Palestinians Demand Western Wall Back - Shows They Don't Want Peac

[jbg]

In a negotiating posture unmatched for showing bad faith, Abbas demanded the return of the Western Wall a/k/a/ Wailing Wall from Israel (link). Apparently Mohamed's horse consummated the conversion of hay into fertilizer at this site, making it holy Muslim property.

As the last remnant of the ancient Second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 of the common era, the Western Wall, also known as the Wailing Wall, is considered Judaism's holiest site. Muslims, who call it Al-Burak, also venerate it as the place where they believe the prophet Muhammad tied his horse before ascending to the heavens.

We are talking about full control" over Jerusalem, Mr. Husseini, a scion of one of the most prominent Palestinian Arab families, told Ma'ariv. "The Wailing Wall," he said, "is a Muslim waqf," or sacred endowment, "and therefore cannot be abandoned." He cited a 1928 British mandate white paper that called for the area to be under Muslim control where Jews would be allowed to worship.

All kidding aside, this shows that the Palestinians do not want peace; this demand was made after Olmert offered to surrender parts of Jerusalem, itself a politically inflammatory gesture. By Abbas' standards, all Israel would be "a Muslim waqf,"

Edited October 13, 2007 by jbg

[DogOnPorch]

Actually, the Koran refers to Mohammed's 'ride' as one really pimped-out donkey with wings (al-buraq).

In reallity, Islam didn't arrive in Jerusalem until well after Mohammed's death (638 AD). It came with a sword in its' hand in the form of an army under Omar's control. It was he who decided that the holiest Jewish religious site was the same place where Mohammed went on his famous junket to heaven with the angel Gabriel (the furthest mosque). How convenient...

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

O Allah! Grant me to die a martyr, and make my death be in your Prophet’s country.

---Umar ibn al-Khattab (Omar)

[jbg]

With demands like these extravagant, unfounded and outrageous ones, is it any wonder that "peace talk (sic) ... hit the fan"(link)?

[JB Globe]

With demands like these extravagant, unfounded and outrageous ones, is it any wonder that "peace talk (sic) ... hit the fan"(link)?

It's a completely unrealistic demand - motivated no doubt by the fact that Abbas is being viewed more and more as a Western puppet, and is over-compensating by trying to (unsuccessfully) pander to a certain segment of the Palestinian population.

But of course, we all do know that unrealistic demands, expectations, and policies which are destructive to the peace process abound on both sides from time to time in this conflict, right?

[sharkman]

The Palestinians are ramping up the demands again, can war be far away?

[jbg]

But of course, we all do know that unrealistic demands, expectations, and policies which are destructive to the peace process abound on both sides from time to time in this conflict, right?

Frankly, Israel presents a very rare case where the winner of a war is surrendering territory, much less the winner of the following seven wars:

1. 1948;
   
2. 1956;
   
3. 1967;
   
4. 1973;
   
5. 1982 (Lebanon);
   
6. 1987-1992 Intifada; and
   
7. 2000-date Intifada
   

One wonders why the losers are making demands. But wasn't it always thus with Muslims. The losers of the Barbary Pirates' struggle, the Pirates, made demands (the Americans were pacified by an English-only codicil that the Muslims didn't sign). Similarly, the Arab world has successfully demanded that the US not relocate their embassy to Jerusalem. Universities provide ritual footbaths to Muslim students (link).

I guess people are afraid of the Muslims and their propensity to sickening violence.

[Peter F]

Frankly, Israel presents a very rare case where the winner of a war is surrendering territory, much less the winner of the following seven wars

I guess people are afraid of the Muslims and their propensity to sickening violence.

um Israel has its own propensity for sickening violence.

:

1. 1948;
   
2. 1956;
   
3. 1967;
   
4. 1973;
   
5. 1982 (Lebanon);
   
6. 1987-1992 Intifada; and
   
7. 2000-date Intifada
   

Or did Israel succeed through lack of violence?

[ScottSA]

um Israel has its own propensity for sickening violence.

Or did Israel succeed through lack of violence?

You would have preferred that they meekly line up and trudge into the sea?

[Peter F]

You would have preferred that they meekly line up and trudge into the sea?

Sure. Why not?.

If they had no propensity for violence then they would have lost. But they didn't, did they?

No. They won each and every one of those wars. They will win each and every war that comes along too.

Wars are not won through lack of violence. JBG is saying Muslims have a 'propensity' for violence. I am suggesting Israeli's also have a 'propensity' for violence.

And I have cited all thier victory's achieved because of thier willingness to be violent.

So you see, professor, I have made a case. You, as usual, have said nothing.

[ScottSA]

I said:

You would have preferred that [Jews] meekly line up and trudge into the sea?

Sure. Why not?.

So you see, professor, I have made a case. You, as usual, have said nothing.

The "case" you have apparently "made" apparently involves Jews marching into the sea. I suppose that's one way to solve the "Jewish question," eh?

[jbg]

Wars are not won through lack of violence. JBG is saying Muslims have a 'propensity' for violence. I am suggesting Israeli's also have a 'propensity' for violence.

And I have cited all thier victory's achieved because of thier willingness to be violent.

So you see, professor, I have made a case. You, as usual, have said nothing.

Self-defense is not violence. And no one would say that Canada is a "violent" country on account of Vimy Ridge, would they?

[Peter F]

Self-defense is not violence.

Self-defense is violence. Shooting, bombing and generally creating as much mayhem and fear amongst the enemy is violence wether it be self-defence or pre-emptive or for the good of mankind. The IDF is very good at violence. It seems they have a predisposition for it. Thats why they continually win.

And no one would say that Canada is a "violent" country on account of Vimy Ridge, would they?

Of course not. Egypts not a violent country either, nor Syria, nor Iran, nor Pakistan, nor India, nor Lebanon.

But that wasn't your point, was it? Your point was that muslims (not nations) have a predisposition to violence. You allude to some sort of geneticly caused predisposition and/or religiously caused predisposition. You single out muslims and ignore the obvious violence of non-muslims. Wich, I think, I have pointed out.

[jbg]

Self-defense is violence. Shooting, bombing and generally creating as much mayhem and fear amongst the enemy is violence wether it be self-defence or pre-emptive or for the good of mankind. The IDF is very good at violence. It seems they have a predisposition for it. Thats why they continually win.

Of course not. Egypts not a violent country either, nor Syria, nor Iran, nor Pakistan, nor India, nor Lebanon.

But that wasn't your point, was it? Your point was that muslims (not nations) have a predisposition to violence. You allude to some sort of geneticly caused predisposition and/or religiously caused predisposition. You single out muslims and ignore the obvious violence of non-muslims. Wich, I think, I have pointed out.

No, my point is you cannot make equivalent Israel's use of force, aimed at military targets but sometimes collaterally damaging civilian targets, with the deliberate "fighting" of tall buildings, buses and pizza parlors.

[Moxie]

Damn those Israelies they strap bombs on their children and hide under Burkas, nope that's not Israel. Wait, what about Iraq Terrorists using mentally ill children as road side bombs, nope that's not those damn Jews. Damn Jews defending themselves for having innocent children bombed with missles. The children of Pretend Palestine starve but Hammas isn't suffering a lack of missles or bullets.

[jbg]

Damn those Israelies they strap bombs on their children and hide under Burkas, nope that's not Israel. Wait, what about Iraq Terrorists using mentally ill children as road side bombs, nope that's not those damn Jews. Damn Jews defending themselves for having innocent children bombed with missles. The children of Pretend Palestine starve but Hammas isn't suffering a lack of missles or bullets.

And is this the prelude to an Israeli election (link)?

[Higgly]

I can see that some people are upset about Palestinians wanting the Western Wall back. Would you be happier if all they asked for was the land they actually rightfully and legally own?

Edited October 22, 2007 by Higgly

[jbg]

I can see that some people are upset about Palestinians wanting the Western Wall back. Would you be happier if all they asked for was the land they actually rightfully and legally own?

No, I'd be happier if they made realistic demands, and added promises of a "warm peace", i.e. true cooperation, travel rights, ambassadorial relations, and progress designed to turn that area of the world into the social and economic dynamo it could be, rather than a tinder box.

[Higgly]

No, I'd be happier if they made realistic demands, and added promises of a "warm peace", i.e. true cooperation, travel rights, ambassadorial relations, and progress designed to turn that area of the world into the social and economic dynamo it could be, rather than a tinder box.

Realistic demands to guys like you mean things like, "Oh golly. We don't care about the land under your settlements. We own it, but we didn't really need it. Why not give it to a family from Russia? How about a few Ethipians? Maybe an American or two? And we don't care about the roads that join them that we are not allowed to cross or use. We didn't need those either. In fact, why don't we all just move to Jordan. That's the ticket! We demand to move to Jordan!" Those are the kinds of demands you like, right?

[jbg]

Realistic demands to guys like you mean things like, "Oh golly. We don't care about the land under your settlements. We own it, but we didn't really need it. Why not give it to a family from Russia? How about a few Ethipians? Maybe an American or two? And we don't care about the roads that join them that we are not allowed to cross or use. We didn't need those either. In fact, why don't we all just move to Jordan. That's the ticket! We demand to move to Jordan!" Those are the kinds of demands you like, right?

No. I mean to take back the 98% of the West Bank and Gaza offered, and then create real peace.

Can you come up with non-belligerant answers?

[JB Globe]

I guess people are afraid of the Muslims and their propensity to sickening violence.

Did you really just open the post by criticizing an arguement you found the be ridiculous? Because if you did, the above quote would contain lethal doses of hypocrisy and irony.

[jbg]

Did you really just open the post by criticizing an arguement you found the be ridiculous? Because if you did, the above quote would contain lethal doses of hypocrisy and irony.

Huh?

[JB Globe]

Huh?

What? Me hypocrite? That's unpossible!

What's the sequel to this post? Are you going to call Ahmadinejad a bigot than proceed to tell us how evil ALL Muslims are?

[jbg]

What's the sequel to this post? Are you going to call Ahmadinejad a bigot than proceed to tell us how evil ALL Muslims are?

Your reasoning and logic are very difficult to follow.

I'll respond to what I think you're saying, by stating that the Muslims who leave him in power are not doing themselves a service.

[DogOnPorch]

They'd do the world a service if they could find leaders who didn't look and act like the bad guys from 1001 Nights or a bad knock off of Al Pacino in

.

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

Is this your pen?

---

[JB Globe]

Your reasoning and logic are very difficult to follow.

Nice try. You know exactly what I'm saying, you're just playing dumb so you don't actually have to debate me on it:

My point is - who are you to criticize others for making "ridiculous" statements/demands, or, as you have before, criticize folks like the Iranian Prez, for making racist comments, when you yourself have make such comments on a routine basis?