Discussion on Arab/Israeli conflict, split from {Islam doesn't condone terror]

[razeontherock]

Or, to make another analogy, the Spanish Inquisition. The Jews (and Muslims) who were killed by it were killed as a direct consequence of holding on to their faith (rather than becoming Christian).

Here's a thought: analogies and history aren't your strong suit. If you have a point, don't try to involve those fields in making it.

 

[PHenry42]

If we're still equating this to the conflict, it is not a good analogy for it.

Oh, I think it is. The great majority of the Palestinians dispossessed in 1948 were in no way guilty of going to war against the Jewish community.

 

[b&wpac7]

Oh, I think it is. The great majority of the Palestinians dispossessed in 1948 were in no way guilty of going to war against the Jewish community.

And the great majority of the Jewish community are in no way guilty of dispossessing anybody. Now, one group seems to not be able (or unwilling to) police their own who like to shoot rockets into civilian areas and then feign SHOCK when Israel decides that enough is enough and goes in to stop the rockets.

 

[FRM48]

How can you dispossess a people who never had a right to the land in the first place?Another history lesson!!!! Palestinian=Jerusalem Born JORDANIAN.

 

[PHenry42]

And the great majority of the Jewish community are in no way guilty of dispossessing anybody. Now, one group seems to not be able (or unwilling to) police their own who like to shoot rockets into civilian areas and then feign SHOCK when Israel decides that enough is enough and goes in to stop the rockets.

The state of Israel is guilty of dispossessing people, though. Why the sudden fast forward to present day? How does anything happening today (or the innocence of the Jewish community) retroactively have implications on the events of 1948?

Since you dropped off the discussion and came back, perhaps you could continue where we actually and tell us whether you agree or disagree with #165.

 

[b&wpac7]

The state of Israel is guilty of dispossessing people, though. Why the sudden fast forward to present day? How does anything happening today (or the innocence of the Jewish community) retroactively have implications on the events of 1948?

Ok, you know what, I want evidence that they were removed. As far as I know, nobody had to go anywhere. I may be mistaken about that, but I'd like to see otherwise. If they didn't have to go, but did because they objected to the new state created, they lose their claim.

Since you dropped off the discussion and came back, perhaps you could continue where we actually and tell us whether you agree or disagree with #165.

Do I agree that everybody should have equal freedoms and such? Yeah. I even object to Israel modifying the allegiance thing (can't remember what it's called) to asking people to support the Jewish state. It rubs me the wrong way.

 

[PHenry42]

How can you dispossess a people who never had a right to the land in the first place?Another history lesson!!!! Palestinian=Jerusalem Born JORDANIAN.

No right to the land, says who? Basic property rights and the very concept of citizenship disagree.

The "Jordan is Palestine!" mythology is popular among Israel's armchair apologists, but has no basis in fact. A cursory look at Jordanian society reveals that Palestinians and Jordanians are very distinct groups, distinct enough for there to be social friction. The separation of Transjordan from the Mandate of Palestine in 1921 does in no way imply that the remaining part is legally Jews-only, or that the rights of the Arab population in it are revoked. On the contrary, every single League of Nations (and later UN) resolution regarding the mandate has a clause stating explicitly that the resolution does not revoke any of the rights enjoyed by the non-Jewish population in the affected area.

 

[PHenry42]

Ok, you know what, I want evidence that they were removed. As far as I know, nobody had to go anywhere. I may be mistaken about that, but I'd like to see otherwise. If they didn't have to go, but did because they objected to the new state created, they lose their claim.

That the removal was partly forcible has been established by the Israeli New Historians, with reference to actual official Israeli archives, as well as testimonies by folks from both sides. However, this point is fundamentally moot. What matters is that Israel forcibly prevented them from returning. Abandoning your place of residence for a short while (out of concerns of personal safety no less!) is no legal basis for revocation of citizenship and residency and forfeiture of property. Citizenship is not a game of musical chairs.

Sure, if someone made a deliberate decision to emigrate permanently out of a refusal to live in a Jewish state, he has no claim. But let's not make incriminating assumptions, for if we do, the burden of proof is on the one making that assumption and using it as a basis to deny rights.

Do I agree that everybody should have equal freedoms and such? Yeah. I even object to Israel modifying the allegiance thing (can't remember what it's called) to asking people to support the Jewish state. It rubs me the wrong way.

Good to hear, but does this apply equally to the whole embattled area and everyone involved? Does the Palestinian expelled from Haifa have the same right to live there as the Jew? Does the Jew expelled from Hebron have the same right to live there as the Palestinian?

 

[b&wpac7]

Good to hear, but does this apply equally to the whole embattled area and everyone involved? Does the Palestinian expelled from Haifa have the same right to live there as the Jew? Does the Jew expelled from Hebron have the same right to live there as the Palestinian?

At this point, I would say whoever is there right now has the priority, but that's where some sort of deal has to come into play

 

[Montalban]

No right to the land, says who? Basic property rights and the very concept of citizenship disagree.

Under who's law? One can just as easily argue then that possession in 9/10ths of the law. Israel has possession, end of story

The "Jordan is Palestine!" mythology is popular among Israel's armchair apologists, but has no basis in fact. A cursory look at Jordanian society reveals that Palestinians and Jordanians are very distinct groups, distinct enough for there to be social friction. The separation of Transjordan from the Mandate of Palestine in 1921 does in no way imply that the remaining part is legally Jews-only, or that the rights of the Arab population in it are revoked. On the contrary, every single League of Nations (and later UN) resolution regarding the mandate has a clause stating explicitly that the resolution does not revoke any of the rights enjoyed by the non-Jewish population in the affected area.

Palestinians were so troublesome to Jordan that in September 1970 Jordan had to attack them.

However Arabs in Palestine had the opportunity to have land, when the land was partitioned in 1948 and they didn't want partition. They fought the Jews for all of it and lost

 

[PHenry42]

Well if anybody sees a way to a lasting solution to the Israeli conflict, by all means have at it. I don't.

In the meantime, I created this thread to discuss something different: namely, if Islam condones terror, or not. I've been given a good bit of homework to do on the subject, and will be posting what I find. Hopefully Muslims will be gracious enough to share their understanding of their Holy texts, and understanding will increase.

Well, if you have no clue about a lasting solution, maybe you shouldn't bash those of us who do. I have offered a basis of justice and equality, and of reworking the status quo to that end. I do maintain that it's not only just, but totally reality-based. Moreso than any variant of victor's justice, which is pretty much guaranteed not to last. Conflicts do not end when one side wins. Victors can impose terms on losers, but as long as the underlying causes of the conflict remain, so does the conflict, ready to break out again if cracks appear in the machinery of subjugation.

I shall humour your purpose for this thread, I've committed to it. Heck, I'm the one who gave you homework, it would be a most severe break of trust for me to bail out. I still hope we can treat cordially, despite the harsh words.

But as you wondered several times whether Islam has anything to do with the animus towards Israel, I shall answer you and neatly bridge it to your general query about Islam and war. To misquote Bertolt Brecht, it's both a holy war and a normal war. It's a normal war in the sense that it's fought over something completely secular: Homeland and right to live in it. It's a religious war in the sense that Islam commands us to fight on behalf of other Muslims who are suffering oppression and injustice. So yes, there is Islamic basis for a united front against Israel. As for whether I condone terror, no, not indiscriminate against a general population. Only against those who are directly guilty through their conscious actions of enacting and perpetuating Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. Cynical that I am, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that justice won't be enacted until imposed by Islamic bayonets, or the threat of such. Should the Islamic world bring Israel to heel, though, I would hope it would give the Jews the same justice I'm demanding for the Palestinians. I don't believe in permanent revocation of rights or infliction of injuries because of alleged war guilt, and I stand by that consistently.

 

[PHenry42]

Under who's law? One can just as easily argue then that possession in 9/10ths of the law. Israel has possession, end of story

Then I take it you wouldn't object to having the Hagia Sophia turned into a graffiti gallery, with its Orthodox religious art spraypainted over? Turks have possession, end of story?

Possession doesn't make law. Try to rob a bank and tell the judge that the money is yours legally because you possess it at the moment. If possession makes law, anything you can grab is legally yours and there is no law.

 

[PHenry42]

At this point, I would say whoever is there right now has the priority, but that's where some sort of deal has to come into play

How does that go together with the equality you just professed agreement with? Current presence is pretty much "Israelis are wherever they want, Palestinians in the few places Israel allows them to".

 

[Servant of Jesus]

But as you wondered several times whether Islam has anything to do with the animus towards Israel, I shall answer you and neatly bridge it to your general query about Islam and war. To misquote Bertolt Brecht, it's both a holy war and a normal war. It's a normal war in the sense that it's fought over something completely secular: Homeland and right to live in it. It's a religious war in the sense that Islam commands us to fight on behalf of other Muslims who are suffering oppression and injustice. So yes, there is Islamic basis for a united front against Israel. As for whether I condone terror, no, not indiscriminate against a general population. Only against those who are directly guilty through their conscious actions of enacting and perpetuating Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. Cynical that I am, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that justice won't be enacted until imposed by Islamic bayonets, or the threat of such. Should the Islamic world bring Israel to heel, though, I would hope it would give the Jews the same justice I'm demanding for the Palestinians. I don't believe in permanent revocation of rights or infliction of injuries because of alleged war guilt, and I stand by that consistently.

Wow- a Muslim who finally tells it like it really is! Amazing! No beating around the bush- we're going to pretend we're being fair- but in reality, our goal really is to push Israel into the sea!

Heck, we've done that with the Christians in Iraq, the Ba'hai's in Iran; we're almost there with the Christians in Lebanon and Egypt. We've established a nice bunker of Islam in the London borough of Tower Hamlets, and the Clichy-sous-Bois district in Paris.

So just in case some of you read PHenry42's post too hastily and didn't really appreciate the details and meaning, let me enlighten you:

But as you wondered several times whether Islam has anything to do with the animus towards Israel, I shall answer you and neatly bridge it to your general query about Islam and war. To misquote Bertolt Brecht, it's both a holy war and a normal war. It's a normal war in the sense that it's fought over something completely secular: Homeland and right to live in it.

Interpretation: the land occupied by Jews in Israel is OUR Homeland, WE have a right to live there- and we're going to kick the Jews out!

It's a religious war in the sense that Islam commands us to fight on behalf of other Muslims who are suffering oppression and injustice. So yes, there is Islamic basis for a united front against Israel.

Interpretation: O.K.- I admit it- Islam and the Qu'ran really do COMMAND us Muslims all over the world to support terrorism and launch Jihad against infidels, and especially the Jews in Israel.

As for whether I condone terror, no, not indiscriminate against a general population. Only against those who are directly guilty through their conscious actions of enacting and perpetuating Israel's crimes against the Palestinians.

Interpretation: Terrorist attacks should not be indiscriminate- after all, 20% of the people in Israel are already Muslim Palestinians. So, no- we'll only terrorize the Jews!

Cynical that I am, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that justice won't be enacted until imposed by Islamic bayonets, or the threat of such.

Interpretation: We will IMPOSE Islam on Israel! The Qur'an says we can, and by golly, the bayonets will let us do it. Of course, if we can force them to heel by threatening them with something like, for example, nuclear weapons, that would be even better.

Should the Islamic world bring Israel to heel, though, I would hope it would give the Jews the same justice I'm demanding for the Palestinians. I don't believe in permanent revocation of rights or infliction of injuries because of alleged war guilt, and I stand by that consistently.

Interpretation: It's a foregone conclusion that we WILL bring Israel to heel, and then we'll be able to administer justice in the same way we do in other Muslim countries: shariah law, suicide bombings, beheadings, public hangings, stonings; the more heinous and indiscriminate, the better.

----------------------------------------------------------

The mind truly does boggle that you dare to even come to a Christian Web site and be allowed to spout such venom.

I thought your early posts were over the top- but this one really is in the stratosphere.


.

 

[plenary]

Homeland and right to live in it. It's a religious war in the sense that Islam commands us to fight on behalf of other Muslims who are suffering oppression and injustice. So yes, there is Islamic basis for a united front against Israel. As for whether I condone terror, no, not indiscriminate against a general population. Only against those who are directly guilty through their conscious actions of enacting and perpetuating Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. Cynical that I am, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that justice won't be enacted until imposed by Islamic bayonets, or the threat of such. Should the Islamic world bring Israel to heel, though, I would hope it would give the Jews the same justice I'm demanding for the Palestinians. I don't believe in permanent revocation of rights or infliction of injuries because of alleged war guilt, and I stand by that consistently.

That is idle hope.

One billion angry, bitter and hateful Muslims, it shouldn't be that hard to murder a couple million Jews now would it?

Because that would be the case IF Israel should fall... To finish the job which Hitler started... There is no peaceful coexisting in Islam, only greed and self-love just as the life of Muhammad portrays.
No self-denial, no humility, just the sword...
The only reason why the Muslim world does not attack Israel is because of the Israeli strength, which is exactly the same reason, why the people in the hells are subdued.. By fear of retaliation....
Hamas, Hesbollah? Do you think they give a rat's ass about a human life? That is precisely the same with the devils... They just want to destroy everything and the only reason why they don't destroy everything, is because the don't have the power to do so... Hmmm.. Isn't that a striking resemblance...
Perhaps it is so, because of the fact that the followers of hamas and Hesbollah are themselves perfect devils?
Just like the fact that love with devils is not really love but hatred, although it seems to be love, at first glance, but it is only the love of self, which isn't real love at all... It's all one big fat lie...That is also the reason why the Muslims keep on butchering each-other.... Because there is no real love between the Muslims, although they claim it is love...
To attack someone, because he is of a different religion, without cause, is utter foolishness and complete stupidity..... But hey, if it makes you happy, go for it.

The murder of all the jews would have made Muhammad extremely proud....

Qur'an 2:191 "Slay them wherever you find and catch them, and drive them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution and oppression are worse than slaughter."

Qur'an 8:59 "The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them."

Bukhari:V5B59N727 "When Allah's Apostle became seriously sick, he started covering his face with a woolen sheet. When he felt short of breath, he removed it, and said, 'That is so! Allah's curse be on Jews and Christians.'

You're not fooling anyone with this "religion of peace"... Yeah right and Hitler rightfully deserved the Nobel peace price....
To assume that everyone who has a different opinion or a different religion is a fool, what makes that the person in question?

Qur'an:8:7 "Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: 'Wipe the infidels out to the last.'"

The islamic war on the Jewish people has nothing ado with justice, but with greed and the love of self.... (Which means the hatred of others) And if (God forbid) the Jewish people would fall, than the Hindu's, the Buddhists, the Christians, atheist and all other groups would be next, victims to the power mongering of the one and only prophet of Islam.

And all in the name of Allah.... How beautifull. It brings tears to ones eyes.....

 

[b&wpac7]

And if (God forbid) the Jewish people would fall,

I wouldn't worry. We're pretty good at the whole survival thing.

 

[Montalban]

Then I take it you wouldn't object to having the Hagia Sophia turned into a graffiti gallery, with its Orthodox religious art spraypainted over? Turks have possession, end of story?

They already took over it and did that - adding Islamic scrawls all over the wall

But if you don't think possession makes the law then I expect to find you lobbying to give it back to the Greeks.

Possession doesn't make law. Try to rob a bank and tell the judge that the money is yours legally because you possess it at the moment. If possession makes law, anything you can grab is legally yours and there is no law.

Bad analogy.

In this case it's two different parties saying that neither will share and they fight over it and one wins then the other party running off to the judge and demanding that they step in and give them some part back.

 

[PHenry42]

They already took over it and did that - adding Islamic scrawls all over the wall

But if you don't think possession makes the law then I expect to find you lobbying to give it back to the Greeks.

Sure, as soon as you concede that possession does not make law and start lobbying for the restoration of everything the Palestinians have been robbed of.

Bad analogy.

Maybe that's because it wasn't an analogy in the first place. It was a reductio ad absurdum to disprove the inane and absurd notion that possession makes law.

 

[Montalban]

Sure, as soon as you concede that possession does not make law and start lobbying for the restoration of everything the Palestinians have been robbed of.

I accept that Israel has posession just as I accept Turkey does

I don't what YOUR point is. You know where I stand. But for the most part you seem to think that answering questions with questions lets me know what you're thinking. It is just avoidance

Maybe that's because it wasn't an analogy in the first place. It was a reductio ad absurdum to disprove the inane and absurd notion that possession makes law.

A reductio ad absurdum is the use of analogy!

But it doesn't work. As I pointed out, in my rebuttal. Further you miss the point as I accept Turkey holding Haigha Sophai.

 

[PHenry42]

A reductio ad absurdum is the use of analogy!

No, it isn't. Look it up. It is proof via assumption of the contrary, and demonstration that the contrary leads to an absurdity, something we know is not true. It can be done entirely without analogy. Analogies have no inherent proof value in logic anyway, they're just illustrative devices.

But it doesn't work. As I pointed out, in my rebuttal. Further you miss the point as I accept Turkey holding Haigha Sophai.

You refuted nothing. The example of a bank robber was not an analogy, it was an example of absurdity following. I seriously doubt you accept the current possession of the Hagia Sophia for that matter, you're bluffing. The spiteful attitude you display all over and your lash-out how I supposedly should support its restoration speak volumes.

Do you actually ever make posts that aren't somehow connected to bashing Islam? It doesn't seem like that.