Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Ibrahim »

HAL9000 wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:It did not happen, but the fact is that had it happened,
Do you see the problem with this? How can a hypothetical scenario be factual?

The fact that you don't care does not change the truth.
1) The "truth" of a hypothetical scenario?


Your argument that the Suras of Quran supersede the currently fashionable antisemitic Hadiths, does not seem to help to convince Hamas and many Arab groups to change their minds, for in this kind of thinking is at the core of their beliefs.
2) You seem to think that the root of Hamas' attitude towards Israel is religious. , when clearly they have other objectives and motivations.
[Emphasis added by HAL 9000]

2) If you are referring to the chronological root of Hamas' attitude towards Israel (before Hamas was formed, although many of its members were around at the beginning of the conflict after 1947) , then you might be partially right. But currently, the "root" of Hamas' attitude morphed into a direct antisemitism that is beginning to become an integral part of the grievances.
Not the point. Hamas being institutionally anti-Semitic does not mean that they are motivated by theology or any version of theology, even if they seek those justifications after the fact.







Now let me address your comment 1) above. You basically deleted part of my full sentence that "If the people who established Israel were Muslim Arabs from Egypt instead of Jews, then the outrage against Israel's existence in the Islamic world (minus Palestinians) would have been considerably less severe." You only quoted the hypothesis "If only Muslim Arabs had settled in Israel instead of Jews".


But my point was never a hypothesis A, but the truth of the logical formula " IF A THEN B " as the proof that there is a double-standard.

Since you don't like my claim (the logical formula's truth, not the truth of the hypothesis), then this time let me give a concrete example
I don't care about any of your hypothetical scenarios or arguments, or your references to other unrelated historical events for comparison. Focus on one subject at a time. When you raise a hypothetical scenario or comparison then the discussion becomes a referendum on the validity of your scenario or comparison instead of the actual subject.
User avatar
Marcus
Posts: 2409
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:23 pm
Location: Alaska

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Marcus »

HAL9000 wrote:. . you also do not object to this kind of land grab, even though you are spending a lot of time criticizing Jews in Palestine for having stolen land. This demonstrates that you have a double-standard. . .
\

That's nicely pointed out, HAL, regardless of who's doing the complaining . . thanks.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Ibrahim »

Marcus wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:. . you also do not object to this kind of land grab, even though you are spending a lot of time criticizing Jews in Palestine for having stolen land. This demonstrates that you have a double-standard. . .
\

That's nicely pointed out, HAL,

Not at all, it's off topic and ad hominem. HAL has given up on the subject at hand, the subject he chose, and is running around trying to find any other subject or hypothetical scenario to argue instead. Unsurprising that it would collect certain admirers. :lol:
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Turks and Cyprus.... Jews and Israel-Palestine,,

Post by monster_gardener »

HAL9000 wrote:
Ibrahim wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:It did not happen, but the fact is that had it happened,
Do you see the problem with this? How can a hypothetical scenario be factual?

The fact that you don't care does not change the truth.
1) The "truth" of a hypothetical scenario?


Your argument that the Suras of Quran supersede the currently fashionable antisemitic Hadiths, does not seem to help to convince Hamas and many Arab groups to change their minds, for in this kind of thinking is at the core of their beliefs.
2) You seem to think that the root of Hamas' attitude towards Israel is religious. , when clearly they have other objectives and motivations.
[Emphasis added by HAL 9000]

2) If you are referring to the chronological root of Hamas' attitude towards Israel (before Hamas was formed, although many of its members were around at the beginning of the conflict after 1947) , then you might be partially right. But currently, the "root" of Hamas' attitude morphed into a direct antisemitism that is beginning to become an integral part of the grievances.

Here is a version of the Hamas' charter (this is from 1988, and it is possible that they toned down their antisemitic statements slightly, but essentially the religious interpretations that they are bringing into politics is the same). Note that the main tenet of Hamas' is still not hunting down the Jews, but to get all the land and make it without Jews. However, religious antisemitism became an integral part of their charter that is used to super-charge their motivations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Anti ... ti-Zionism
EXCERPT:
Antisemitism and anti-Zionism

See also: Racism in the Palestinian territories
According to academic Esther Webman, antisemitism is not the main tenet of Hamas ideology, although antisemitic rhetoric is frequent and intense in Hamas leaflets. The leaflets generally do not differentiate between Jews and Zionists. In other Hamas publications and in interviews with its leaders attempts at this differentiation have been made.[223] In 2009 representatives of the small Jewish sect Neturei Karta met with Hamas leader Ismail Haniya in Gaza, who stated that he held nothing against Jews but only against the state of Israel.[224]
Hamas Charter (1988)
Main article: Hamas Covenant
Article 7 of the Hamas Covenant provides the following quotation, attributed to Mohammed:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."[225]
Article 22 states that the French revolution, the Russian revolution, colonialism and both world wars were created by the Zionists or forces supportive of Zionism:
"You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it."[226]
Article 32 of the Covenant refers to an antisemitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion:
"Today it is Palestine, tomorrow it will be one country or another. The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."[225]
Statements by Hamas members and clerics
In 2008 Imam Yousif al-Zahar of Hamas said in his sermon at the Katib Wilayat mosque in Gaza that "Jews are a people who cannot be trusted. They have been traitors to all agreements. Go back to history. Their fate is their vanishing.".[68][227]
Another Hamas legislator and imam, Sheik Yunus al-Astal, discussed a Koranic verse suggesting that "suffering by fire is the Jews' destiny in this world and the next". He concluded "Therefore we are sure that the Holocaust is still to come upon the Jews".[68][227]
In January 2009, Gazan Hamas Health Minister Basim Naim published a letter in The Guardian, stating that Hamas has no quarrel with Jewish people, only with the actions of Israel.[228]
In May 2009, senior Hamas MP Sayed Abu Musameh said that "in our culture, we respect every foreigner, especially Jews and Christians, but we are against Zionists, not as nationalists but as fascists and racists."[229]
Following the rededication of the Hurva Synagogue in Jerusalem in March 2010, senior Hamas figure al-Zahar called on Palestinians everywhere to observe five minutes of silence "for Israel's disappearance and to identify with Jerusalem and the al-Aqsa mosque." He further stated stated that "Wherever you have been you've been sent to your destruction. You've killed and murdered your prophets and you have always dealt in loan-sharking and destruction. You've made a deal with the devil and with destruction itself – just like your synagogue." [230][231]
On 8 January 2012, during a visit to Tunis, Gazan Hamas PM Ismail Haniyeh told The Associated Press on that he disagrees with the anti-Semitic slogans. "We are not against the Jews because they are Jews. Our problem is with those occupying the land of Palestine," he said. "There are Jews all over the world, but Hamas does not target them.".[232]
In response to a statement by Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas that Hamas preferred non-violent means and had agreed to adopt "peaceful resistance," Hamas contradicted Abbas. According to Hamas spokesman Sami Abu-Zuhri, "We had agreed to give popular resistance precedence in the West Bank, but this does not come at the expense of armed resistance."[233]
On August 10, 2012, Ahmad Bahr, Deputy Speaker of the Hamas Parliament, stated in a sermon which aired on Al-Aqsa TV that:
If the enemy sets foot on a single square inch of Islamic land, Jihad becomes an individual duty, incumbent on every Muslim, male or female. A woman may set out [on Jihad] without her husband's permission, and a servant without his master's permission. Why? In order to annihilate those Jews...Oh Allah, destroy the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, destroy the Americans and their supporters. Oh Allah, count them one by one, and kill them all, without leaving a single one.[234][235][236][237]
Statements on the Holocaust
Hamas has been explicit in its Holocaust Denial. In reaction to the Stockholm conference on the Jewish Holocaust, held in late January 2000, Hamas issued a press release which it published on its official website, containing the following statements from a senior leader:
This conference bears a clear Zionist goal, aimed at forging history by hiding the truth about the so-called Holocaust, which is an alleged and invented story with no basis. (...) The invention of these grand illusions of an alleged crime that never occurred, ignoring the millions of dead European victims of Nazism during the war, clearly reveals the racist Zionist face, which believes in the superiority of the Jewish race over the rest of the nations. (...) By these methods, the Jews in the world flout scientific methods of research whenever that research contradicts their racist interests.[238]
In August 2003, senior Hamas official Dr Abd Al-Aziz Al-Rantisi wrote in the Hamas newspaper Al-Risala that the Zionists encouraged murder of Jews by the Nazis with the aim of forcing them to immigrate to Palestine.[239]
In 2005, Khaled Mashaal called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's December 14, 2005 statements on the Holocaust that Europeans had "created a myth in the name of Holocaust"[240]) as "courageous."[241] Later in 2008, Basim Naim, the minister of health in the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority government in Gaza countered holocaust denial, and said "it should be made clear that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian government in Gaza denies the Nazi Holocaust. The Holocaust was not only a crime against humanity but one of the most abhorrent crimes in modern history. We condemn it as we condemn every abuse of humanity and all forms of discrimination on the basis of religion, race, gender or nationality."[242]
In an open letter to Gaza Strip UNRWA chief John Ging published August 20, 2009, the movement's Popular Committees for Refugees called the Holocaust "a lie invented by the Zionists," adding that the group refused to let Gazan children study about it.[243] Hamas leader Younis al-Astal continued by saying that having the Holocaust included in the UNRWA curriculum for Gaza students amounted to "marketing a lie and spreading it." Al-Astal continued "I do not exaggerate when I say this issue is a war crime, because of how it serves the Zionist colonizers and deals with their hypocrisy and lies."[244][245]
In February 2011, Hamas voiced opposition to UNRWA's teaching of the Holocaust in Gaza. According to Hamas, "Holocaust studies in refugee camps is a contemptible plot and serves the Zionist entity with a goal of creating a reality and telling stories in order to justify acts of slaughter against the Palestinian people."[246][247]
In July 2012, Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman, denounced a visit by Ziad al-Bandak, an adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, to the Auschwitz death camp, saying it was "unjustified" and "unhelpful" and only served the "Zionist occupation" while coming "at the expense of a real Palestinian tragedy". He also called the Holocaust an "alleged tragedy".[248][249][250][251]
Thus, regardless of your observation that the Quran itself does not promote antisemitism, Hamas is doing its best to combine various elements from Islam to profit from antisemitism made religious and religion made antisemitic.

--

Now let me address your comment 1) above. You basically deleted part of my full sentence that "If the people who established Israel were Muslim Arabs from Egypt instead of Jews, then the outrage against Israel's existence in the Islamic world (minus Palestinians) would have been considerably less severe." You only quoted the hypothesis "If only Muslim Arabs had settled in Israel instead of Jews".


But my point was never a hypothesis A, but the truth of the logical formula " IF A THEN B " as the proof that there is a double-standard.

Since you don't like my claim (the logical formula's truth, not the truth of the hypothesis), then this time let me give a concrete example that has already happened in 1974.

In 1974, the Cypriot Greek fascist leader Nikos Sampson launched a coup to overthrow the government in an attempt to unite Cyprus with Greece. On this occasion he also launched a brutal campaign to ethnically cleanse and also exterminate the Ethnic Turkish minority in Cyprus. Then Turkey intervened and invaded the Northern Part of Cyrpus (40 % approximately) and this actually saved the lives of thousands of ethnic Turks who were in the Island. At that time I was a child in Turkey and I applauded this military intervention because of the fascist coup perpetrated by Nikos Sampson. Incidentally, many years late,r before Sampson died from natural causes, he stated that if Turkey had not intervened, he would have liquidated all the ethnic Turks in Cyprus.

But separately, not only the 40 % of Cyprus that Turkey invaded was a lot more land than that originally belonged to the ethnic Turks in the island, but in addition, the Turkish government that was jointly operated by Professor Dr. Erbakan and the leftist coalition partner Mr. Ecevit, also brought in up to 120,000 Anatolian peasants to settle in Cyprus, to bolster the Turkish minority there.

Bringing in settlers from Anatolia was illegal according to the international law, but NATO did not punish Turkey too much (some arms shipments were delayed from the US) because of Turkey's strategic military importance during the Cold War. But in addition, the Muslim world did not say anything either. In the West Bank there are approximately 400,000 Jewish settlers, which is more than the alleged 120,000 settlers from Anatolia who went to Cyprus, but the scales of these numbers are comparable. I can see that you also do not object to this kind of land grab, even though you are spending a lot of time criticizing Jews in Palestine for having stolen land. This demonstrates that you have a double-standard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus
EXCERPT:
Turkish settlers
As a result of the Turkish invasion, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that the demographic structure of the island has been continuously modified as a result of the deliberate policies of the Turks. Following the occupation of Northern Cyprus, civilian settlers from Turkey began arriving on the island. Despite the lack of consensus on the exact figures, all parties concerned admitted that Turkish nationals began systematically arriving in the northern part of the island in 1975.[84] It was suggested that over 120,000 settlers were brought into Cyprus from mainland Turkey.[84] This was despite Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupier from transferring or deporting parts of its own civilian population into an occupied territory.
UN Resolution 1987/19 (1987) of the "Sub-Commission On Prevention Of Discrimination And Protection Of Minorities", which was adopted on 2 September 1987, demanded "the full restoration of all human rights to the whole population of Cyprus, including the freedom of movement, the freedom of settlement and the right to property" and also expressed "its concern also at the policy and practice of the implantation of settlers in the occupied territories of Cyprus which constitute a form of colonialism and attempt to change illegally the demographic structure of Cyprus".
In a report prepared by Mete Hatay on behalf of PRIO, the Oslo peace center, it was estimated that the number of Turkish mainlanders in the north who have been granted the right to vote is 37,000. This figure however excludes mainlanders who are married to Turkish Cypriots or adult children of mainland settlers as well as all minors. The report also estimates the number of Turkish mainlanders who have not been granted the right to vote, whom it labels as "transients", at a further 105,000.[85]
Thank you VERY Much for your post, HAL,

Interesting....

I have considered the similarity between the Turkish Invasion of Cyprus and the Iz-Pali problem......

You have taken it up a notch and provided some possibly real justification for the Turks......

What you quote Nikos Sampson saying is remarkably similar to what the Arabs intended to do the Jews in Israel-Palestine: Drive the Jews into the Sea......

And what happened is similar........ Greeks got their butts kicked and have been complaining since........

Hmmmmn........... If true that the EOKA-B did aim at genocide...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ANikos_Sampson

Lets do some quick research to jog the old memory cells.........

Interesting.............Archbishop Makarios wanted the Turks to kick EOKA-Butt :wink:.............

(near the end of the link)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makarios_I ... .931977.29

And the Turks seem to have had some sort of legal basis to go/be there even beyond & above the saving Turkish Cypriot lives aspect............

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_ ... %281960%29

UN Mandate establishing Israel......... Legal basis for Israel to be there...

Plus all those Turkish SETTLERS!!!!! ;) :twisted: that you mentioned..

Up to this point, I have mostly been viewing the Cypriot situation from a Greek perspective................

And I saw this as just Turkish hypocrisy... Turks complaining about Israel when they had their own occupation going on Cyprus.. with destruction of Greek heritage, churches etc...

And I have been remembering what happened when the Turks originally invaded Cyprus..... IIRC Turks flayed the Byzantine governor and paraded his skin......

But the modern Turkish Cypriots seem to have sensibly wanted separatism from the Greeks........... A very wise policy........ Keep different sorts of killer apes separate from each other unless they really want to be friends..........

Sounds like there may be even more similarity between the Turks in Cyprus... and the Jews in Israel-Palestine than I had thought...

Maybe the Turk were NOT Jerks ;) when they invaded Cyprus......... Maybe the Turks/Turkish Cypriots do have a right to be on Cyprus with their own separatist government...

Just like the Jews in Israel............
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
HAL9000

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by HAL9000 »

Ibrahim wrote: Not the point. Hamas being institutionally anti-Semitic does not mean that they are motivated by theology or any version of theology, even if they seek those justifications after the fact.


Hamas is not only institutionally antisemitic, but it also has a constitution that is composed of Islamic arguments to support that antismitism. Although Quran does not promote antisemitism as you said, Hamas still combines various components from Islam to build an antisemitic religious theory that is a main pillar of its constitution. You have deleted or skipped that part which is pasted above.

Contrary to what you say, Hamas is clearly also motivated by this theology, it is not just using this theology to justify its goals of gaining the land.

And even if Hamas leaders were merely using these theological antisemitic arguments just to justify its goals, the intensity and volume of these theological justifications are strongly influencing the minds and hearts of the millions of followers of Hamas, leading to the same final effect that if the ones who took land from Palestinians were not Jewish, the resistance to this land grab would have been significantly less.
HAL9000

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by HAL9000 »

Ibrahim wrote: I don't care about any of your hypothetical scenarios or arguments, or your references to other unrelated historical events for comparison. Focus on one subject at a time. When you raise a hypothetical scenario or comparison then the discussion becomes a referendum on the validity of your scenario or comparison instead of the actual subject.
You are very correct about the fact that my argument is ad hominem, and it may even be transferred to Hell in the end.

But it is still very relevant. The point is that given that the neighboring countries have a lot more injustice than in Israel/Palestine, you are only focusing on Israel/Palestine with religious fervor, without devoting any attention to other injustice in the neighborhood.

Thus you are exaggerating the Israel/Palestine problem relative to other events which you say they are irrelevant. They are not irrelevant because this comparison shows without any hypothetical arguments that you are focusing Israel because it is not Muslim.

Even beyond Israel not being Muslim, I am convinced that your negative interest in this situation is because due to the similarities and important connections between Judaism and Islam, you are unable to tolerate any competition from Judaism in the region. As long as Jews were good pets who were loyal to the end in the Turkish Ottoman Empire (which we proudly were), you are more than happy to tolerate Jews in that capacity, but when Jews establish their independent state in the heart of Islamic lands, this is a problem for you. Furthermore, I am even convinced that even if Christian Crusaders had taken exactly the same land instead of the Jews, even in this case your resistance to this configuration would have been slightly less than your resistance against Israel as a Jewish state, once again because of the strong connections between Islam and Judaism. I also think that because of these similarities, you are motivated with jealousy as well.
Last edited by HAL9000 on Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:15 am, edited 6 times in total.
Jnalum Persicum

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Jnalum Persicum »

HAL9000 wrote:.
Ibrahim wrote:.

Not the point. Hamas being institutionally anti-Semitic does not mean that they are motivated by theology or any version of theology, even if they seek those justifications after the fact.


Hamas is not only institutionally antisemitic, but it also has a constitution that is composed of Islamic arguments to support that antismitism. Although Quran does not promote antisemitism as you said, Hamas still combines various components from Islam to build an antisemitic religious theory that is a main pillar of its constitution. You have deleted or skipped that part which is pasted above.

Contrary to what you say, Hamas is clearly also motivated by this theology, it is not just using this theology to justify its goals of gaining the land.

And even if Hamas leaders were merely using these theological antisemitic arguments just to justify its goals, the intensity and volume of these theological justifications are strongly influencing the minds and hearts of the millions of followers of Hamas, leading to the same final effect that if the ones who took land from Palestinians were not Jewish, the resistance to this land grab would have been significantly less.

.

Zionist define Anti-Semitism as being Anti-Zionist (being against Israel)

Anti-Semitism is being anti Judaism .. being anti Jewish people .. a racist view and mindset

Anti-Zionism is a political view .. Zionism is a political "ism"

Though I have no knowledge re Hammas constitution and other in&out of Hammas, as Judaism is a pillar of Islam religion, and, as Hebrew tribe is part of ME people, so far I have not seen any reputable ME faction attacking Judaism

Zionism is a political movement .. in fact, Zionist usually neither believe in nor practice Judaism, notion (mentioned by David) of "religious Zionism" is like saying "communism Capitalism", a rubbish

To couple or relate Middle Eastern antagonism and non acceptance of Zionism (invasion) to Judaism or Islam or Muslims is just attempt (by Zionist) to change the subject


.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Similarities but Al-Lat of Problems....

Post by monster_gardener »

HAL9000 wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: I don't care about any of your hypothetical scenarios or arguments, or your references to other unrelated historical events for comparison. Focus on one subject at a time. When you raise a hypothetical scenario or comparison then the discussion becomes a referendum on the validity of your scenario or comparison instead of the actual subject.
You are very correct about the fact that my argument is ad hominem, and it may even be transferred to Hell in the end.

But it is still very relevant. The point is that given that the neighboring countries have a lot more injustice than in Israel/Palestine, you are only focusing on Israel/Palestine with religious fervor, without devoting any attention to other injustice in the neighborhood.

Thus you are exaggerating the Israel/Palestine problem relative to other events which you say they are irrelevant. They are not irrelevant because this comparison shows without any hypothetical arguments that you are focusing Israel because it is not Muslim.

Even beyond Israel not being Muslim, I am convinced that your negative interest in this situation is because due to the similarities and important connections between Judaism and Islam, you are unable to tolerate any competition from Judaism in the region. As long as Jews were good pets who were loyal to the end in the Turkish Ottoman Empire (which we proudly were), you are more than happy to tolerate Jews in that capacity, but when Jews establish their independent state in the heart of Islamic lands, this is a problem for you. Furthermore, I am even convinced that even if Christian Crusaders had taken exactly the same land instead of the Jews, even in this case your resistance to this configuration would have been slightly less than your resistance against Israel as a Jewish state, once again because of the strong connections between Islam and Judaism. I also think that because of these similarities, you are motivated with jealousy as well.
Thank you Very Much for your post, HAL.

Similarities...Both Islam and Judaism are at least superficially more ;) monotheistic.... than orthodox Trinitarian Christianity which can confuse even Christians :? ;) *

There are those Satanic Verses/Stories ;) about Allah having a wife and daughter that have caused Al-Lat ;) oops I mean A Lot of problems........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_Verses

And Elohim is plural and Shekhinah is female and can be plural too.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhinah

In any case, problem is that Islam is IrreDentist ;) Once Muslims gain control of a piece of land, it is NEVER supposed to come under control of infidels again........
Which is why the loss of Israel and Spain is such a BAD Toothache :twisted: for the Islamic world.... :lol:

But you may be right.........

Similarities.........

Darwin said that there is more competition be between similar species and even within a species than between dissimilar species

May have some application to religions too...... though not 100%...........

And if we do make contact with intelligent life in Outer Space, contact with something that lives under conditions like those on Jupiter or Titan might be be safer..........

But don't count on it......

We might get Affronted :twisted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Affront#Affront

*But whom are Me, MysElves and I to criticize..... 8-) :lol:
Last edited by monster_gardener on Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Ibrahim »

HAL9000 wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: I don't care about any of your hypothetical scenarios or arguments, or your references to other unrelated historical events for comparison. Focus on one subject at a time. When you raise a hypothetical scenario or comparison then the discussion becomes a referendum on the validity of your scenario or comparison instead of the actual subject.
You are very correct about the fact that my argument is ad hominem, and it may even be transferred to Hell in the end.

But it is still very relevant. The point is that given that the neighboring countries have a lot more injustice than in Israel/Palestine, you are only focusing on Israel/Palestine with religious fervor, without devoting any attention to other injustice in the neighborhood.

Except that I don't believe this claim is true. It may have been, decades ago, but certainly no longer. Israeli treatment of the Palestinians is as bad as any persecution of any group in any Arab country, or any country anywhere that isn't actively filling mass graves. Even Copts systematically harassed by Salafist gangs in Egypt are often better off than Arabs living under Israeli occupation.




Thus you are exaggerating the Israel/Palestine problem relative to other events which you say they are irrelevant.
This is a simple logic problem of the kind that parents have to explain to your children. If you are scolding one child for not cleaning their room they might respond "well, my sister didn't make her bed!" Children don't understand that this is not a relevant response, and a discussion of one wrong does not benefit from comparison to another.


They are not irrelevant because this comparison shows without any hypothetical arguments that you are focusing Israel because it is not Muslim.
Blatantly false. I am focusing on Israel because that is the subject of the thread.



Even beyond Israel not being Muslim, I am convinced that your negative interest in this situation is because due to the similarities and important connections between Judaism and Islam, you are unable to tolerate any competition from Judaism in the region.
Aside from being a baseless slander, this doesn't even make any sense. There are one billion Muslims in the world, and 15 million Jews. Even if I had some theological concern (I don't), or thought that one or both religions wouldn't be around for a long time to come (I don't), I can still count.


As long as Jews were good pets who were loyal to the end in the Turkish Ottoman Empire (which we proudly were), you are more than happy to tolerate Jews in that capacity, but when Jews establish their independent state in the heart of Islamic lands, this is a problem for you.
My problem is that the Israeli Jews (not all Jews) have seized land from another group of people to found their state, and rule over and abuse the survivors of that seizure with cruelty and injustice. I don't care about or miss the Ottoman empire.



Furthermore, I am even convinced that even if Christian Crusaders had taken exactly the same land instead of the Jews, even in this case your resistance to this configuration would have been slightly less than your resistance against Israel as a Jewish state, once again because of the strong connections between Islam and Judaism.
Aside from being false and baseless, this too doesn't make any sense. My constant criticism of the impotent brutality of Western Christian armies on this forum proves this claim false, even before I point out that you aren't basing it on anything but your magical power of knowing what other people "really" think regardless of what they say.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by monster_gardener »

Ibrahim wrote:
HAL9000 wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: I don't care about any of your hypothetical scenarios or arguments, or your references to other unrelated historical events for comparison. Focus on one subject at a time. When you raise a hypothetical scenario or comparison then the discussion becomes a referendum on the validity of your scenario or comparison instead of the actual subject.
You are very correct about the fact that my argument is ad hominem, and it may even be transferred to Hell in the end.

But it is still very relevant. The point is that given that the neighboring countries have a lot more injustice than in Israel/Palestine, you are only focusing on Israel/Palestine with religious fervor, without devoting any attention to other injustice in the neighborhood.

Except that I don't believe this claim is true. It may have been, decades ago, but certainly no longer. Israeli treatment of the Palestinians is as bad as any persecution of any group in any Arab country, or any country anywhere that isn't actively filling mass graves. Even Copts systematically harassed by Salafist gangs in Egypt are often better off than Arabs living under Israeli occupation.




Thus you are exaggerating the Israel/Palestine problem relative to other events which you say they are irrelevant.
This is a simple logic problem of the kind that parents have to explain to your children. If you are scolding one child for not cleaning their room they might respond "well, my sister didn't make her bed!" Children don't understand that this is not a relevant response, and a discussion of one wrong does not benefit from comparison to another.


They are not irrelevant because this comparison shows without any hypothetical arguments that you are focusing Israel because it is not Muslim.
Blatantly false. I am focusing on Israel because that is the subject of the thread.



Even beyond Israel not being Muslim, I am convinced that your negative interest in this situation is because due to the similarities and important connections between Judaism and Islam, you are unable to tolerate any competition from Judaism in the region.
Aside from being a baseless slander, this doesn't even make any sense. There are one billion Muslims in the world, and 15 million Jews. Even if I had some theological concern (I don't), or thought that one or both religions wouldn't be around for a long time to come (I don't), I can still count.


As long as Jews were good pets who were loyal to the end in the Turkish Ottoman Empire (which we proudly were), you are more than happy to tolerate Jews in that capacity, but when Jews establish their independent state in the heart of Islamic lands, this is a problem for you.
My problem is that the Israeli Jews (not all Jews) have seized land from another group of people to found their state, and rule over and abuse the survivors of that seizure with cruelty and injustice. I don't care about or miss the Ottoman empire.



Furthermore, I am even convinced that even if Christian Crusaders had taken exactly the same land instead of the Jews, even in this case your resistance to this configuration would have been slightly less than your resistance against Israel as a Jewish state, once again because of the strong connections between Islam and Judaism.
Aside from being false and baseless, this too doesn't make any sense. My constant criticism of the impotent brutality of Western Christian armies on this forum proves this claim false, even before I point out that you aren't basing it on anything but your magical power of knowing what other people "really" think regardless of what they say.
Thank you Very Much for your post, Ibrahim.
Even Copts systematically harassed by Salafist gangs in Egypt are often better off than Arabs living under Israeli occupation.
Thank you for admitting that the Copts are harassed; however, what do you believe the Egyptian/Muslim response would be if the Copts began a guerilla/terror campaign of firing rockets into Muslim neighborhoods, shooting up Muslim coffee houses, bombing buses, bashing in the heads of Egyptian Muslim children, and kidnapping Egyptian police & soldiers.....

I suspect that if the Copts acted in that manner, that shortly there might not be many/any adult male Copts living in Egypt outside of dungeons in durance most vile.........
This is a simple logic problem of the kind that parents have to explain to your children. If you are scolding one child for not cleaning their room they might respond "well, my sister didn't make her bed!" Children don't understand that this is not a relevant response, and a discussion of one wrong does not benefit from comparison to another.
If a parent or nation is inconsistent in enforcement of rules/ideals, they are likely to get called up on hypocrisy charges or worse........ Happens to Uz.........

My problem is that the Israeli Jews (not all Jews) have seized land from another group of people to found their state,
Israel was promised a homeland by the British under the League of Nations Mandate and given one under the UN....
Problem being that the UN did not use military power to enforce the original Partition like the Turks have done on Cyprus.....
The Arabs would have been better off if the UN had done that........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Jnalum Persicum

Re: Arab Jews (or Jewish Arabs)

Post by Jnalum Persicum »

monster_gardener wrote:.

Israel was promised a homeland by the British under the League of Nations Mandate and given one under the UN....

.

:lol: .. who the f*ck are Brits to promise Zionist a home on Arab land ? ? ?

Like Portugal promising Pomegranates Mozambic :D

and

did the Arab accept this ? ?

NO

and

Monster

be honest

you really believe those doing those things to Jews .. to refresh your memory have look @ Evian Conference .. constitute UN, and can talk in the name of world .. they only represent themselves, the "Beast club"

NO, Neither Arabs nor Muslim world has accepted giving Arab land to Zionist

monster_gardener wrote:.

Problem being that the UN did not use military power to enforce the original Partition like the Turks have done on Cyprus .....

The Arabs would have been better off if the UN had done that .......

.
UN enforce giving Arab land to Zionist ? ? ?

:lol:

come on, Monster, come on


.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Could have prevented wars where the Arabs lost even more....

Post by monster_gardener »

Jnalum Persicum wrote:
monster_gardener wrote:.

Israel was promised a homeland by the British under the League of Nations Mandate and given one under the UN....

.

:lol: .. who the f*ck are Brits to promise Zionist a home on Arab land ? ? ?

Like Portugal promising Pomegranates Mozambic :D

and

did the Arab accept this ? ?

NO

and

Monster

be honest

you really believe those doing those things to Jews .. to refresh your memory have look @ Evian Conference .. constitute UN, and can talk in the name of world .. they only represent themselves, the "Beast club"

NO, Neither Arabs nor Muslim world has accepted giving Arab land to Zionist

monster_gardener wrote:.

Problem being that the UN did not use military power to enforce the original Partition like the Turks have done on Cyprus .....

The Arabs would have been better off if the UN had done that .......

.
UN enforce giving Arab land to Zionist ? ? ?

:lol:

come on, Monster, come on


.
Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.

Thank you for the mention of the shameful Evian Conference.

Occasionally even fallen angels ;) like Raphael ;) Trujillo :twisted: are better than so called 'good people'.........

Remembering a book about an alternate time line where Uz set up a homeland for the refugee Jews in Alaska......

UN enforce giving Arab land to Zionist ? ? ?
Yes..... Enforce the Partition...... Keep the Arabs from "Driving the Jews into the Sea"..............

AND PREVENT WARS IN WHICH THE ARABS LOST EVEN MORE TERRITORY...........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Jnalum Persicum

Re: Could have prevented wars where the Arabs lost even more

Post by Jnalum Persicum »

monster_gardener wrote:.
Jnalum Persicum wrote:.

UN enforce giving Arab land to Zionist ? ? ?

.
Yes..... Enforce the Partition...... Keep the Arabs from "Driving the Jews into the Sea"..............

AND PREVENT WARS IN WHICH THE ARABS LOST EVEN MORE TERRITORY ..........

.

No , Arabs have lost no territory yet, enemy just occupying Arab territory

and

Monster,

do you not in earnest think, UN, instead of "Enforcing" what those participants in "Evian Conference" had decided (giving Arab land to Zionist), UN should have negotiated with Arabs and Palestinians ? ? to gain their acceptance and cooperation ? ?

What about if NOM nations suddenly decide to give TEXAS to Chinese ? ? ? and enforce it

come on,

start reading RUMI , will do a lot of good, will open doors to himanity


.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Bloody Evian Waters, Losing Territory, Hermanity, Rumination

Post by monster_gardener »

Jnalum Persicum wrote:
monster_gardener wrote:.
Jnalum Persicum wrote:.

UN enforce giving Arab land to Zionist ? ? ?

.
Yes..... Enforce the Partition...... Keep the Arabs from "Driving the Jews into the Sea"..............

AND PREVENT WARS IN WHICH THE ARABS LOST EVEN MORE TERRITORY ..........

.

No , Arabs have lost no territory yet, enemy just occupying Arab territory

and

Monster,

do you not in earnest think, UN, instead of "Enforcing" what those participants in "Evian Conference" had decided (giving Arab land to Zionist), UN should have negotiated with Arabs and Palestinians ? ? to gain their acceptance and cooperation ? ?

What about if NOM nations suddenly decide to give TEXAS to Chinese ? ? ? and enforce it

come on,

start reading RUMI , will do a lot of good, will open doors to himanity

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.
do you not in earnest think, UN, instead of "Enforcing" what those participants in "Evian Conference" had decided (giving Arab land to Zionist)
As I understand the Evian Conference, with the very honorable exception of the Dominican Republic under Raphael Trujillo, the conference pretty much decided that most of the Jews under Hitler's control were going die because it was inconvenient to rescue them .......

Not get any land in the Middle East......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89vian_Conference
What about if NOM nations suddenly decide to give TEXAS to Chinese ? ? ? and enforce it
When I googled NOM nations, I got Nations of Micronesia ;) ....

But in any case, whoever NOM is would have to conquer Texas just like the Brits had to defeat the Turks to conquer Palestine so they could give it to both the Jews and the Arabs ;) :shock: :twisted:
No , Arabs have lost no territory yet, enemy just occupying Arab territory
Maybe......

They have lost territory in Spain and Central Europe...... Salafi Sam ;) bitched about it big time......

Have lost some in India........
And the Indians are RAMming ;) the mosque down......... When built on top of Hindu temple during the invasion...........

Not sure if they have lost Persia ;) :twisted:

But more important here in this case.........Maybe humanity lose Northern Hemisphere....... Over less than a Persian Pistacio Plantation......

When how the heck did Arabs & Muslims end up in Spain, India and at the Gates of Vienna? The same way the Brits did... :twisted:

start reading RUMI , will do a lot of good, will open doors to himanity
[/quote]

Like the Lotus Sutra can open you up to hermanity? ;)

But I did take a look at............

http://peacefulrivers.homestead.com/rumilove.html

Will have to Ruminate ;) on it.........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Jnalum Persicum

Re: Bloody Evian Waters, Losing Territory, Hermanity, Rumina

Post by Jnalum Persicum »

monster_gardener wrote:.
Jnalum Persicum wrote:.

do you not in earnest think, UN, instead of "Enforcing" what those participants in "Evian Conference" had decided (giving Arab land to Zionist)

.

As I understand the Evian Conference, with the very honorable exception of the Dominican Republic under Raphael Trujillo, the conference pretty much decided that most of the Jews under Hitler's control were going die because it was inconvenient to rescue them .......

:lol: :lol: come on, Monster, come on

be honest for once with yourself

Hitler was saying anybody wanting to have the Jews, pleeeeease take them .. he repeated and repeated this

but

You guys sent 2 ships full of Jews back to Germany .. Nazis sent on an emigration mission to several countries. All of them (including America) rejected the Jews. Eventually, the ship returned to Germany.

You guys, everybody, hated Jews, did not want to have them

.

MS St. Louis.

The ship sailed transatlantic routes, from Hamburg to New York, but during the Great Depression turned to cruising to make revenue. The ship is most notable for a single voyage in 1939, which was dramatised in the 1976 motion picture Voyage of the Damned.

The German propaganda ministry and the Nazi party conceived of a propaganda exercise which would demonstrate that Germany was not alone in its territorial, exclusionary hostility towards Jews as a permanent minority within the political economy of their state. The German propagandists wanted to demonstrate that the “civilized” world agreed with their assertion that Jews constituted a continuing “hidden-hand” of influence on national and economic affairs. They wanted to demonstrate that no other Western country or people would receive Jews as refugees. Firstly it would appear that the Nazis were allowing the Jewish refugees a new life in Havana

The Nazis were aware of rising western antisemitism and correctly surmised that these Jews, traveling on tourist visas (not immigrant visas, which none of the potential host countries would likely have issued to them), would not be able to visit Cuba as tourists when in fact they were political/social refugees; who, for whatever reason, had been forcibly removed from Germany, their home country. Furthermore, having been refused entry into Cuba and other Atlantic nations, the plight of the refugees would force the world to admit that there was, as the Nazis characterized it, a “Jewish problem” that Germany, for all to see, was trying to resolve “humanely.”

With not one of the countries of the Northern Atlantic basin allowing the Jewish passengers entry,
those countries would be in no position in the future to morally object when Germany dealt with its problem Jewish population. The St. Louis sailed out of Hamburg into the Atlantic Ocean in May 1939 carrying one non-Jewish and 936 (mainly German) Jewish refugees seeking asylum from Nazi persecution just before World War II. However, on the ship’s arrival in Cuba, the passengers were refused either tourist entry (which in theory was valid for their tourist visas) or political asylum (which was not the stated purpose for which the tourist visas had been issued) by the Cuban government under Federico Laredo Brú. This prompted a near mutiny. Two people attempted suicide and dozens more threatened to do the same. However, 29 of the refugees were able to disembark at Havana.

On 4 June 1939, the St. Louis was also refused permission to unload on orders of President Roosevelt as the ship waited in the Caribbean Sea between Florida and Cuba. Initially, Roosevelt showed limited willingness to take in some of those on board despite the Immigration Act of 1924, but vehement opposition came from Roosevelt’s Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, and from Southern Democrats—some of whom went so far as to threaten to withhold their support of Roosevelt in the 1940 Presidential election if this occurred.

The St. Louis then tried to enter Canada but was denied as well.

The ship sailed for Europe, first stopping in the United Kingdom, where 288 of the passengers disembarked and were thus spared from the Holocaust. The remaining 619 passengers disembarked at Antwerp; 224 were accepted into France, 214 into Belgium and 181 into the Netherlands, safe from Hitler’s persecution until the German invasions of these countries.[5][6]
The ship without the passengers eventually sailed back to Hamburg, Germany. By using the survival rates for Jews in these countries, Thomas and Morgan-Witts estimated that 180 of the St. Louis refugees in France, along with 152 of those in Belgium and 60 of those in Holland survived the Holocaust, giving a total of 709 estimated survivors and 227 killed of the original 936 Jewish refugees.

Later, more detailed research by Scott Miller and Sarah Ogilvie of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has given a slightly higher total of deaths:

Of the 620 St. Louis passengers who returned to continental Europe, we determined that eighty-seven were able to emigrate before Germany invaded western Europe on May 10, 1940. Two hundred and fifty-four passengers in Belgium, France and the Netherlands after that date died during the Holocaust. Most of these people were murdered in the killing centers of Auschwitz and Sóbibor; the rest died in internment camps, in hiding or attempting to evade the Nazis. Three hundred sixty-five of the 620 passengers who returned to continental Europe survived the war.

.

"Evian Conference" was not about being "inconvenient to rescue them" .. to RESCUE the Jews from Germans .. nobody did want the Jews and did not care if they were killed

Anti Jews was prevalent in America and Canada .. in Vancouver in property deeds was written "No dogs, Orientals (Chinese) and Jews allowed"

That was at the time that Iranians were taking-in massive numbers of East European Jews, mostly woman and children poor like a mouse (Iran itself being poor and in famine situation) .. that is called civilization, Monster .. and look what you guys are doing in Palestine with woman and children now

monster_gardener wrote:.
Jnalum Persicum wrote:.
What about if NOM nations suddenly decide to give TEXAS to Chinese ? ? ? and enforce it
.
When I googled NOM nations, I got Nations of Micronesia ;) ....

.
Apology, meant NAM (non aligned nations)



.
Post Reply