The Origins of the conflict against the Jews of Israel

[Rue]

There's a reason this section of the board is flooded with threads that are started to in my opinion troll against Israel for existing.

Its the same reason that causes a grown adult Egyptian athlete refused to shake the hand of an Israeli athlete today at th Rio Olympics or fuels the hateful comments over and over that Zionism is cancer, which necessarily means Jews are not worthy of life but instead a lethal threat simply because they are Israeli,.

Its an ancient hatred and its deeply entrenched in Islam and is still mainstream and I would argue is why certain people on this board hide their Muslim identities. They don't have the integrity to say its part of their religious beliefs as Muslims.

This hatred I would argue is about not just about being unable to acknowledge a Jewish state but also being unable to acknowledge a Jew as an equal to a Muslim. It starts in Islam with reference back to the story of Abraham, where his wife Sarah is depicted as a deceitful liar into tricking Abraham to give his second son Isaac her son his inheritance as originator of all Hebrews (Jews )while the first son Ishmael, born of Hagar a servant is sent with her into the desert cheated of his rightful inheritance and forced into the desert where he goes on to create the Arabs and from them the Muslim people. is unable to have a child so to honour God's wishes he has a son, he has one with one of his female servants Hagar. The very premises depicts Jews as descendants of lies and deceit.

This then necessarily created a friction between Jews and the descendants of Ishamel also refered to as Arabs, and it is in this environment Mohammed is born. Muslims follow the teachings of Mohammed who according to Islam was perfect and therefore can not be questioned.To become a better man, mortal men born imperfect must try emulate Muhammad in every way possible.

Where Muhammed splits from traditional Christian belief, is his belief that the defeat of Jews at Masada and the following expulsion of Jews from their homeland and their subsequent failure to establish a unified nation-state elsewhere was the God's punishment for their not accepting Jesus Christ as their Messiah.

Muhamed we know in later life moves away from Christianity to his own visions and thoughts. It is believed he smoked hash hish and each night in a stoned state he would talk in his sleep or speak what he thought or saw while under the influence, and his wife would write down his comments on leaves which were then were supposedly passed on and re-translated. So like the Old and New Testament, the Koran is not first hand-the actual original words from Muhammed no one knows.

Muhammed believed the descendants of Ishmael, the Arabs, were God’s chosen people. His concept saw them as favoured by God because he misunderstood and thought the descendants of Isaac the son of Sarah thought they were favoured by God. Ironically Jews were never defined in Judaism as favoured by God only promised he would not forget them, if they continued to contact God through the collective of Jews and not individual Jews. The Jewish collective is said to enter a contract or covenant with God never to be forgotten by God if it remained collective not to b e better than any non Jew or favoured.

Muhammed caught up in the anger of feeling Isaac was favoured by God over Ishmael preached that Ishmael was cheated and should be the favourite.This is where the original concept comes from that Islamic people or the Arab people or descendants from Ishamel were the true people and Jews descendants of liar and cheater called Sarah. In the origins of Christianity Jews are killers, in Islam we are liars.It is the collective of Jews as a while that are liars as well as each individual Jew. We are all descended from an evil liar.

This is why when you go into the Koran it has Muhammed stating these following beliefs which are similar to how Christ's teachings or gospels are portrayed in he New Testament:

1, Mohammed's preachings are the literal words of God – and thus absolutely true and can not be questioned..

2.Mohammed is said to have preached that for not accepting Jesus Christ’s prophetic teachings, the Jews were punished by being for ever denied to have a homeland, a kingdom, a nation-state of their own which is why to this day Jews cannot have a state. God punished them for not following Jesus. Now go back to 1. Muhammed cannot be questioned so if he says Jews were punished and can not have a state for not believing in Jesus, they can't have one, ever.

3.Israel by being a Jewish nation-state defies God's punishment for rejecting Jesus as the Messiah which necessarily makes it an abomination before God because if a Jewish nation-state exists, then God is no longer punishing the Jews and the teaching of Mohammed about God not permitting Jews to have a homeland then become falsified and so if that lesson in 2 is false, then everything else he preached comes into question as also not being true.

4.In fact as long as Israel continues to exist, Mohammed is proven to be a liar and Islam is proven to not be a valid religion and so its seen as an abomination, a challenge to the very root principles of Islam as taught by Muhammed.

5.Because of this then come the passages that Israel must be destroyed at all costs, so that Mohammed is proven correct and ALL of the religion of Islam is no longer proven to be a fallacy.

This is why a devout Muslim, does not feel in good conscience, that he can accept any Jewish homeland to exist.So Sharia (Muslim laws) as part of Islam don't acknowledge Jews as anything but dhmmi and dhimmi because they are not Muslim can not be equal to Muslims as they are not following the words of Muhammed and until they do, they are necessarily defective.

In the case of Jews, we are said to be from same father as Muslims but it ends there. According to Islam we are infidel, non believers and we either must be converted to the word of Muhammed, die, or agree to live as inferiors kept alive by the grace of Muslims if we agree to pay a tax and live separate and apart from them. Extremist Islam believes and follows the passages of the Koran that say all Jews must be killed in the first step to cleansing the world of evil. In Islam the world is eventually all to be Muslim run by a Muslim council of Imams, a one world government.

So this myth that trendy leftists have that terrorism only started when Israel took over the West Bank and/or stole land from Muslim-Arabs is a crock. In fact more land was taken away from Palestinian Arabs-Muslims by non Palestinian Arab-Muslims who flooded the region because of British immigration laws deliberately created to provide them incentives to move there to prevent a Jewish state, In fact most of the land on the West Bank is stolen by Muslims from other Muslims.

Islam has yet to undergo a true Reform movement.

The two most largest sects, Sunni and Shiite have been at war with one another since both diverged as to what prophets to follow thousands of years ago and long before people interested in oil showed up. The Alawites of Syria who President Assad is a member of are no even true Muslims but a mystic sect that broke from them yet since the Alawites hate the Sunnis who are the majority in Syria, and because Sunnis are the enemy of Shiites, Iran sides with the Alawites as well as Shiites in Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain where they have instituted a war against the Sunnis in these nations financed by the Saudis.

The Saudis also finance Wahabi extremists who consider their fellow Sunnis to liberal. There are an infinite number of variations within Sunnism and Shiitism. There is no central church or hierarchy as heir is in Catholicism. Imams do not go to any one college and many are self taught. No one Imam has the same way of preaching and in Iran to keep the Shiite Imams in line the council that runs the country has a religious police that assure they all follow the preachings of the imams on the council. Sunni clergy to maintain their power traditionally teamed up with the military leaders in their countries no different than the Protest or Catholic clergy did with their Kings and Queens.

It is in this back drop anti Semitism against Jews is recycled. It comes from the belief that a Jew is not in their rightful place if they think they are entitled to a state and it explains why certain Hasidic Jews march along with traditional Imams preaching that Israel is an abomination. Those Jews, the Hasids live in a bygone era maintaining the same lifestyle they did thousands of years ago and like traditionbal Islam demands orthodox rituals be followed and does not allow free discussion or debate and sees anyone outside this group as the enemy.

So to mainstream Islamists and until they transcend their literal thinking they will preach crap ad infinitum about Israel and they will hide their Muslim names fearing people will say their religion has taught them to hate Jews not the charade they play that they care about Palestinians.

This is not about Palestinians. Its about Muslims of the West Bank and Gaza and Jews of Israel and people born in Palestinian refugee camps where hey are deliberately kept prisoners by Arab countries. Its about two people descended from Ishmael and Isaac who live side by side and are enveloped in an ancient set of tales that defines Jews as deceitful and incapable of equality with Muslims.

Extremists in the name of Islam and sometimes Judaism (with certain settlers) use their religions as the fuel to try resurrect the ancient war. Its not an accident Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Hezbollah quote passages of the Koran calling on a holy war not just to take back Israel but to start from there and establish a unified Muslim world.

Jews are just one obstacle. Hindus, Christians, Bahaiis, Zoroastreans, Yazidis, Kurds, Berbers, Druze,Amidyah and Ismaili Muslims, Unitarians, Buddhists (who are technically not a religion), Siekhs, Jains, among many religions are all seen as offensive by mainstream Islam. It does not teach tolerance just the exact opposite, that only the words of Muhammed are acceptable and in that respect its no different than certain literal evangelical Christians who truly believe unless they convert the world, we go to hell.

Me I see it as primates-apes who follow ape pack mentalities. I believe religions are codified forms of primate behaviour that defines the alpha male, who is in the pack and where packs iive and how they deal with other ape packs.

I do not find it suprising that all religions have alpha males who usually have facial hear or beards reminding us they are

still the alpha ape.

I also think it explains what I consider the hateful trolling on this forum that is passed off as discussion on Israel. Its nothing more than the same ancient whiny complaint of one brother feeling his other brother was more favoured.

Call it Cain and Abel, call it sibling rivalry, call it Tom and Dick Smothers, its just apes fighting over the pecking over and which alpha ape controls a territory on any given day.

The bigger the penis (more weapons) the Alpha male has over his opponent the more likely he will in the end prevail at least so the male apes think. The female ones are beginning to realize other than sperm carriers, men are expendable and they would prefer to run the entire world and get rid of us once we mate. Golda, the Iron Lady, Fraulein Merkel,

Hilary, we men are becoming dinosaurs and its not an accident highly feminine men like Justine Trudeau are coming to power. Alpha males are killing themselves off. Putin, Trump, the Isis terrorists, they are sad characters, man trying to

be the warrior saviours depicted in the Bible and Koran.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Rue

[eyeball]

So the Nazis are off the hook? Taxme will be happy to hear that.

[Rue]

So the Nazis are off the hook? Taxme will be happy to hear that.

So now what do you want me to giggle? You'd think by now if you have nothing to say to me you would resist the insipid vacuous comments.

[The_Squid]

If someone went on a 4,000 word diatribe like this criticizing the Jewish faith you would be screeching about how it's antisemitism.

[herples]

Your argument is all over the place. I have no clue where to even start with it.

[Rue]

I take the time Squid to address directly the hatred on this board. No doubt the length is a challenge for those whose attention span is limited to 5 second sound bites. The length is not the issue, the content is. The fact you comment on the length only attests to the generation you live in where you are brought up on cell phones and illiterate fragmented sentences. I carefully outlined what I said. The length is because unlike some on this forum, I complete my thoughts.

By the way, if one of the resident anti semites you refer to were to write a 4,000 word response (you counted them did you) and it criticized fundamental Jewish religious concepts I probably would be impressed or agree with them. I have yet to see one anti semite on this board able to understand anything about Judaism. What I have seen are anti semites unable to discuss the Old Testament as I do the Koran.

I criticize all religions equally including my own. I reject literal fundamentalism. I reject any passage of the Bible or Koran interpreted literally. I reject the concepts of the Islamic religion that enshrine dhimmitude and I explained why. I reject those postions of Islam that institutionalize anti semitic beliefs no different then I challenged the Christian doctrine that ALL Jews descended from the Jews of Christ's day were blood libel for his death.

Christianity eventually rejected that blood libel thesis. Christianity has evolved where it has renounced anti-Semitic interpretations and we are at a time when Jews and Christians mainstream can worship together. The same can not be said yet for most Muslims. Ismaili and Amidyah Muslims we can sit and pray with. They show us respect and vice versa. Unfortunately mainstream Sunni and Shiite faiths are far from that place.

There are modern progressive Muslims that reject fundamentalist interpretations of certain passages of the Koran no differently than I and how I reject fundamentalist interpretations of the Old Testament. Such Muslims and I are united in the comments I have made. They reject the anti semitic

interpretations but they are a minority and they come to the West precisely because their beliefs would get them killed it they stated what they believed back home,

I expect you to not read what I wrote and play the Muslim card-that if the Muslim religion in any way is criticized, its simply prejudicial against Islam.

That is a crock but I expect it from you. You come on this forum and make sweeping false generalizations about Judaism and Zionism. I challenge them and this is part of the challenge and an effort to explain the roots of the hatred exhibited on this board against Jews for being Israeli.

You don't want to read it don't. Don't however pull the Muslim card with me. All religions are subject to criticism when they generate hatred and conflict, not just Judaism.

[Rue]

Herples my argument was not all over the place but I appreciate because its more than a sentence it overwhelmed you. Just don't read it. I dn't doubt more than on sentence or more than one simple thought would overwhelm you. Thanks for the feed back.

[herples]

Herples my argument was not all over the place but I appreciate because its more than a sentence it overwhelmed you. Just don't read it. I dn't doubt more than on sentence or more than one simple thought would overwhelm you. Thanks for the feed back.

Nothing overwhelming about it. You have one argument about how Islam is suppose to hate Jews then another on how it has to treat non believers then another on the Israel-Arab conflict. Yet you haven't explained the origins of the conflict at all you just made various arguments then posted it.

The conflict began after world war one when the Ottoman empire was broken up. The British decided that some of the land in Palestine should be given to the Jewish people as long "...that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." In the Balfour Declaration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

The Arabs of Palestine, also the majority of the population, didn't like it because they wanted to either be part of Syria or have independence and the British were in the way of that as well as not wanting another nation taking territory within their own territory.

Religion became a bigger part with the rise of Jihadism in Israel in the 80's.

[dre]

Nothing overwhelming about it. You have one argument about how Islam is suppose to hate Jews then another on how it has to treat non believers then another on the Israel-Arab conflict. Yet you haven't explained the origins of the conflict at all you just made various arguments then posted it.

The conflict began after world war one when the Ottoman empire was broken up. The British decided that some of the land in Palestine should be given to the Jewish people as long "...that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." In the Balfour Declaration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

The Arabs of Palestine, also the majority of the population, didn't like it because they wanted to either be part of Syria or have independence and the British were in the way of that as well as not wanting another nation taking territory within their own territory.

Religion became a bigger part with the rise of Jihadism in Israel in the 80's.

Also, while its true that religion plays a part in the conflict, the modern Israeli / Arab conflict (after 1960) is really just a dust-up over control of the Jordan River's headwaters.

Violence between the armistice and 1964 was relatively contained. But it clashes started to increase again when both sides began building water diversion projects to try increase the water one side controlled at the expense of the other. Israel began construction of their National Water Carrier, which when complete would reduce the flow of water to the Hashemites. This was part of the Israeli goal to "make the desert bloom". Arab nations responded by starting their own water diversion project... Diverting the Hasbani and the Banias river to the Yarmouk River, that would result in less water being available for the Israeli NWC.

In 1965 things heated up. Syrians started shooting at Israeli troops and farmers, and Israel destroyed the Arab water diversion project with tanks and artillary, and also destroyed all of the heavy equipment in the area. This set off a chain of border clashes which lead to the 6 day war just over a year later.

And when the war the six day war started water was the central focus of Israels occupation.

Israel issued a number of military orders, and sent troops directly to strategic water control locations.

Military Order No. 291. All pre-1967 land and water-related arrangements are declared invalid

Military Order No. 158 (1967): "Order Amending the Water Supervision Law" ordained that all wells, springs and water projects are under the full direct command of the Israeli Military Commander.^[21] Every installation or resource built without a permit will be confiscated

Military Order No. 92 (1967) states that it ″gives the absolute authority of controlling all issues related to water to the Water Officer who is appointed by the Israeli courts.″ Military Orders 498 and 558 of 1974 and 1977 transferred all powers to the IDF in Gaza

Military Order No. 58 (1967) states that ″it is prohibited to construct any new water installation without a license and that the licensing officer has the right of rejecting any application for a license without having to give the justification for his rejection.

Military Order No. 948 states that every citizen in the Gaza Strip is compelled to obtain the approval of the Israeli military commander before implementing any water-related project.

Palestinians were denied the right to drill wells on their own land, and strict water usage quotas were imposed on them that allow them to only use 1/5 of what an Israeli uses. Meanwhile almost all of the water resources in the west bank are pumped into Israel supplying roughly 40% of Israels water supply.

Proponents of both sides of this conflict want everyone to think its special. Its about god, and racism, and religion. And there's a little bit of truth to that. But for the most part this is a garden variety dust-up over territory and resources like most other conflicts are. There's nothing all that special about it at all. The only thing that makes it a little different is that global attitudes towards the use of military to conquer new territory changed, so Israel was stuck. If it had been a hundred years earlier they would have just expelled all the Palestinians, or killed them, and permanently annexed the territory.

Instead they have had to pretend they want peace with the Palestinians and pretend they have an open mind to an Arab state in the occupied territories.

But right in the ruling parties Charter....

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.

In other words? "You cant have a state because we need permanent control of that territory and its resources".

This analysis might seem to paint Israel as the bad guys, but I think it does the opposite. NO COUNTRY would voluntarily give up 60% of their Fresh water. And Israel has the misfortune of being a down-stream state, so they are vulnerable to attempts by the upstream states to starve them out.

ALL nations are willing to do some nasty things in order to accomplish objectives that they see as vital to the survival and lively hood of their citizens.

Edited August 13, 2016 by dre

[GostHacked]

What part of Dre's post was anti-semitic?

[Rue]

Nothing overwhelming about it. You have one argument about how Islam is suppose to hate Jews then another on how it has to treat non believers then another on the Israel-Arab conflict. Yet you haven't explained the origins of the conflict at all you just made various arguments then posted it.

The conflict began after world war one when the Ottoman empire was broken up. The British decided that some of the land in Palestine should be given to the Jewish people as long "...that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." In the Balfour Declaration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

The Arabs of Palestine, also the majority of the population, didn't like it because they wanted to either be part of Syria or have independence and the British were in the way of that as well as not wanting another nation taking territory within their own territory.

Religion became a bigger part with the rise of Jihadism in Israel in the 80's.

You chose to detach the comments. I show how they are all linked. You have taken history and engaged in this magic formula where you snap shot it and ignore everything t hat transpired leading up to the event in which you unilaterally declare the relevant story line starts. You are wrong. You engage in snap shot history, No the conflict you see in the Middle East did not start on the date you designated. It started long ago as Islam developed as a religion and the preachings of Islam spread about Jews and non Muslims. Before that war raged with the Christians and before them the Jews, and at the time of the Jews non Abrahamic faiths and before them other peoples.

No the Middle East conflict doesn't magically start in W1 or after it. Of course not. The motions of war, distrust, conflict between Muslim sects and between Muslims and non Muslims evolved and were transpiring long before the British or Turks.

You choose to artificially ignore history as a never ending chain of inter-connected events. You ignore all the events before your artificially and arbitrarily chosen snap shot in time you choose to start from so of course with that bias, you see no connection with anything I stared before that explaining how

it flowed into the time line you choose. I expect that.

I do not expect people like you to have the patience to before you start using ethnocentric time lines based on the British colonial take on history

go back further.

The definition of a Jew being unable to have a state or the same rights as a Muslim started long before WW1. That was the point I made, its the point you deliberately choose to ignore and I explained why. You just chose to deny it. You deny. You won't even acknowledge the religious conceptualization behind the belief Jews can't have a state. WW1 has nothing to do with that. WW1 and 2, and the coming of Western colonialists did not create that belief or conflict, they merely picked up on it and used it to divide and conquer. They used it to divide and conquer Arab states to get control of their oil

resources, no more, no less.

All the West did is to exploit existing religious conflict, not create it, use what already existed to favour their oil agenda. Its not rocket science but I do not doubt you will never open yourself to the possibility that life and history and civilizations and their never ending series of chain of events existed long before you decide the world started after WW1 in the Middle East.

[Rue]

What part of Dre's post was anti-semitic?

What part of my response to Dre called him anti semitic? Stop baiting.

[Rue]

Islam originated in the 7th century. It then migrated into the area known as the Arabian peninsula and then moved beyond that area.

As Islam spread, Non Muslims including Jews subject to Muslim sharia law as imposed by Muslim rulers.

While each Muslim ruler differed in ways as to how they interpreted and imosed sharia law they all agreed, non Muslims could not own

land or gave their own state.

That is the origin of the present day belief still repeated by Muslim rulers that Jews can not have a state let alone live in a Muslim country

with the same legal rights as a Muslim.

To this day if you are a non Muslim in a Muslim state you are defined as legally inferior.

To pretend the conflict in the middle east only started after 1949 and Israel's creation is absurd. Blaming it on water shortages or

British historic time lines that ignore the above is equally as absurd.

Stating the above does not make me guilty of engaging in a diatribe against Islam.

[Rue]

This article which is a summary of a complex issue tries to balance the writings of the Koran and point out the negative

and positive references to Jews:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_antisemitism

My opinion as to the origins of the conflict between Jews and Muslims that now flows into today's conflict

is expressed in this article and its how I would describe it:

http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.ijpbs.20120205.03.html

International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences

p-ISSN: 2163-1948 e-ISSN: 2163-1956

2012; 2(5): 142-147

doi: 10.5923/j.ijpbs.20120205.03

The Psychological Origin of the 1300-Year-Old Arab-Israeli War: How History Must Guide Policy Making

The author of the above, Steven E. Rothke, Assistant Professor of Clinical Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, postulates that the conflict is at its core, fundamentally a religious conflict but can be explained by looking at its significant psychological component a manifested through the words of Muhammed.

He offers a psychological analysis that when the Jews rejected Muhammad as the Apostle of God, he experienced a severe psychological wound leading to a series of actions we today define as narcissistic rage.

This rage then is transcribed into the Qur’an and is said to become an integral part of Islamic-Jewish relations since that time.

Its why no doubt what I wrote would seem to some disconnected or confusing.

My point is the conflict is far older and more complex then a water shortage, pretending it only started when Israel was created or because of Western colonialists.

Its a deeply embedded pattern of belief and behaviour that has evolved over thousands of years and is inter-connected in all the rhetoric we see today promulgated by Mullahs,Immams and the Muslim states of the Middle East that do not maintain distinction between the state and Islamic religious

belief.

Ironically the anti Zionists on this board criticize Israel for not separating its religion from its state which it in fact does do legally but Muslim states still do not.

While Israel has separate family and civil courts for Muslims, a Supreme Court that enshrines their right to own property, gives them the right to vote, elect members to the Knesset, receive funding in over 125 free legal clinics to contest Israeli laws they feel unfair, allows it open access to a free press,

allows Muslim Israelis access to the same hospitals for treatment, the same cannot be said in reverse with Muslim countries.

While anti Zionists come on this board and claim the law of return that expedites Jews to Israel is "racist" because it provides expedited processing for Jews, these same critics do not challenge the other 140 nations in the world including Japan, China, Italy, Eire, Belgium, Germany, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Finland, Sweden, Taiwan, South Korea, on and on for having the very same law.

The anti Zionists won't mention how Jews are prohibited from obtaining citizenship or owning land in Muslim Middle East states, have to have a Muslim serve as their broker in any business deal or testify for them on the stand as they are considered liars for not believing in Muhammed.

They won't discuss what dhimmitude is and how it is in fact institutionalized religious apartheid that forced Jews into ghettos and deemed them

inferior to the point they could not worship or congregate in public, could not shake the hand or touch Muslims (still perists to this day).

Its a dialogue you won't see on this board and how that relates to today's conflict because if it was, the whole pith and substance of the arguments of Jews being colonialists let alone oppressors would fall apart in a wave of historic fact.

To expose the above does not attack or insult the peaceful passages of the Koran that could one day be emphasized and over-ride the negative passages with critical thinking by Muslims as they evolve past fundamentalism and literalism like Christianity and Judaism did and move to a more

relativistic method of interpretation which does not read the passages literally but symbolic and takes into consideration the political biases of the writers in the era when the words would have been transcribed second hand from Muhammed.

[Rue]

The other component of my position can be found in this article and in particular these excerpts:

THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF THE ISLAMIC WORLD

The Double Standards of the Islamic World
By Jack Schwartz
October 23, 2003

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000121.html

" It is a commonplace for Western supporters of the Palestinian cause to attribute violence against Israelis to the occupation of the West Bank. Presumably, if the injustices connected to the occupation of the territories ended, the violence would end with it. The Palestinian Authority goes somewhat further and insists that only when all Palestinian refugees are allowed to return to the homes which their forbears lost in the wars with Israel will the urge for retribution be assuaged,"

In regards to the above comment I would contend this board is flooded with the above rhetoric that states the above but couches it. The agenda is to do away with Israel as a Jewish state and replace it with a Muslim one, but couch or disguise or hide the actual agenda to dismantle Israel as a Jewish state by engaging in the semantic game that the PA recognizes Israel when its known they have stated they will only recognize Israel once it stops being a Jewish state as expressed time and time again by Mr. Abbas who states he would never acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state and says the only way there will be peace is if any Muslim self declared as a descendant of a "Palestinian" is allowed to enter Israel and not just be given automatic citizenship but land title to any land they claim belongs to them without any proof of title.

The above author also stated:

"The basic appeal of the Palestinians to their co-religionists worldwide. has little do with Nationalism, Territory or Restitution of Property Rights. It is a matter of Faith and cuts to the heart of the basic beliefs of Islam. An alliance of Islamicists, Leftists and the Politically Correct have set up a Catch-22 whereby any examination of Islam by a Westerner or, for that matter, a Muslim who fails to toe the party line, is decried as "racism," an intellectual bullying tactic perfected by the late Edward Said. This creates a situation in which no one can comment on the relationship between a faith and its zealots without being labeled "a racist." It also conveniently insulates Islam from any rational criticism or self-examination of its historical and cultural antecedents regarding its relationship with other cultures, except on its own narrow terms."

The above I would argue was demonstrated by Squid in his response to me claiming I am engaging in a diatribe against Muslim religion but would never do the same about the Jewish religion.

The name calling avoids having to discussing the issue.

I've been censored for pointing out the above is what is behind these forum contributors-a hate belief that is exactly why a religious Muslim athlete refused to shake the hands of an Israeli athlete who defeated him in Judo at he Olympics and was sent home and

its exactly what is displayed in the rhetoric against Israel on this forum that fuses ancient Muslim concepts of intolerance of Jews with today's new speak, attacking Jews using the word Zionist or Israeli.

Unlike one poster I don't simply quite from the same bias Al Jazzera. I don't hide my ethnic identity, continually refer to myself in flattering terms of moral righteousness and make comments that Muslims are cancer or that I am in the Canadian legion.

I have only brought myself into the topic when Jews are attacked to say, you attack a Jew for being Jewish I stand up.

I have yet to see a Muslim come on this board and accuse me of attacking Muslims. Never has it happened. Why not? Why is it if I am engaging in anti Islamic beliefs,why hasn't a Muslim come on this board and called me out and pointed out my hateful words againsgt all Muslims?

Someone show me one passage where I called all Muslims cancers, terrorists, or said the entire Muslim religion is evil or claimed all Muslims are ultra orthodox.

The point of this thread is to challenge directly the anti Semitism behind the flood of anti Israel rhetoric that I believe stains this forum with hatred and prevents, and chokes off any discussion about proposed peace solutions to the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis that would define and respect the right to both peoples living in their own states.

The author went on to state which is what I argue that:

"When we try to explain genocidal rationales, we speak of Dehumanization -- placing the victim in a subhuman category which permits the perpetrator to traverse moral strictures -- but an equally valid rational is Demonization, which catapults the victim into a superhuman category, a Satanic force that has to be expunged, which permits the perpetrator to vent his fury with moral rectitude. I think this explains the psychology of suicide bombing better than the rationales of despair. There have been many peoples who have suffered occupation or oppression as bad as if not worse than the Palestinians in the last half century in Tibet, East Timor, South Africa, and Kosovo to name only a few -- without resorting to suicide bombings. Terrorists by now have enough facility with car bombs and remote control to set off a bomb without attaching it to a shihad. Despite the disclaimers of some mainstream clerics, there is a religious component to this act which speaks to the Muslim faithful at the deepest level. A "martyr" -- in a clear act of religious passion as evinced by the elaborate videotaped ceremony prior to the sacrifice -- consecrates him-or-herself to God for this blow against the usurpers. From their point of view, it is a Holy Deed in a Holy War. How else can we explain the act of the young woman at the Haifa café who deliberately stopped between two tables of families when she exploded her device. This was not a military act. It had no strategic goal. Its purpose was vengeance fueled by sheer hatred and a belief that the families and children she was slaughtering were all seeds of the Devil; that morally, they were fair game, that it was right, indeed, necessary to kill them, that it was religiously sanctioned -- indeed, required under the rubric of jihad. Her act was, to her, justified by her faith; it was part of its very fabric. When Hamas zealots justify terror bombing in Israel's cafes and restaurants by condemning all Israelis -- including women and children -- as soldiers, they are echoing the Koranic verses that condemn all Jews, without exception, to the fires of hell for eternity. Albeit indirect and refracted, their rationale has scriptural resonance among Muslims which, in a volatile situation, trumps the Koran's more humane injunctions against shedding the blood of innocents.

Any doubts about this can be dispelled by simply reading the praise heaped on the shihads by mullahs after their acts. We are not talking here about a death cult on the periphery of a religion, but rather about a driving force in contemporary Islam that has captured the imagination of a large part of the Muslim world. It doesn't come from nowhere and it derives from more than despair. It is embedded in the origins of the faith."

If you have any doubt where the Jews of Israel are cancer reference comes form, make no mistake, it originated with a hateful Mullah affiliated with Hamas and its religious in origin and shows the connection of religion, terrorism, and hatred of Jews on this forum.

As for those who support Muslim terrorism on this forum and don't have the courage to state so- they know where to find me-they don't speak for Palestinians, Muslims, "good" (anti Zionist) Jews or anyone but themselves.

Edited August 16, 2016 by Rue

[cybercoma]

So the Nazis are off the hook? Taxme will be happy to hear that.

I can't be bothered reading a manuscript from Rue, but come on. He couldn't possibly write that much about "conflict against Jews" and not mention the Nazis or even before that British colonialism and the Balfour Declaration. Edited August 16, 2016 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

What part of Dre's post was anti-semitic?

The part where he doesn't kowtow to Jewish interests.

[eyeball]

I can't be bothered reading a manuscript from Rue, but come on. He couldn't possibly write that much about "conflict against Jews" and not mention the Nazis or even before that British colonialism and the Balfour Declaration.

It's all Islams fault and feminized men. Hitler and Nazis are never mentioned once in the OP, I can't vouch for the rest of the book though.

[herples]

You chose to detach the comments. I show how they are all linked. You have taken history and engaged in this magic formula where you snap shot it and ignore everything t hat transpired leading up to the event in which you unilaterally declare the relevant story line starts. You are wrong. You engage in snap shot history, No the conflict you see in the Middle East did not start on the date you designated. It started long ago as Islam developed as a religion and the preachings of Islam spread about Jews and non Muslims. Before that war raged with the Christians and before them the Jews, and at the time of the Jews non Abrahamic faiths and before them other peoples.

No the Middle East conflict doesn't magically start in W1 or after it. Of course not. The motions of war, distrust, conflict between Muslim sects and between Muslims and non Muslims evolved and were transpiring long before the British or Turks.

You choose to artificially ignore history as a never ending chain of inter-connected events. You ignore all the events before your artificially and arbitrarily chosen snap shot in time you choose to start from so of course with that bias, you see no connection with anything I stared before that explaining how

it flowed into the time line you choose. I expect that.

I do not expect people like you to have the patience to before you start using ethnocentric time lines based on the British colonial take on history

go back further.

The definition of a Jew being unable to have a state or the same rights as a Muslim started long before WW1. That was the point I made, its the point you deliberately choose to ignore and I explained why. You just chose to deny it. You deny. You won't even acknowledge the religious conceptualization behind the belief Jews can't have a state. WW1 has nothing to do with that. WW1 and 2, and the coming of Western colonialists did not create that belief or conflict, they merely picked up on it and used it to divide and conquer. They used it to divide and conquer Arab states to get control of their oil

resources, no more, no less.

All the West did is to exploit existing religious conflict, not create it, use what already existed to favour their oil agenda. Its not rocket science but I do not doubt you will never open yourself to the possibility that life and history and civilizations and their never ending series of chain of events existed long before you decide the world started after WW1 in the Middle East.

Go back further and it's the Ottoman empire which competed with the other empires in the world there was no great war between the Ottomans and Israelis.

We are not talking about the origin of the conflict of the Middle East but of the origin of the conflict with Israel. You can argue about the interconnection of events in the past till the cows come home in reality it's the event more recent such as world war one and two disrupting the world and the choices made in that period that set in motion the conflict we see today. If you have set of events that led up to today conflict put it here instead of ranting about Islam and it's hatred of everything.

[cybercoma]

The creation of the wheel was the origin of conflict with Israel.

[DogOnPorch]

The origin of the conflict between the Arabs and Israel is not a secret: The Grand Mufti al-Husseini would be number one on the runway. No Mufti, no war.

[Rue]

I can't be bothered reading a manuscript from Rue, but come on. He couldn't possibly write that much about "conflict against Jews" and not mention the Nazis or even before that British colonialism and the Balfour Declaration.

So you can't be bothered to read then you comment on what I should have written. That's credible. For someone who did not read you seem to notice what I did not write.

More to the point you expected me to write about something, i.e., Nazism and British colonialism, why? They did not originate the concept of Jews being unable to have their own nation or own land and that is the point of the thread.

Now you, you want to be able to ignore the thread topic, and try ti unilateraly dictate to me I what....can't write about the origins of the concept of why Muslims do not feel Jews should have a country and instead discuss Nazism or British colonialism. No. You don't dictate to me that you won't read what I write, but have the right to criticize me because I won't write on another topic.

If you don't want to acknowledge where the concept in Islam comes from that rejects Jews as having the right to a state ignore my thread b ut don't dictate to me you will ignore my thread, then make a comment I should write about something that does not deal with the root of the concept of Jews not being able to own land or have a state.

Yah I know in your world, you snapshot history and ignore the rest because it doesn't suit your selective agenda.

[Rue]

The creation of the wheel was the origin of conflict with Israel.

No of course it was not. The conflict between Muslims and the Jewish collective commenced in the 7th century after Christ's death. Your unilateral refusal to acknowledge history and try dictate when its convenient for your political agenda to start discussing, is crap.

You want to make insipid comments ridiculing my thread, it only shows your inability to respond and instead try insult me. Be my guest.

[Rue]

The origin of the conflict between the Arabs and Israel is not a secret: The Grand Mufti al-Husseini would be number one on the runway. No Mufti, no war.

No the conflict began in the 7th century, The Mufti was not born yet. Now you want to join along and refuse to acknowledge the historic origins in Islam of df the concept of a non Muslim being unable to own land, go ahead but the historic origins and development doesn't vanish because you choose to ignore history and select when you feel it started.

[Rue]

Go back further and it's the Ottoman empire which competed with the other empires in the world there was no great war between the Ottomans and Israelis.

We are not talking about the origin of the conflict of the Middle East but of the origin of the conflict with Israel. You can argue about the interconnection of events in the past till the cows come home in reality it's the event more recent such as world war one and two disrupting the world and the choices made in that period that set in motion the conflict we see today. If you have set of events that led up to today conflict put it here instead of ranting about Islam and it's hatred of everything.

To start with I started the thread so don't tell me the subject I commenced thank you then change the subject. The origins of the conflict I discuss have to do with the concept in Islam of where they believe a Jew does not have the same legal rights as a Muslim and therefore can n ot own land or have their own state. That was the topic I started. You choose to change the topic and do what? Limit it to the Middle East or the origins of modern day Israel....and then tell me that was the point of the thread. No. It was not and if you want to ignore that the rejection of Jews by Islam as equals and therefore not allowed to own land or have a state only started after Israel was created you are wrong and I have explained why. You like the others who responded to me can ignore history and arbitrarily rewrite it to suit your own political bias and agenda.

Ottoman Empire and Israel? Are you unaware that prior to the Ottoman Empire there were numerous Muslim empires since the 7th century and what role Islam played in refusing to allow Jews to have their own land? Of course not. You put blinders up and pretend i ts only in 1949 there was a conflict or better still what after WW1. Nonsense.

I will say this the consistency in the anti Israel Zionists on this board to refuse to acknowledge the historic roots of dhimmitude speaks loudly.