existed as a sovereign state or ethnic enclave in a State.

 Palestinian in the Bible, In contemporary understanding, however, Palestine is generally defined as a region bounded on the east by the Jordan River, on the north by the border between modern Israel and Lebanon, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea (including the coast of Gaza), and on the south by the Negev, with its southernmost extension.


 Hey Ronald, why did they bury Jesus outside of City of Jerusalem, which by the way Jesus was buried in the west areas of Palestine?

Why because the dead were not left in the city by tradition... they were all burried outside the City... and the Criminal Dead were assigned a grave most heanous... not so with Chirst.

The following article is an in depth examination of the Burial of Christ's Body... and its significance.

The Burial of Christ’s Body
By Wayne Jackson

"While it is common to stress the death and resurrection of Christ, little attention generally is paid to the matter of the Lord’s burial.
However, Paul declares that the gospel of Christ involves the death, burial, and resurrection of the Savior (1 Cor. 15:3-4).
After Jesus Christ died on the cross, his body was removed and placed in the new, unused tomb of a wealthy gentleman who was a member of the Hebrew Sanhedrin, Joseph of Arimathaea. The apostle Matthew wrote:
And when evening was come, there came a rich man from Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple: this man went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given up. And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, and departed (Mt. 27:57-60; cf. Mk. 15:43).
Here are some interesting and important truths associated with the burial of Christ.
The Bodies of Criminals
From a strictly human vantage point, the burial of Jesus’ body in the manner described above was a radically unusual procedure.
Christ was crucified by Roman authorities at the behest of rebellious Jews (Acts 2:23). According to the Latin poet, Horace, it was the Roman practice to leave a body upon the cross until it decayed. He spoke about crucified slaves “feeding crows on the cross” (Epistle 1.16.46-48).
On the other hand, it was the custom of the Jews that any sentenced to death by the Sanhedrin was:
not to be buried in the sepulchers of their fathers; but two burying places were appointed by the council, one for those that were slain by the sword and strangled, the other for those that were stoned who also were hanged and burnt (Lightfoot, 2.374; emphasis original).
The Jewish historian Josephus wrote: “We consider it a duty to bury even our enemies” (Wars 3.8.5). But, as one scholar has observed, an “area far outside the city of Jerusalem had been consigned for the burial of executed criminals” (Lane, 578). Professor Lane cites ancient Jewish sources in support of his statement.
Additionally, it has been noted that for Pilate “to release the body of a condemned criminal — especially one condemned of high treason — to someone other than a relative was highly unusual” (Wessel, 8.785).
Why would the governor permit the corpse of this Jesus, who had created such an upheaval throughout the region, to be released to anyone — particularly in view of the fact that Christ had foretold his own resurrection?
Great care, therefore, would have been taken to prevent any confiscation of the body. As the chief priests and Pharisees explained the matter to Pilate:
Sir, we remember that that deceiver said while he was yet alive, “After three days I will rise again.” Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day, lest haply his disciples come and steal him away, and say unto the people, “He is risen from the dead”: and the last deception will be worse than the first (Mt. 27:63-64).
The Burial of Christ
The burial of the Savior’s body conformed to neither Jewish nor Roman custom, in terms of how the remains of criminals were dispatched. Why was this the case?
The immediate explanation lies in the fact that Joseph was an influential Jew of “honorable estate” (Mk. 15:43), who “asked for the body of Jesus.” And Pilate, the Roman governor, for reasons not explained in the biblical text, “commanded it to be given up” (Mt. 27:58).
The ultimate explanation, however, is to be found in the fact that divine prophecy foretold that though Jehovah’s suffering Servant would be “assigned a grave with the wicked” (NIV), nonetheless he would be buried “with a rich man in his death” (Isa. 53:9). Divine Providence clearly was at work in the fulfillment of this prophecy.
Liberal scholars attempt to evade the thrust of this prophecy by making the term “rich” a mere allusion to Jesus’ enemies, or else that of an elaborate burial; but Motyer forcefully points out:
Wicked ... rich: the former is plural and the latter is singular. If Isaiah had merely intended the contrast between a shameful and a sumptuous burial, he would have used two singulars. The use of a plural and a singular suggests that he is talking not about categories but about actual individuals (337).
He goes on to point out that only Matthew’s record of Jesus’ burial in Joseph’s tomb can be the fulfillment of the prophecy.
Divine Overruling
Though Christ’s enemies doubtless intended that his grave be that of a common criminal (he was crucified between two thieves), it is absolutely remarkable that a prophet, seven hundred years earlier, foretold that the Lord would be buried with the “rich.” As observed already, this clearly is at variance with a reasonable expectation.
How could such a prediction possibly have happened by chance? It could not have. Ordinary human beings are unable to predict the future — no matter how many ridiculous claims there are to the contrary.
However, He who knows “the end from the beginning” is able to see the future, cause it to be written, and finally fulfilled (Isa. 46:10).
It was essential that the location of the tomb be readily known, in view of the fact that some, likely in their opposition to the doctrine of the resurrection, would protest that Christ had not been raised, but the location of his grave simply was unknown or had been misidentified.
This futile explanation has been attempted many times across the centuries. But that view cannot be valid in view of the Jerusalem circumstances. Christ was buried in the tomb of a very prominent man. His tomb was not shrouded in obscurity.
The Seal of Jesus’ Tomb
Further, the tomb was marked and authenticated with a Roman seal.
If a door had to be sealed, it was first fastened with some ligament, over which was placed some well-compacted clay [or wax], and then impressed with the seal, so that any violation of it would be discovered at once (Job 38:14; Song 4:12; Mt. 27:66) (McClintock, 9.492-493).
It would be absurd to assume that the Romans kept no records of such important documentation.
The burial of Jesus, therefore, is a matter of supreme importance — intricately related to both the Savior’s death and his resurrection. And it should not be passed over lightly.
Was Jesus Embalmed?
There is a final matter that warrants some reflection. It is commonly asserted that Jesus’ body was embalmed. That term is never used with reference to the preparation of the Lord’s body. Certainly, he was not embalmed with any method analogous to what the Egyptians practiced, where the remains were mutilated (see Morris, 496, 730).
The Jews anointed the body with spices when such could be afforded. This would retard the stench of decomposition (cf. Jn. 11:39; see Borchert, 282).
But here is an important observation. The fact that the friends of Christ provided spices and anointed his body for burial clearly reveals that they had not grasped the significance of Psalm 16:10 — namely that his flesh would not experience “corruption” (cf. Acts 2:25-28) because he would be raised.
What is the importance of this point?
After Jesus’ death, the disciples did not concoct some outlandish plan to steal the body and proclaim that he had been resurrected, because they did not anticipate the resurrection!
They fully expected the corpse to decay and return to the dust. But on that Sunday following his death (and subsequently for 40 days), the sight of him alive produced their faith in the risen Lord. This is extremely powerful circumstantial evidence of the genuine resurrection of the Savior’s body.
Christianity is based upon a buried and resurrected Lord. The religion is genuine and stands unique, in contrast to all other religious systems — either ancient or modern."

End of Article.

 Christian Jewish tradition forbade burial within the walls of a city, and the Gospels specify that Jesus was buried outside of Jerusalem, near the site of his crucifixion on Golgotha ("the place of skulls")
 This was during the occupation of the Roman Empire, it was also because the Khazar Jews of Jerusalem chose a thief over Christ.
 Most globalist refer to Palestine as never being seen as a state, but this was not true. They push a narrative for the Rothschild's occupation of territory.. 
 The Palestine Country, Palestine, Officially the State of Palestine, is a de jure sovereign state in Western Asia claiming the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as the designated capital, although its administrative center is currently located in Ramallah.

Ok, thanks Rosie...:)

Amazing... you site the CLAIM of a number of nomadic Arab tribes to appropriate the status of a non-existent historical state called Palestine... but fail to provide the underlying evidence for the existence of such a state or its people.   As I thought your views align with those of Palestinian Trolls and sympathizers...

Until Israel became a State in 1948... there was no voice claiming to be Palestine... no sovereign nation, parliament, congress or Islamic Caliphate, or Palestinian National Body with a presence in the region. However, an enterprising group of Nomadic Arab tribes, without any permanent home or nation, saw an opportunity to become heirs to the land Israel claimed based on some fictitious tie to the Philistines... now an extinct nation and people.

Suddenly, and out of thin air arise Nomadic Arab tribes... many cast out of the existing local Arab states as criminals and interlopers... looking to lay claim to Israel's lands... granted to the returning Jews by the UN and others, as their ancestral homeland... Given to them by God as an eternal inheritance.  Make a note... The land was barren and arid on their arrival... much of it without inhabitants... Its cities were poor and few... with great economic hardship and physical burdens.

Now that the land is developed and blooming everywhere the Arabs want it returned... only they have no legitimate claim... most of the Palestinian Arabs are nomads ... they never had a permanent presence anywhere... they now want the Jews to leave and to give them their homes and businesses.  BS... they are just like the militant migrants entering our Southern Borders... they are incapable of supporting a stable economy or government... it has never happened in their past and if Israel gave them all the land they now hold it would rapidly return to desert and desolation.

 I did google, The Palestine Country, Palestine, Officially the State of Palestine

State of Palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine

And I looked for books in support of this, so I did find some for sale...:)

 Everyone refers to occupied by Israel, and they leave out the facts of the name Rothschild.

 Then I looked up, was Cainan Arabic, yes he was Jewish and Arabic, and I promise Ronald I will not tell anyone...:)

 So the State of Palestine is listed as a state, take it up with the big dogs, not my problem...:)




Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich


Breaking — West Virginia Lawmakers Invite Persecuted Pro-Second Amendment Counties In Virginia To Join Their State

West Virginia lawmakers introduced legislation to invite persecuted pro Second Amendment Counties to join their state.

The West Virginia Senate adopted a resolution to remind Virginia residents from Frederick County that they have a standing invite — from 1862 — to become part of West Virginia.

West Virginia freedom fighters broke away from Virginia Democrat slave owners during the Civil War.

This week West Virginia has once again invited persecuted Virginia pro 2-A counties to come join their state.

Sounds like a winning plan!

Resolution 8 reads as follows:


(By Delegates Howell, Summers, Shott, Householder, C. Martin, Hott, Graves, Cadle, Barnhart, J. Jeffries, Maynard, Phillips, Foster, Hamrick, Steele, D. Jeffries, Wilson, Waxman, Bartlett, Paynter, Linville, Sypolt, Bibby, Hill, Ellington, Higginbotham, J. Kelly, Mandt, Pack, Dean and P. Martin)

[Introduced January 14, 2020]

Providing for an election to be had, pending approval of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and a majority of qualified citizens voting upon the proposition prior to August 1, 2020, for the admission of certain counties and independent cities of the Commonwealth of Virginia to be admitted to the State of West Virginia as constituent counties, under the provisions of Article VI, Section 11 of the Constitution of West Virginia

Whereas, The Legislature of West Virginia finds that in 1863, due to longstanding perceived attitudes of neglect for the interests of the citizens of Western Virginia, and a studied failure to address the differences which had grown between the counties of Western Virginia and the government at Richmond, the Commonwealth of Virginia was irretrievably divided, and the new State of West Virginia was formed; and

Whereas, Such division occurred as the Trans-Allegheny portions of Virginia perceived that they suffered under an inequitable measure of taxation by which they bore a disproportionate share of the tax burden; and

Whereas, That this perception was further compounded by the effects of a scheme of representation by which Trans-Allegheny Virginia was not allowed to have its proper and equitable share of representation in the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, That this arrangement arguably resulted in the tax dollars of Trans-Allegheny Virginia being used to enrich the Tidewater through internal improvements which did not benefit the people of Western Virginia, while the people of the Trans-Allegheny had little to no say in how their tax dollars were allocated; and

Whereas, Though this course led to an irreconcilable division, and the subsequent formation of West Virginia, yet, the longstanding peaceful cooperation between this State and the Commonwealth of Virginia is a sign that such separation, undertaken even under the most challenging and onerous of circumstances, can, with the passage of time, yield lasting results which are beneficial to both sides; and

Whereas, In the intervening years, the same neglect for the interests of many of the remaining counties of the Commonwealth of Virginia has allegedly been evidenced by the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, Particularly, many citizens of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont contend that an inequitable measure of taxation exists by which they bear a disproportionate share of the present tax burden of the Commonwealth; and

Whereas, The people of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont also believe that, currently, a scheme of representation exists by which the citizens of Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont do not have a proper share of representation in the government at Richmond; and, consequently

Whereas, The people of the Southside, the Shenandoah Valley, Southwestern Virginia, and the Piedmont believe that their tax dollars are used to enrich the Tidewater and Northern Virginia through internal improvements which do not benefit the people of these other parts of Virginia, while the people of these other parts of Virginia have little to no say in how their tax dollars are allocated; and

Whereas, In recent days, these tensions have been compounded by a perception of contempt on the part of the government at Richmond for the differences in certain fundamental political and societal principles which prevail between the varied counties and cities of that Commonwealth; and

Whereas, In the latest, and most evident, in this string of grievances, the government at Richmond now seeks to place intolerable restraints upon the rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution to the citizens of that Commonwealth; and

Whereas, The Legislative body of West Virginia believes that this latest action defies the wise counsel which has come down to us in the august words of our common Virginia Founders: as the government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of that tribune of liberty, Patrick Henry-who stated to the Virginia Ratifying Convention in 1788 that “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of a Signer of the Declaration and premier advocate of American independence, Richard Henry Lee-who stated in The Federal Farmer that “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of that zealous guardian of our inherent rights, George Mason-who stated that “To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them”; and

Whereas, The government at Richmond now repudiates the counsel of the declaimer of our independence and theoretician of our freedoms, Thomas Jefferson-who stated in his first draft of the Virginia Constitution, that “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms”; and

Whereas, The Boards of Supervisors of many Virginia counties and the Councils of many Virginia cities have recognized this dangerous departure from the doctrine of the Founders on the part of the government at Richmond; and

Whereas, These Boards of Supervisors and Councils have passed resolutions refusing to countenance what they affirm are unwarranted and unconstitutional measures by that government to infringe the firearm rights of Virginians; and

Whereas, The actions of the government at Richmond undertaken since the recent general election have, regrettably, resulted in unproductive contention and escalating a lamentable state of civic tension; and

Whereas, That, as has been proven in numerous instances, such as have been observed internationally in more recent times with the peaceful dissolutions of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union, and the creation of South Sudan, or, earlier in Virginia’s own history, with the formation of Kentucky, the peaceful partition of neighboring peoples can occur, and, is often very beneficial to both sides in reducing tensions and improving the tenor of discourse over ongoing political and societal differences; and

Whereas, Article VI, Section 11 of The Constitution of the State of West Virginia explicitly permits additional territory to be admitted into, and become part of this state, with the consent of the Legislature and of a majority of the qualified voters of the state; and

Whereas, In a spirit of conciliation, the Legislature of West Virginia hereby extends an invitation to our fellow Virginians who wish to do so, to join us in our noble experiment of 156 years of separation from the government at Richmond; and, we extend an invitation to any constituent county or city of the Commonwealth of Virginia to be admitted to the body politic of the State of West Virginia, under the conditions set forth in our state Constitution, specifically, with the consent of a majority of the voters of such county or city voting upon such proposition; and we hereby covenant that their many grievances shall be addressed, and, we further covenant with them that their firearms rights shall be protected to the fullest extent possible under our Federal and State Constitutions; and

Whereas, Providing that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall give its assent to any county or independent city presently part of the Commonwealth of Virginia having the opportunity and ability to do so, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia.

Trump Holds Rally in Milwaukee, WI 1-14-20

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service