Muslim antisemitism the cause of the Israeli conflict

[Rue]

1 hour ago, herples said:

It seem easy to break down a conflict into simply about Jews and Muslims but it ignores other factors such as the collapse of the Ottoman empire and the British control over parts of the Middle East.

Well it depends how far you want to look back to trace the origins of the continuing conflict. I would suggest the above is one of many vatnage points of analysis and the further back you go the more the conflict will explain itself.

[herples]

2 minutes ago, Rue said:

Well it depends how far you want to look back to trace the origins of the continuing conflict. I would suggest the above is one of many vatnage points of analysis and the further back you go the more the conflict will explain itself.

There is no sense in trying to go back further and further because all you will get is different eras and different problems. The entire history of the Ottoman empire doesn't explain the current conflict or the origins of it.

[DogOnPorch]

6 minutes ago, herples said:

There is no sense in trying to go back further and further because all you will get is different eras and different problems. The entire history of the Ottoman empire doesn't explain the current conflict or the origins of it.

 

It does in part. It was the Sultan's 1858 Land Code which allowed the buying and selling of the Sultan's land. The Zionist Movement took full advantage of the new rules. Arabs did, too. But in much smaller numbers. One notable Arab Clan that bought a LOT of land was the al-Husseini Clan.

You know...the Boss. Hitler's guy...

 

[Bryan]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Uhhhh...Roman Empire. Diadochi...Greeks...Macedonians...NO they haven't. Stop making stuff-up. Arabs arrived in the 7th century AD.

 

Paestinians and Jews are literally the same people genetically. They have been there -- together -- the whole time..

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, Bryan said:

Paestinians and Jews are literally the same people genetically. They have been there -- together -- the whole time..

Again...history does not agree with your trusted (lol) "DNA analysis".

Mohammad began his conquests in the 7th century. His Companions continued his war against the West. Jerusalem fell to the Arabs in 637 AD.

Alexander eliminated...literally...the "Philistines" after the twin Sieges of Gaza and Tyre. The men were crucified...the women/children shipped to Macedonia as slaves.

[kactus]

5 hours ago, Rue said:

Spare me.  Your words on this forum show a hatred for an entire group of people. 

 

The conflict is deeply rooted in the Islamic religious belief that Jews can not own land, be citizens of a Jewish nation or be legally equal to Muslims in any way.

Apartheid? Colonization. Horse crap. Jews came to Israel to escape the very colonialists who propped the puppet Arab Regimes that tried to wipe the Kews of Israel out. Jews escaped Muslim apartheid called dhimmitude.

Islam is about dhimmitude, the institutionalized apartheid of non Muslims to this day.

The conflict is and has always been one of Muslims not being able to accept Jews as equals because of their Muslim beliefs.

One day it will change. 

Your denial and attempt to conceal it by calling Jews apartheidists and colonialists is a crock.

Jews were not and were never foreigners to the Middle East-that is simply your bigotry against Jews and your refusal to accept our native roots started in the Middle East long before Muslims existed. In your world Jews are not from the Middle East because if they were, your whole theory of them being invaders would go down the toilet.

Jews did not invade Israel. They were born there, have always lived there, and now their ancestors have come back.

Get over it. They are going nowhere and neither are Palestinians.

The sooner people like you and your refusal to accept Jews as equals living side  by side you dies out the better.

Palestinians one day, if they find a way to get rid of people like you claiming to speak for them, will find peace with Jews as equals side by side.

It will happen no matter how many people like you will die never accepting it as a possibility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indeed I will spare you....Your words on this forum clearly shows your bias towards Israel and therefore to be taken with a pinch of salt.... I gave you the benefit of the doubt to rationalise your points and have an understanding what your government is inflicting on palestinians (continuation of illegal settlements, etc...) You never showed any remorse for palestinians. The whole world and the US abstaining the UN resolution for the first time calls for the illegal occupation as "illegal". Who the hell do you guys think you are discrediting UN resolution on illegal settlements?? All you ever do on this forum is to remain quiet about your government's wrong doing and blame Palestinians. Spare me playing the victim...When you try to take the law in your own hand then guess what the jungle rule applies... Stop moaning and start owning the responsibilities...Now go on and finish the horse crap you started...

[dre]

37 minutes ago, Argus said:

And yet, you are resolutely opposed to even trying to screening those 'dirt farmers' who apply to come to Canada live next to you

Cool story bro! The problem of course is that I think every single immigrant and visitor to Canada SHOULD be screened, and they are. A Palestinian or Israeli immigrant should be investigated for any extremist activity or ties to groups like Hamas and Likud, or involvement in illegal settlement activity, etc.

I'm just not dumb enough to expect them to "self report" that they are potentially dangerous, and the questions on your stupid little questionnaire would be posted online within a week along with information from immigration lawyers on how to properly answer them.  I would rather put the money into beefing up the real investigative process.

[Argus]

19 hours ago, marcus said:

Ridiculous comment. Jews and Muslims have lived together for centuries and they have fought for centuries. Just like any other groups. 

There is no point in which Jews and Muslims have lived together except as conqueror and conquered. There is not now nor has there ever been a Muslim nation which treats other religious groups as equals within its borders. Jews, Christians and others who were permitted to reside in the lands of Dar al Islam were forced to pay special taxes and had all manner of prohibitions applied to their rights and conduct.

19 hours ago, marcus said:

The situation and conflict in Palestine has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with colonization and apartheid.

That makes no sense whatsoever. The various borders drawn in the region by western powers have been accepted other than this one, because the people within are Jews. Calling them colonizers is likewise silly since many have been there for literally eons. Nor was land taken away from anyone else at that time. Only when surrounding Muslims attacked Israel and lost (badly) did they lose territory.

19 hours ago, marcus said:

Any time you start moving foreigners onto a land and lock out the inhabitants from their own homes, then treat them like shit, it's only natural to create friction and a rebellion.

That didn't happen. And the Muslims who stayed within Israel have more human rights and more political representation than any Arab anywhere else in the region.

[Argus]

15 minutes ago, dre said:

Cool story bro! The problem of course is that I think every single immigrant and visitor to Canada SHOULD be screened, and they are.

Completely untrue.

 

 

[taxme]

14 hours ago, Rue said:

Spare me.  Your words on this forum show a hatred for an entire group of people. 

 

The conflict is deeply rooted in the Islamic religious belief that Jews can not own land, be citizens of a Jewish nation or be legally equal to Muslims in any way.

Apartheid? Colonization. Horse crap. Jews came to Israel to escape the very colonialists who propped the puppet Arab Regimes that tried to wipe the Kews of Israel out. Jews escaped Muslim apartheid called dhimmitude.

Islam is about dhimmitude, the institutionalized apartheid of non Muslims to this day.

The conflict is and has always been one of Muslims not being able to accept Jews as equals because of their Muslim beliefs.

One day it will change. 

Your denial and attempt to conceal it by calling Jews apartheidists and colonialists is a crock.

Jews were not and were never foreigners to the Middle East-that is simply your bigotry against Jews and your refusal to accept our native roots started in the Middle East long before Muslims existed. In your world Jews are not from the Middle East because if they were, your whole theory of them being invaders would go down the toilet.

Jews did not invade Israel. They were born there, have always lived there, and now their ancestors have come back.

Get over it. They are going nowhere and neither are Palestinians.

The sooner people like you and your refusal to accept Jews as equals living side  by side you dies out the better.

Palestinians one day, if they find a way to get rid of people like you claiming to speak for them, will find peace with Jews as equals side by side.

It will happen no matter how many people like you will die never accepting it as a possibility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Jews stole the land that the Jews live on now from the Palestinians. If someone moved into your house and pushed you to live in your garage, I don't think that you would be quite happy, right?  

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, taxme said:

The Jews stole the land that the Jews live on now from the Palestinians. If someone moved into your house and pushed you to live in your garage, I don't think that you would be quite happy, right?  

Palestinians were invented at 1967's Khartoum Conference after the Arabs lost yet another war in their efforts to eliminate Israel. Yasser Arafat was Egyptian.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, taxme said:

The Jews stole the land that the Jews live on now from the Palestinians. If someone moved into your house and pushed you to live in your garage, I don't think that you would be quite happy, right?  

This is nonsense, of course. No one stole any land. There were already a ton of Jews living in Israel when the borders were drawn. They didn't steal the land, they bought it. Is anyone complaining that Jordan is not a real country? It was created about the same time, only it's only Muslims so nobody cares.

[dre]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

This is nonsense, of course. No one stole any land. There were already a ton of Jews living in Israel when the borders were drawn. They didn't steal the land, they bought it. Is anyone complaining that Jordan is not a real country? It was created about the same time, only it's only Muslims so nobody cares.

The Jews did not steal the land that is really Israel. It is as legal a state as any other country in the world. What they stole was the Golan heights, and large swaths of the West Bank and built settlements around strategic water resources so they could "make the desert bloom", and build a huge network of pipelines and pumping stations.

The land outside of the green-line is occupied territory. Its "stolen" at least until its returned.

[taxme]

On 12/30/2016 at 1:31 PM, Argus said:

This is nonsense, of course. No one stole any land. There were already a ton of Jews living in Israel when the borders were drawn. They didn't steal the land, they bought it. Is anyone complaining that Jordan is not a real country? It was created about the same time, only it's only Muslims so nobody cares.

As far as I know, the Jews did take the land from the Palestinians, and the Jews are still doing it today. 

[GostHacked]

On 12/30/2016 at 11:27 AM, dre said:

Cool story bro! The problem of course is that I think every single immigrant and visitor to Canada SHOULD be screened, and they are. A Palestinian or Israeli immigrant should be investigated for any extremist activity or ties to groups like Hamas and Likud, or involvement in illegal settlement activity, etc.

I'm just not dumb enough to expect them to "self report" that they are potentially dangerous, and the questions on your stupid little questionnaire would be posted online within a week along with information from immigration lawyers on how to properly answer them.  I would rather put the money into beefing up the real investigative process.

Hard to argue against that logic. It makes sense to me. Even heavy screening people from China and Russia would be a good idea too.

[Guest]

Just retain the option to send people back from whence they came for any infraction, and then exercise that option at the drop of a hat.

Heck, I've behaved.

[dialamah]

47 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Just retain the option to send people back from whence they came for any infraction, and then exercise that option at the drop of a hat.

Heck, I've behaved.

What, you've never broken a speed limit or jaywalked?

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, dialamah said:

What, you've never broken a speed limit or jaywalked?

I wouldn't advocate sending people back to war torn countries and breaking up families for speeding or jaywalking. 

I've never killed anyone for drawing Muhammad, or advocated such.

 

Edit>  Okay, I said any infraction.  I just saw that.  Let's say almost any infraction.

Edited January 3, 2017 by bcsapper

[Argus]

On 12/30/2016 at 9:07 PM, dre said:

The Jews did not steal the land that is really Israel. It is as legal a state as any other country in the world. What they stole was the Golan heights, and large swaths of the West Bank and built settlements around strategic water resources so they could "make the desert bloom", and build a huge network of pipelines and pumping stations.

The land outside of the green-line is occupied territory. Its "stolen" at least until its returned.

They didn't steal it. They won it in a war started by the other people, who then refused to sign a peace treaty.

Aside: how come nobody complains that Jordan unilaterally occupied big chunks of "Palestinian" territory and then incorporated it into its own territory? Because they did. They took over all the west bank, including Jerusalem. And they granted Jordanian citizenship to all the Palestinians. Jordan didn't sign a peace treaty until 1993. It seems to me that they should get the West Bank back.

[dialamah]

24 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

 

Edit>  Okay, I said any infraction.  I just saw that.  Let's say almost any infraction.

   I know, I shouldn't tease like that eh?   

It is a good point that Argus brings up, in that it takes a long time to deport someone.  I wonder, if the country were to implement the one-strike-you're out model, how that would work.   If a recent immigrant were convicted of spousal homicide, would they be allowed all their appeals in Canadian courts?   Would the receiving country be asked or expected to impose some kind of sentence on the killer?  Retry them if they didn't like what the Canadian courts had done?   What if the immigrant were American and sending him back to the US meant he faced the death penalty?   I understand that many countries will not deport people to places where they can be put to death, so how would that work?  

And, often enough there are wrongful convictions.  If someone was wrongfully convicted and it was discovered some time later, would that person be invited back to Canada?  Compensated for the time he spent back 'home' and for resettling in Canada?   Would we need to develop a scale of compensation for a wrongful deportation?  

Also, what if the country refused to take him back?   Then what?

Gosh, this is starting to sound like one of those easy, simply solutions that becomes a lot more complex when examined a little bit.    

Edited to add:  Oops, I may have forgotten what thread this is.   

Edited January 3, 2017 by dialamah

[Argus]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Just retain the option to send people back from whence they came for any infraction, and then exercise that option at the drop of a hat.

Heck, I've behaved.

Have you ever read anything about Canada's court system?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

Have you ever read anything about Canada's court system?

Never had to.  Been a good boy.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Never had to.  Been a good boy.

Let me suggest to you how this would go. First, they'd have to be tried in court. That would take about two years, maybe three or four with appeals. Then the government could order them deported. They would immediately launch an appeal. A year or so later when that was denied, they would go to the courts and appeal the order there, first at the lower level, then through the appeals courts. That would take another three or four years. So we're looking at maybe eight years, which is a bit divorced from the drop of a hat.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

   I know, I shouldn't tease like that eh?   

It is a good point that Argus brings up, in that it takes a long time to deport someone.  I wonder, if the country were to implement the one-strike-you're out model, how that would work.   If a recent immigrant were convicted of spousal homicide, would they be allowed all their appeals in Canadian courts?   Would the receiving country be asked or expected to impose some kind of sentence on the killer?  Retry them if they didn't like what the Canadian courts had done?   What if the immigrant were American and sending him back to the US meant he faced the death penalty?   I understand that many countries will not deport people to places where they can be put to death, so how would that work?  

And, often enough there are wrongful convictions.  If someone was wrongfully convicted and it was discovered some time later, would that person be invited back to Canada?  Compensated for the time he spent back 'home' and for resettling in Canada?   Would we need to develop a scale of compensation for a wrongful deportation?  

Also, what if the country refused to take him back?   Then what?

Gosh, this is starting to sound like one of those easy, simply solutions that becomes a lot more complex when examined a little bit.    

 

They certainly do.  I don't believe for a minute that that will actually happen.  I don't believe anything different will happen, whether screening or deporting.

I do think an effort can be made to impress upon people what is expected and what is not, such that there can be no doubt.  Courses, for instance.  I would have been happy to take some when I arrived, had it been deemed necessary.

[Guest]

Just now, Argus said:

Let me suggest to you how this would go. First, they'd have to be tried in court. That would take about two years, maybe three or four with appeals. Then the government could order them deported. They would immediately launch an appeal. A year or so later when that was denied, they would go to the courts and appeal the order there, first at the lower level, then through the appeals courts. That would take another three or four years. So we're looking at maybe eight years, which is a bit divorced from the drop of a hat.

Yes, I know.  But lets face it, do you need a similar breakdown on the screening process?