The Origins of the conflict against the Jews of Israel

[Rue]

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

Your comment above is anti semitic and deliberately so. Jewish interest? What a pathetic response and attempt to insult and Jew bait.

[Bonam]

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.

To be fair, long before Islam existed, the conflict between the Jews and the Arabs was still there. It is probably one of the oldest conflicts in human history that still continues today. Probably one of the reasons for its longevity is the degree to which this conflict figures centrally in three of the world's major religions.

[Rue]

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.

Oh look another who doesn't read my posts but claims to know what topic I was discussing. Lol.

The topic was the origins of the conflict flowing from the concept in Islam of Muslims refusinn g to acknowledge that Jews have the right to a state.

It has nothing to do with Nazis. Kt has nothing to do with you and feminized men. It has to do with why people like you ignore the origins od dhimmitude and the concept of why Islam preaches Jews can't have a state or own land.

It has to do with your deliberate ignoring of history like the other anti Zionists on this board. It shows as evidenced in the responses vividly the handful of anti Zionists and their refusal to acknowledge the origins of the core value of rejection of an Israeli state.

It shows how your lot deliberately ignore what does not suit your political agenda to selectively censor any part of history that would blatantly contradict your myth that Muslims only started rejecting the right of Jews to own land and have their own state after Israel was created in 1949.

[Rue]

Not one of you who has responded to me has a shred of evidence to deny dhimmitude and the concept of a stateless, landless Jew started in the 7th century.

Lol.

To be expected. Its also interesting. For people who don't read my posts because they are too long the handful of you seem to find the time to respond and try deflect the topic because you won't discuss it because you refuse to acknowledge what I said.

All you can do is deflect or make personal attacks.

Kowabunga. Surf's up.

[DogOnPorch]

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.

Thanks for the reply, Rue.

With respect, the Arab-Israeli Conflict began in 1948 at the behest of the Grand Mufti. Not something else.

Muslim vs Jew...indeed...all the way back to the 7th Century as Jews were cursed by Allah for not recognizing Muhammad as the next...and final...prophet of God. The Mufti, no doubt, had this wee fact on his mind re: his hatred of Jews.

[herples]

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.

I have not changed any subject and I have stayed within what the thread title states and what you have written.

Thanks for the reply, Rue.

With respect, the Arab-Israeli Conflict began in 1948 at the behest of the Grand Mufti. Not something else.

Muslim vs Jew...indeed...all the way back to the 7th Century as Jews were cursed by Allah for not recognizing Muhammad as the next...and final...prophet of God. The Mufti, no doubt, had this wee fact on his mind re: his hatred of Jews.

The Grand Mufti alone did not start the conflcit. You keep repeating the grand mufti over and over again while ignoring the entire picture.

[eyeball]

Photoshopping the picture you mean.

[DogOnPorch]

The Grand Mufti alone did not start the conflcit. You keep repeating the grand mufti over and over again while ignoring the entire picture.

Indeed. Hitler, alone, wasn't responsible for WW2.

By all means, give your version of the Arab-Israeli conflict's origins since mine is incorrect.

[GostHacked]

Your comment above is anti semitic and deliberately so. Jewish interest? What a pathetic response and attempt to insult and Jew bait.

Hell, even if it was called Israeli interest, would you still say it's anti-semetic? Please just shut up about the anti-semitism bull. It has not helped you form an articulated response because your emotions get in the way.

[herples]

Indeed. Hitler, alone, wasn't responsible for WW2.

By all means, give your version of the Arab-Israeli conflict's origins since mine is incorrect.

I have already made my version clear in other threads where I have had this discussion with you go and read them. Also I have posted the origin of the conflict on the first page of this thread.

Edited August 18, 2016 by herples

[DogOnPorch]

I have already made my version clear in other threads where I have had this discussion with you go and read them. Also I have posted the origin of the conflict on the first page of this thread.

What a surprise. So have I. Yet you claim I'm ignoring the details or something similar. What have I missed?

My posting history is also available.

[Rue]

Hell, even if it was called Israeli interest, would you still say it's anti-semetic? Please just shut up about the anti-semitism bull. It has not helped you form an articulated response because your emotions get in the way.

Let's get some things clear.

1. Cyber made this comment to me:

"cybercoma, on 16 Aug 2016 - 12:20 PM, said:

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

The above statement is blatantly anti semitic. It is a classic example of throwing out a stale, recycled Jewish conspiracy cliché.

It was insulting and designed to insult Jews and myself as only caring about Jews. Its snively, its inspid, its purile and its exactly

what is thrown out on this forum when discussing Israel-insulting comments about Jews.

2. You think you can tell me to shut up? Lol. You think you can tell me to shut up and allow my people, myself, to be insulted

because we choose to be Jews and live in a Jewish state? Really? Lol. shut up? Lol.

3. Tell me do you think telling me to shut up and using the words you did was an example of logic, cold, calm rationality? Hmmmm? Before you tell me to shut up and not be emotional read back your own baiting. Its pathetic. Either respond to the issues I raised or ignore my words but constantly baiting me personally and telling me what I can and can not say-lol.

Man this Bwana routine is hard to shrug hmmm? Oooh you sure put this Jew in his place? Lol. Yah think.

Shut up Jew. Lol. Yep that's the way to establish your veracity in debate.

[Rue]

The thread was about the origins of the concept of why Islam defines Jews of being incapable of having their own state and owning land and how that concept was created and implemented in the 7th century when Islam evolved.

I do note some of you want to bait me personally or go off on a tangent about what started WW2 or the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Britain, the Ottoman Empire but as of yet not one of you is capable of responding to the thread and deny with objective information that the concept of dhimmitude and the Jew being defined as unable to own the state did not start back in the 7th century with the advent of Islam. Not one of you.

Further for those who have tried the Muslim card to avoid the topic and use it to attack me personally as being anti Muslim I would expect that.

Not one anti Zionist/Jew/Israeli on this board has the integrity to acknowledge this basic precept of Islam and how its merely been continued in a conflict with non Muslims since Islam began.

Islam was never a peaceful religion. Its very premises is predicated on non Muslims being infidel and therefore not worthy of the same legal and state and land and other rights of Muslims. That remains to this day. Its not new. Its ancient and pretending this bigotry against Jews only started when Israel

came about in 1949 is deliberately ignorant of the history of the Middle East and what transpired for thousands of years and long before any Turk or British person showed up.

[GostHacked]

Let's get some things clear.

1. Cyber made this comment to me:

"cybercoma, on 16 Aug 2016 - 12:20 PM, said:

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

Even if he said Israeli interests, you would still react the same way. Each and every post made about Israel is met with a reply from you calling them anti-semetic coupled with a lot of childish sentences. No matter WHO makes the post. You get what you give Rue. Don't cry when you are treated the same way you treat others.

[DogOnPorch]

The thread was about the origins of the concept of why Islam defines Jews of being incapable of having their own state and owning land and how that concept was created and implemented in the 7th century when Islam evolved.

I do note some of you want to bait me personally or go off on a tangent about what started WW2 or the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Britain, the Ottoman Empire but as of yet not one of you is capable of responding to the thread and deny with objective information that the concept of dhimmitude and the Jew being defined as unable to own the state did not start back in the 7th century with the advent of Islam. Not one of you.

[clip]

Well, Rue...I get it. And I'm sorry if you think the Mufti a tangent.

If we're talking about 'the Jews of Israel' being the 'Jewish Nation' as a whole...over history: they had the misfortune of being smack dab on the crossroads of three continents. Before the rise of Islam, there were plenty of other empires and ideologies challenging Judaism.

However, no other ideology other than Islam expressly curses the Jews in their canon. Christianity had the Blood Libel by implying since Judas was Jewish...ALL Jews are to blame. Overlooking Jesus was Jewish...of course. But, Easter no longer brings the pogroms it used to...eh?

And your icon...a Holocaust photo. You are angry about something other than me bringing-up the Mufti's role in said Holocaust or war with Israel. Something that my family was both victim and perpetrator in. I could share w/ you the long list of last names matching mine at Yad Veshem...but you don't take PMs, I guess.

Either way, I'm not your opponent. Cheers.

[eyeball]

That's not how it works. Either you're with one another or you're not

[GostHacked]

That's not how it works. Either you're with one another or you're not

Interesting that people on the same side of the argument cannot seem to agree on certain details! Conundrum indeed.

[Rue]

Well, Rue...I get it. And I'm sorry if you think the Mufti a tangent.

If we're talking about 'the Jews of Israel' being the 'Jewish Nation' as a whole...over history: they had the misfortune of being smack dab on the crossroads of three continents. Before the rise of Islam, there were plenty of other empires and ideologies challenging Judaism.

However, no other ideology other than Islam expressly curses the Jews in their canon. Christianity had the Blood Libel by implying since Judas was Jewish...ALL Jews are to blame. Overlooking Jesus was Jewish...of course. But, Easter no longer brings the pogroms it used to...eh?

And your icon...a Holocaust photo. You are angry about something other than me bringing-up the Mufti's role in said Holocaust or war with Israel. Something that my family was both victim and perpetrator in. I could share w/ you the long list of last names matching mine at Yad Veshem...but you don't take PMs, I guess.

Either way, I'm not your opponent. Cheers.

I am sorry it took so long to respond. You are not my opponent and the tone of my response to you was not meant to be harsh. The sob Mufti was the father of modern anti semitism and using Palestinians and Arabs to ferment Hitler's agenda. However all I meant as prominent as he was in reigniting and refueling the anti semitic feelings and beliefs, the concepts of Jews being infidel or inferior existed in the Muslim world before Hitler

introduced his version of it which of course fused with the pre-existing Muslim one and took a new intensified form of expression.

I put that picture up in direct response to the holocaust deniers on this thread. I always respect your posts.

[Rue]

Interesting that people on the same side of the argument cannot seem to agree on certain details! Conundrum indeed.

Interesting how you can't seem to fathom that not all discussions are either black or white and people can respectfully disagree.

Interesting how you just can't help but generalize and lump people on "sides" and then in the next breath accuse me of doing so.

I respect all of Dog's words. I might disagree now and then as he does with my words, so? Dog knows the history. He knows I know he knows.

He knows I think he is a sincere man with his words. This forum makes some responses sound a tad harsh. I started this thread because the concept in Islam of Jews not being able to own land or have a state is an ancient one. It didn't start when Israel came into existence again in 1949.

[Moonlight Graham]

Rue, personally I see the conflict as much simpler than that. They share territory that both see as their home and also linked to them religiously and through many historic generations. They've both been willing to kill and die for it. Generations have been taught to dislike or hate the other because they do terrible things to each other.

Both sides have acted disrespectful to the other many, many times over the years. This can't help but sow resentment. Whoever is worse or whoever started what...personally I don't see as very relevant or helpful.

[DogOnPorch]

Interesting how you can't seem to fathom that not all discussions are either black or white and people can respectfully disagree.

Interesting how you just can't help but generalize and lump people on "sides" and then in the next breath accuse me of doing so.

I respect all of Dog's words. I might disagree now and then as he does with my words, so? Dog knows the history. He knows I know he knows.

He knows I think he is a sincere man with his words. This forum makes some responses sound a tad harsh. I started this thread because the concept in Islam of Jews not being able to own land or have a state is an ancient one. It didn't start when Israel came into existence again in 1949.

No worries. We're still on the same page.

I've always wondered about Jerusalem's so-called status as 'Islam's Third Most Holy Place'. Muslims loved it so much it was allowed to fall into ruin. It was...guess who...the Mufti who renovated the Temple Mount to the general condition we see today (gold covering, etc)...then the Jordanians who fixed the leaky roof. The Mufti took donations from the 'Muslim World' for the renovation and pocketed the change. He then pushed the concept of Islam's third most holy site to the 'modern world'...and it stuck. This encouraged Arabs to move to the Mandate to counter the rising Jewish presence...the Mufti's version of Zionism.

Jerusalem, historically, was captured by Islamic invaders in 637 AD. It was Companion Omar that declared that the Jewish Temple site was the very place Muhammad went to heaven to be dictated the Quran. The so-called 'furthest mosque'. Rubbish, of course. Muhammad never set foot there.

In Muhammad's days, distant Jerusalem was only important early-on as he attempted to woo the local Jews into becoming Muslim...prayers were in Jerusalem's direction. When the Jews rejected Muhammad, the prayers towards Jerusalem stopped.

That about the extent of its holiness...a mix of iconoclasm and appropriation.

[eyeball]

Dog knows the history. He knows I know he knows.

[Rue]

I am glad you find my respect of Dog hilarious. It speaks loudly as to your role on this and other threads.

[Rue]

No worries. We're still on the same page.

I've always wondered about Jerusalem's so-called status as 'Islam's Third Most Holy Place'. Muslims loved it so much it was allowed to fall into ruin. It was...guess who...the Mufti who renovated the Temple Mount to the general condition we see today (gold covering, etc)...then the Jordanians who fixed the leaky roof. The Mufti took donations from the 'Muslim World' for the renovation and pocketed the change. He then pushed the concept of Islam's third most holy site to the 'modern world'...and it stuck. This encouraged Arabs to move to the Mandate to counter the rising Jewish presence...the Mufti's version of Zionism.

Jerusalem, historically, was captured by Islamic invaders in 637 AD. It was Companion Omar that declared that the Jewish Temple site was the very place Muhammad went to heaven to be dictated the Quran. The so-called 'furthest mosque'. Rubbish, of course. Muhammad never set foot there.

In Muhammad's days, distant Jerusalem was only important early-on as he attempted to woo the local Jews into becoming Muslim...prayers were in Jerusalem's direction. When the Jews rejected Muhammad, the prayers towards Jerusalem stopped.

That about the extent of its holiness...a mix of iconoclasm and appropriation.

Yes. Now as for the concept of dhimmitude and Jews not being allowed to own land or have a state, that seems to be a conclusion derived at by those after he's dead interpreting his alleged writings, essays, speeches and writing them down into what turns into the Koran.

They are a concept of the inferior non Muslim that to this date continues in mainstream Islam not fringe Islam. M ainstream Islam still teaches that those who do not follow the words of Muhammed are inferior to Muslims and infidel. That is fact not fiction and its a fact that prevents any

meaningful dialogue from coming about until Islamic followers transcend that doctrine pretty much like Christians have now moved on from

defining Jews as inheriting the moral damnation of our ancestors alleged to have killed Christ.

The concept of holding Jews culpable thousands of years later for the alleged sins of our ancestors fueled Christian anti semitism no differently

than Muslim anti semitism is fueled by the concept and belief in dhimmitude which not one, not one anti Israel will acknowledge on this board-they can't-it flies in the face of their script. To acknowledge it would require acknowledging the very reason Israel is rejected as a Jewish state is a religious one from Islam not this bull sheeyit crap fantasy that anti semitism in the Muslim world which defines Jews as inferior does not exist to this day.

Not a peep from these arm chair experts on semitic roots, Zionism, etc.

[GostHacked]

I am glad you find my respect of Dog hilarious. It speaks loudly as to your role on this and other threads.

What exactly is eyeball's role here? And how does that compare to the other threads??