Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
jeem

Genocide by Israel

501 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RavenHawk

You are correct.Criticize Islam you are a good christian and accuse Israel for crime you are anti-Semitic(In case of Muslims I think the appropriate word is terrorist).

Kill Muslims help Zionist killing Muslims you are actually doing your holy ,divine duty

I don’t criticize Islam because I am a Christian. I criticize Islam because I am not Muslim. I criticize the Quran for being filled with violence against the non believer. Muslims may see it as a holy, divine duty. I see it as standing up to intolerance. And to compare that to what Israel is doing is not even comparing apples and oranges. The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian is the same mechanism that has been used throughout history. The Palestinians being Muslim has nothing to do with it. That they threaten Israel’s security is.

All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian wasn’t constantly trying to destroy Israel, because Israel is not Muslim and it is dominant. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian vied for statehood at the same time as Israel. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian weren’t semi-nomadic tribes that fell into the trap of settling into cities. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian had purchased more land from the rightful owners before the British occupied the land. All of this could have been avoided if the Ottoman Empire didn’t lose or even didn’t get into WWI in the first place. The Zionists had a legal opportunity and they took it and they made the best of it. I think it is a bit too late for the Palestinian. They are a short-lived culture.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

Oh I don't know ... tell me of any civ that had never beheaded anyone or worse ?

Commit violence ? Either you are so blind to your hypocrisy or you are doing it on purpose ... and I do believe you are doing the latter ... why is it only when its associated with Islam that it means something to you ... and when its associated with something else it is understandable or acceptable ? ever heard of guillotines ? Does Islam have a history of burning women and children ? So you say you guys don't do it anymore ... so what does that means ... its alright now ? Ever heard of incendiary ammunition ? JC said anything about that being okay ? Phosphorous bombs gets JC's thumbs up of approval ?

Violence occurs in every culture, but do these other cultures deny doing it? No, they don’t. Only in Islam is there this absolute distancing from the violence that the Quran encourages Muslims to commit against non Muslims. That is dishonesty and that is worse than the guillotine or burning or any other form of torture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

Violence occurs in every culture, but do these other cultures deny doing it? No, they don't. Only in Islam is there this absolute distancing from the violence that the Quran encourages Muslims to commit against non Muslims. That is dishonesty and that is worse than the guillotine or burning or any other form of torture.

YOu again takes things out of context ... if I said Christianity is a religion of violence ... and God knows there is enough historical evidence to back that up ... what would you say ?

Do you see us attacking the religion because of historical circumstances ? WHy should Islam be afforded such treatment ? and unfairly not to mention mostly inaccurate I might add ... fairplay man ... so as ye sow ... so doth ye reap ... Unto Rome ... and all that ...

When you quote inaccurately then it is obvious that there will be contradictory opinions ... you just don't say I am right and that's the end of it ... if you can then why can't they state the same ?

How many generations have the middle east conflict denied the citizens of any form of a stable social fabric ... ? How many ?

And you accuse them of being uncivillised ... ' bomb them back to the stone age ' ? 'mission accomplished' ? Not satisfied yet ? How much more ? Eradication ? Annihilation ? Total and final solution ? ... Has a familiar stench to it don't you think ?

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
buckskin scout

I don't criticize Islam because I am a Christian. I criticize Islam because I am not Muslim. I criticize the Quran for being filled with violence against the non believer. Muslims may see it as a holy, divine duty. I see it as standing up to intolerance. And to compare that to what Israel is doing is not even comparing apples and oranges. The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian is the same mechanism that has been used throughout history. The Palestinians being Muslim has nothing to do with it. That they threaten Israel's security is.

All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian wasn't constantly trying to destroy Israel, because Israel is not Muslim and it is dominant. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian vied for statehood at the same time as Israel. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian weren't semi-nomadic tribes that fell into the trap of settling into cities. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian had purchased more land from the rightful owners before the British occupied the land. All of this could have been avoided if the Ottoman Empire didn't lose or even didn't get into WWI in the first place. The Zionists had a legal opportunity and they took it and they made the best of it. I think it is a bit too late for the Palestinian. They are a short-lived culture.

No it is the Israelis that are being threatened of losing the demographic war to the Palestinian Arabs. What legal opportunity, they only owned 6% of Palestine. The UN gave them an additional 50% under the Partition Plan. And the Balfour Declaration was performed by Britian on behalf of the Zionist without any consent from the indigeneous peoples of Palestine namely the Palestinian Arabs.

Furthermore, Palestine was dominated by the Roman-Byzantine Empire for 700 years, and then dominated by the Arab Empires for 1300 years under during all that time many Palestinian Jews converted to Christianity and then to Islam.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

YOu again takes things out of context ... if I said Christianity is a religion of violence ... and God knows there is enough historical evidence to back that up ... what would you say ?

I would say I agree with you. Christianity is a religion of violence (historically), but Islam beats it out as being more violent. Plus Christianity has gone through reform through the years that it is not even a shadow of being violent as it once was (Islam has not). Christianity is reaching enlightenment. It is beginning to critically reexamine itself with all sorts of new revelations (Islam cannot reexamine itself without going against Allah). I.e. Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married and that Judas was Jesus’ armor bearer which doesn’t make him the traitor the Church would have us believe, etc.

Do you see us attacking the religion because of historical circumstances ? WHy should Islam be afforded such treatment ? and unfairly not to mention mostly inaccurate I might add ... fairplay man ... so as ye sow ... so doth ye reap ... Unto Rome ... and all that

Why don’t you? There is plenty of evidence to do so. It’s because to do so would open up Islam to be criticized even more fairly than it has been.

When you quote inaccurately then it is obvious that there will be contradictory opinions ... you just don't say I am right and that's the end of it ... if you can then why can't they state the same ?

Well, I have not seen where I inaccurately quote something. The Quran is filled with contradictory statements and abrogation is used to clarify the confusion. If I claim to be right it’s because neither can you just claim that I am wrong and expect that to be the end of it.

How many generations have the middle east conflict denied the citizens of any form of a stable social fabric ... ? How many ?

I would say many and that is the state of Islam. Israel takes up about 1% of the land in the ME, you can’t claim that as the source of unrest. If Islam is that unstable, then the problem is within Islam.

And you accuse them of being uncivillised ... ' bomb them back to the stone age ' ? 'mission accomplished' ? Not satisfied yet ? How much more ? Eradication ? Annihilation ? Total and final solution ? ... Has a familiar stench to it don't you think ?

I don’t accuse them of being uncivilized. I accuse them of being dishonest with their own Quran. I wouldn’t want to see them bombed back to the Stone Age if I didn’t think that being a non Muslim am only worthy of death.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

This is true. It happened 65 years ago. It has happened MANY times over the millennia - it is NOTHING NEW. Countries have been erased and created with the stroke of a pen on a map since human governments existed. Conquered peoples - even on land they actually OWNED - lose their land when they are defeated or their protectors are defeated in war. Only since the UN was formed has this changed and even then it was the UN that enforced THIS deal. The Palestinians never had a country or government or currency or any evidence that they were anything except simply dwelling in the land called Palestine.

... um, sorry to interrupt, but couldn't exactly the same be said for Israel? At least, at any time since Biblical times. Except they weren't even dwelling there previously.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
buckskin scout

... um, sorry to interrupt, but couldn't exactly the same be said for Israel? At least, at any time since Biblical times. Except they weren't even dwelling there previously.

In fact, the Jews only experienced two periods in which they weren't a confederate of tribal nations with other tribal nations or an Assyrian vassal or an Roman Province.

But were an independent hegemonous Jewish nation, that is the Davidic Kingdom which lasted 73 years and the Maccabees which lasted 78 years.

151 years out 6,000-7,000 years worth of settlement, colonization and conquest. And the Canaanites beat them there by a good 1,000 years.

That stretch of land has quite a bloody history being a coveted trade route and many neighboring Empires.

Edited by GoSC
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeem

I don't criticize Islam because I am a Christian. I criticize Islam because I am not Muslim. I criticize the Quran for being filled with violence against the non believer. Muslims may see it as a holy, divine duty. I see it as standing up to intolerance. And to compare that to what Israel is doing is not even comparing apples and oranges. The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian is the same mechanism that has been used throughout history. The Palestinians being Muslim has nothing to do with it. That they threaten Israel's security is.

All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian wasn't constantly trying to destroy Israel, because Israel is not Muslim and it is dominant. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian vied for statehood at the same time as Israel. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian weren't semi-nomadic tribes that fell into the trap of settling into cities. All of this could have been avoided if the Palestinian had purchased more land from the rightful owners before the British occupied the land. All of this could have been avoided if the Ottoman Empire didn't lose or even didn't get into WWI in the first place. The Zionists had a legal opportunity and they took it and they made the best of it. I think it is a bit too late for the Palestinian. They are a short-lived culture.

"Fight in the cause of Allah (God) those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"Yet if (la-in, the lām is for oaths) you extend your hand against me to slay me, I will not extend my hand against you to slay you; I fear God, the Lord of the Worlds, in slaying you.(The Noble Quran,5:28)"

"Allah does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. Allah loves just dealers. (The Noble Quran, 60:8)"

"Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah(violence/chaos) and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.(The Noble Quran, 2:193)"

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.(The Nobel Quran,2:256)"

"Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them). (The Noble Quran, 15:2-3)"

"Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it):......(The Noble Quran, 18:29)"

"Say: 'Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message). (The Noble Quran, 24:54)"

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (The Noble Quran, 109:1-6)"

"Allah Almighty loves those who restrain anger: "Those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men; for Allah loves those who do good. (The Noble Quran, 3:134)"

If you understand them properly you will find no violence instead peace

Edited by jeem
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeem

Yes, I know that it is a means of encouragement and that still doesn't prove me wrong. That's not the entire meaning. If anything that supports my claim. After more consideration, I have to say that you do answer my question here and that answer does support my claim.

post 208 will prove you wrong

The Quran is a great book on the tactics of domination. This nation's foreign policy should follow the Quran as a military and diplomatic tool. That in itself is proof that an illiterate merchant could never have *wrote* it.

Learn respecting other people beliefs.What you are saying is sarcasm

That was part of another set of points I was making. But by the same token, if you are on the inside, one can be too close to an issue and not recognize the truth of something. And sometimes only being on the outside can one see the whole picture. But this aspect is not the main issue of concern.

Buy a car because its beautiful from outside.But that does not serve your purpose because of outdated engine .

There may be an impreciseness of language here that you shouldn't get too hung up on. For purposes of this forum (unless we absolutely need to say otherwise), "wrote" means "authored" or "revealed to". Mohammed is responsible for bringing the Quran to the world. In other words, the actual meaning to this has no meaning to the primary point.

Sorry I am ordered to protest against any offense to my Prophet

Yes you did and I agree with you because I know the meaning of Zizya. I don't deny that. Actually, wasn't it the Zakat? I could have used a better word but I was making a supporting point. This is not the answer or the question I seek. It is a distraction.

Yeah you agree but I also remember you said it is lame.Zakat is compulsory for every wealthy Muslim(which you called by choice).

Here is where not being Muslim is a hindrance and my level of understanding is challenged. But by the same token, the form of punishment is not what is of importance, just the fact that there is punishment to be levied on the non believer or the one outside of the Ummah. This is the KEY issue. The Quran does state very clearly that it is dangerous for non Muslims. The three ayahs of my claim either imply it or state it. Perhaps what is needed is a sentence by sentence breakdown of those three ayahs??

With clear sense I haven't read of any punishment for being non-Muslims(It excludes punishment from Allah in the last day)

I know Taqiya can also mean "cap" as in something to wear on your head. Perhaps that's where the saying "keep it under your hat" comes from?? But the meaning that I am referring to is "dissimulation". In Islam, it is obligatory to lie under duress to defend one's religious beliefs. That is a practice and very common. It is in full practice on forums like this. And that is what this thread has turned out to be. I was fine going onto a tangent as long as I could wrap it back to the op. But with all the dissimulation, I can't seem to do that.

In other sense you are calling me a liar(which of course go against your attacking rule)

And I still haven't seen one. And I'm not trying to be insulting to you, but you are not that forthcoming in answering. That presents an air of dishonesty. How do you expect anyone to believe you even when you do say something truthful on minor issues? What you are answering are all the wrong questions (all the unimportant answers that you know you can be honest about, but yet not having to answer my main question), so please don't think you've been answering me. You appear to be more in the dismissive mode. But I'm not going to let you get away with it that easily. That'll probably make third eye really flake out.

Here is the explanation of 9:29

(The Noble Quran, 9:28-29) "O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; So let them not, After this year of theirs, Approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, Soon will Allah enrich you, If He wills, out of His bounty, For Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "

Before I explain why Allah Almighty ordered the Muslims to fight the Pagans and the People of the Book until they all either submit to Islam or pay the "Jizyah", I'd like to point out that many people were exempt from the "Jizyah" or "taxes":

As to the fighting, when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him started spreading the Message of Islam to the Arabs, he had to eventually deal with 365 Pagan Arab tribes, 3 Jewish tribes (Bani Qaynuqaa, Bani Al-Natheer, and Bani Quraytha) and some Christian tribes as well.

The Muslims did not live Islam easily 1400 years ago. They had to deal with many battles that were imposed upon them. They also had to deal with many betrayals done by other tribes who broke their peace treaties with the Muslims and joined as alliance with other enemy tribes and fought the Muslims.

Notice that in Noble Verse 9:28 above, Allah Almighty was referring to a certain situation that the Muslims had to face. "After this year..." clearly and unquestionably suggests that Noble Verses 9:28-29 are for a situation that existed 1400 years ago. They don't necessarily have to apply today.

The Muslims have to pay taxes (which is 2.5 percent of their annual income) under the name of "Zakah" to the "Muslim Financial Institute" or the "House of the Muslim Money" which all goes to provide welfare to the poor and the needy citizens; from both Muslims and non-Muslims. The poor and the needy (such as the Orphans, Widows and the disabled) from the Muslims are exempt from paying taxes.

I get that from a wise Muslim sister

Edited by jeem
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

No it is the Israelis that are being threatened of losing the demographic war to the Palestinian Arabs.

Then fine, let them lose that battle. That’s what you want.

What legal opportunity, they only owned 6% of Palestine. The UN gave them an additional 50% under the Partition Plan.

And how much of that 50% was actually owned by Palestinian land owners? Very little. And almost half of that was the Negev, which the Arabs didn’t even want.

And the Balfour Declaration was performed by Britian on behalf of the Zionist without any consent from the indigeneous peoples of Palestine namely the Palestinian Arabs.

The majority of the indigenous peoples could not produce a legitimate land deed. That is why Palestine was listed as unorganized territory. Plus, the British had become the rightful owners. They didn’t have to try to restore property rights in the first place. They could have emptied the entire land of everyone, Muslim and Jew alike. That was their legal authority. The indigenous peoples had no rights. That is what happens when you are conquered or you lose a war. The Balfour Declaration gave a legal direction to go.

Furthermore, Palestine was dominated by the Roman-Byzantine Empire for 700 years, and then dominated by the Arab Empires for 1300 years under during all that time many Palestinian Jews converted to Christianity and then to Islam.

I wonder why? Under dhimmitude, they are eventually forced to convert. And many did not but except for a couple of exceptions, the non Muslim populations never grew beyond about 6%. If it did, it would threaten the Ummah in having to share authority with other religions which Islam cannot allow. And that would instigate pogroms to reduce the threat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

Oh I don't know ... tell me of any civ that had never beheaded anyone or worse ?

Commit violence ? Either you are so blind to your hypocrisy or you are doing it on purpose ... and I do believe you are doing the latter ... why is it only when its associated with Islam that it means something to you ... and when its associated with something else it is understandable or acceptable ? ever heard of guillotines ? Does Islam have a history of burning women and children ? So you say you guys don't do it anymore ... so what does that means ... its alright now ? Ever heard of incendiary ammunition ? JC said anything about that being okay ? Phosphorous bombs gets JC's thumbs up of approval ?

Get what you know of truly "Christian' right first before you attempt to spout and spew your truth of some other religion please ...

You don't know how to differentiate between enemies of Islam and non acceptance of Islam ... I live and eat with Muslims every day of my life ... do you see me getting beheaded because I am not converting anytime soon ? I am a friend of Muslims ... that does not make me a Muslim ... I have no intention of converting to ISlam ... that does not make me an enemy of ISlam ... but of course to you that means nothing as you are already so sure that your little world filled with hatred for Islam makes you think you are loving JC more ... I don;t have to be a Christian to know that JC never taught anything remotely as such ... did JC ? You tell me ...

~

So where, again, does beheading as a tradition in Islam come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

... um, sorry to interrupt, but couldn't exactly the same be said for Israel? At least, at any time since Biblical times. Except they weren't even dwelling there previously.

The country was known as Israel. It was a monarchy and the currency was the shekel. Was it long lived? Absolutely not - but it at least HAD a life. No such thing can honestly be said of the "Palestinians".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast

"Fight in the cause of Allah (God) those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"Yet if (la-in, the lām is for oaths) you extend your hand against me to slay me, I will not extend my hand against you to slay you; I fear God, the Lord of the Worlds, in slaying you.(The Noble Quran,5:28)"

"Allah does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. Allah loves just dealers. (The Noble Quran, 60:8)"

"Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah(violence/chaos) and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.(The Noble Quran, 2:193)"

"There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.(The Nobel Quran,2:256)"

"Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them). (The Noble Quran, 15:2-3)"

"Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it):......(The Noble Quran, 18:29)"

"Say: 'Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message). (The Noble Quran, 24:54)"

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (The Noble Quran, 109:1-6)"

"Allah Almighty loves those who restrain anger: "Those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men; for Allah loves those who do good. (The Noble Quran, 3:134)"

If you understand them properly you will find no violence instead peace

You answer to facts with Quran verses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Space Commander Travis

The country was known as Israel. It was a monarchy and the currency was the shekel. Was it long lived? Absolutely not - but it at least HAD a life. No such thing can honestly be said of the "Palestinians".

So when was it last an independent country prior to 1948? You'd have to go back a pretty long way. That seems to be stretching a bit to claim that gave a right to establish the modern country known as Israel right there, it really does.

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

The discussion goes from Genocide by Israel to "but Islam is like a really bad religion". [pick random boogers about Islam and insert them here]

If I didn't know better I'd start to think people actually believe the reason Israel is committing genocide is because Islam isn't a good religion at all. Statists imposing government control on others because of their opinions on religion, how pathetic!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

So when was it last an independent country prior to 1948? You'd have to go back a pretty long way. That seems to be stretching a bit to claim that gave a right to establish the modern country known as Israel right there, it really does.

Colonel that isn't really the point - or shouldn't be. This whole thing is like a schoolyard dust up except deadly... I was here first! NO! I was! Here's the thing though - Israel is THERE...they are entrenched in the land 65 years. They really aren't ever going to be removed (that isn't said with vitriol in mind) it's a fact that has to be faced by the reasonable people of the region and dealt with by coming to some agreement. Otherwise I'm not sure what can be done - any suggestions? I've watched the process 40 years - literally - and it never really deviates from script. Violence, talks, money distributed (mostly by the US) quiet for a short while. Violence, talks.... you get the picture. Israel isn't going to leave the land and the Palestinians aren't going to accept less than ALL THE LAND. This is why it's easy to predict a major regional war there at some point. Note: I said "predict" NOT lust for...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

I would say I agree with you. Christianity is a religion of violence (historically), but Islam beats it out as being more violent. Plus Christianity has gone through reform through the years that it is not even a shadow of being violent as it once was (Islam has not). Christianity is reaching enlightenment. It is beginning to critically reexamine itself with all sorts of new revelations (Islam cannot reexamine itself without going against Allah). I.e. Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married and that Judas was Jesus' armor bearer which doesn't make him the traitor the Church would have us believe, etc.

Why don't you? There is plenty of evidence to do so. It's because to do so would open up Islam to be criticized even more fairly than it has been.

NO ... that's not the reason .. the reason is common courtesy ... freedom to worship ... respect ...

Do unto others as you would them unto you ...

Re examining the scriptures only applies here to 'Christianity' and here I use the definition liberally ... is because of the censures applied to alternative scriptures available in the Early Christian Period which are now only available due to recent discoveries, those that escaped the early waves of 'clenasing', whereas the TOrah / Talmud and the Qur'an suffered no such defacement ... Recent documents in fact proves that the accuracy lies not with the 'New' Christian books ... accuracy ... not implying veracity ... that's up to the theologians ... and faith ... not for us .. or 'me' maybe not for you to judge.

There is nothing to criticize regarding faith man ... that's just poor judgement ... and a lesson in futility ...

Well, I have not seen where I inaccurately quote something. The Quran is filled with contradictory statements and abrogation is used to clarify the confusion. If I claim to be right it's because neither can you just claim that I am wrong and expect that to be the end of it.

I would say many and that is the state of Islam. Israel takes up about 1% of the land in the ME, you can't claim that as the source of unrest. If Islam is that unstable, then the problem is within Islam.

I don't accuse them of being uncivilized. I accuse them of being dishonest with their own Quran. I wouldn't want to see them bombed back to the Stone Age if I didn't think that being a non Muslim am only worthy of death.

YOu quote from poor translation for one ... and from sources with 'bones' to pick ... if you were to dissect the US constitution ... you will find the same distasteful elements unacceptable ... how is it possible to prove you wrong ? Allah SWT to smite you from the heavens ? :lol:

You didn;t even give the sources I posted even a cursory glance did you ? The problems stems from 'politics' and poor foreign policies not to mention judgement of the Axis Coalition just after WWII ... you want History ... you want facts ... give it a read ... maybe you will find some truth ... I don;t promise you all ... you know too that that is well near impossible if not ridiculous ...

YOu may be accurate on the dishonesty part about some not being honest about Qur'an ... but to state that Islam as a whole is too is definitively and unequivocally inaccurate ... and no the Problem here is not with the religion .. its the ones such as yourself that claims justification from belittling religions for self serving purposes ... and again ... the statement that 'being a non Muslim is only worthy of death' is wrong ... the accurate statement is not 'worthy of salvation, a fate worse than death' ... you know the equivalent of the Christian 'burn in hell'

So where, again, does beheading as a tradition in Islam come from?

Tribalism tradition ... not Islamic ... just as firing squad, chopping off heads, scalping and burning on stakes is cultural ... not traditional ... you know that ... you just like to provoke ... that is your game play ... you are the type that gives Christians the worse kind of reputation of all ...

Colonel that isn't really the point - or shouldn't be. This whole thing is like a schoolyard dust up except deadly... I was here first! NO! I was! Here's the thing though - Israel is THERE...they are entrenched in the land 65 years. They really aren't ever going to be removed (that isn't said with vitriol in mind) it's a fact that has to be faced by the reasonable people of the region and dealt with by coming to some agreement. Otherwise I'm not sure what can be done - any suggestions? I've watched the process 40 years - literally - and it never really deviates from script. Violence, talks, money distributed (mostly by the US) quiet for a short while. Violence, talks.... you get the picture. Israel isn't going to leave the land and the Palestinians aren't going to accept less than ALL THE LAND. This is why it's easy to predict a major regional war there at some point. Note: I said "predict" NOT lust for...

Just because the Israelis are there does not in anyway gives the Zionist policies legitimacy ... you attack the faith and homeland of others and you claims that they are the violent ones ... what makes the Berlin wall wrong but the Zionist one right ? Reasonable ? Justifiable ? again ? How many more generations to short small early graves man ? You wanna tell JC to hurry up and come on back already ?

Predict ... now who's is breaking the scriptural laws eh ? You don't need me to quote your good book ... you know it don't you ?

Sure you do ... you just don;t care so long as you can further enjoy another moment of provocation ... that's how you get your kicks. Retribution man ... liability and consequences will come knocking one day ... and it will be a rude awakening ... and no this is not a 'prediction' ... just the law of cause and effect ... and you know JC spoke much of this ... but you know that .. don't you ? Do you .. ?

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

NO ... that's not the reason .. the reason is common courtesy ... freedom to worship ... respect ...

Do unto others as you would them unto you ...

Re examining the scriptures only applies here to 'Christianity' and here I use the definition liberally ... is because of the censures applied to alternative scriptures available in the Early Christian Period which are now only available due to recent discoveries, those that escaped the early waves of 'clenasing', whereas the TOrah / Talmud and the Qur'an suffered no such defacement ... Recent documents in fact proves that the accuracy lies not with the 'New' Christian books ... accuracy ... not implying veracity ... that's up to the theologians ... and faith ... not for us .. or 'me' maybe not for you to judge.

There is nothing to criticize regarding faith man ... that's just poor judgement ... and a lesson in futility ...

YOu quote from poor translation for one ... and from sources with 'bones' to pick ... if you were to dissect the US constitution ... you will find the same distasteful elements unacceptable ... how is it possible to prove you wrong ? Allah SWT to smite you from the heavens ? :lol:

You didn;t even give the sources I posted even a cursory glance did you ? The problems stems from 'politics' and poor foreign policies not to mention judgement of the Axis Coalition just after WWII ... you want History ... you want facts ... give it a read ... maybe you will find some truth ... I don;t promise you all ... you know too that that is well near impossible if not ridiculous ...

YOu may be accurate on the dishonesty part about some not being honest about Qur'an ... but to state that Islam as a whole is too is definitively and unequivocally inaccurate ... and no the Problem here is not with the religion .. its the ones such as yourself that claims justification from belittling religions for self serving purposes ... and again ... the statement that 'being a non Muslim is only worthy of death' is wrong ... the accurate statement is not 'worthy of salvation, a fate worse than death' ... you know the equivalent of the Christian 'burn in hell'

Tribalism tradition ... not Islamic ... just as firing squad, chopping off heads, scalping and burning on stakes is cultural ... not traditional ... you know that ... you just like to provoke ... that is your game play ... you are the type that gives Christians the worse kind of reputation of all ...

Just because the Israelis are there does not in anyway gives the Zionist policies legitimacy ... you attack the faith and homeland of others and you claims that they are the violent ones ... what makes the Berlin wall wrong but the Zionist one right ? Reasonable ? Justifiable ? again ? How many more generations to short small early graves man ? You wanna tell JC to hurry up and come on back already ?

Predict ... now who's is breaking the scriptural laws eh ? You don't need me to quote your good book ... you know it don't you ?

Sure you do ... you just don;t care so long as you can further enjoy another moment of provocation ... that's how you get your kicks. Retribution man ... liability and consequences will come knocking one day ... and it will be a rude awakening ... and no this is not a 'prediction' ... just the law of cause and effect ... and you know JC spoke much of this ... but you know that .. don't you ? Do you .. ?

~

So Islam's texts do not promote beheading? This discussion isn't about me, my shortcomings as a man or a Christian and you're making it so is just a dodge. What I am or am not does not change what Islam IS. By your reckoning, no one who isn't a scholar in a religion they do not follow has any right to find fault with it - even when the plain text condemns it in practice. You should join and work with CAIR. They have perfected the bob and weave BS to take in the simple minded in my country. Christ said to love one's enemies. I actually try to do that - as individuals. But I am not called on to allow my country or family to be subjugated into a darkness like the world hasn't know in a millennium just to satisfy "turn the other cheek". When I think of Islam and people like you the first thing that pops into my dull little thinking machine is Afghanistan under the Taliban. THAT is what Islam brings when the mullahs are in charge. Historical examples abound of peace and progress under Islamic rule. But not much is said of the dhimmi slaves who were subjugated to get to that state. Sell your drek to someone who wants it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

So Islam's texts do not promote beheading? This discussion isn't about me, my shortcomings as a man or a Christian and you're making it so is just a dodge. What I am or am not does not change what Islam IS. By your reckoning, no one who isn't a scholar in a religion they do not follow has any right to find fault with it - even when the plain text condemns it in practice. You should join and work with CAIR. They have perfected the bob and weave BS to take in the simple minded in my country. Christ said to love one's enemies. I actually try to do that - as individuals. But I am not called on to allow my country or family to be subjugated into a darkness like the world hasn't know in a millennium just to satisfy "turn the other cheek". When I think of Islam and people like you the first thing that pops into my dull little thinking machine is Afghanistan under the Taliban. THAT is what Islam brings when the mullahs are in charge. Historical examples abound of peace and progress under Islamic rule. But not much is said of the dhimmi slaves who were subjugated to get to that state. Sell your drek to someone who wants it.

Fighting words ... if you don;t turn your cheek why should you expect someone else to ?

Historical ... ? You have your own version and only your version do count don;t it ? Drek ? you is so full of it you is absolutely drekful (sic)

Dodge ? You wanna read Leviticus ? Before you continually embarrass us all here on this forum ? Find fault ... that is all you do ... that's why you carry that stink of chauvinism and bigotry whenever you spew and spout your trash ...

Go ahead ... read your Leviticus ... then accuse again ...

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Colonel that isn't really the point - or shouldn't be. This whole thing is like a schoolyard dust up except deadly... I was here first! NO! I was! Here's the thing though - Israel is THERE...they are entrenched in the land 65 years. They really aren't ever going to be removed (that isn't said with vitriol in mind) it's a fact that has to be faced by the reasonable people of the region and dealt with by coming to some agreement. Otherwise I'm not sure what can be done - any suggestions? I've watched the process 40 years - literally - and it never really deviates from script. Violence, talks, money distributed (mostly by the US) quiet for a short while. Violence, talks.... you get the picture. Israel isn't going to leave the land and the Palestinians aren't going to accept less than ALL THE LAND. This is why it's easy to predict a major regional war there at some point. Note: I said "predict" NOT lust for...

So you only have respect for a people because they have a state? That wouldn't have gone far in getting people who don't have a state, a state in the first place. How convenient.

People who only respect other people who have a State only respect the State, when the reasons why one would want a state are the same fundamental values that all people deserve (Peace, justice, security, liberty). All the reasons for supporting an Israeli state in 1948 are all the same reasons to support a Palestinian state today.

Why can't you learn simple facts so you can understand this conflict correctly? This "ALL THE LAND" diatribe you parrot is the stated position of Israel! It's in the Likud Charter. What part of no Palestinian state "west of the Jordan river" do you not understand? How addled does someone have to be to ignore that, and then smear that extremist mindset solely on someone else? When Hamas wrote their charter which basically said the same thing, it was somehow unacceptable? It's unacceptable when either political party or government does it. Palestinians can't want what Israel wants, Palestinians can't say what Israel says, Palestinians can't do what Israel does. Hypocrisy of the most flagrant kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeem

You answer to facts with Quran verses?

One guy used verse from Qur'an to prove Islam a religion of violence(he misinterpret those verse) that was OK.

Now I do the same thing to prove Islam a peaceful religion which is questionable.

In this thread of biased(some with Islamist,some with Zionist) I am pleased to learn your remarkable neutral position.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Fighting words ... if you don;t turn your cheek why should you expect someone else to ?

And to add insult to injury, he's the Christian. That's what he's supposed to do. Can't do it himself. Forces others to do it in order to escape the indefinite economic warfare being waged against them. A real Christian would act like they have the first clue what's in the New Testament.

Love one another! That is the whole of the law!

Someone's going to have to show me where the scripture turned into "Oppress Thy Neighbor".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
buckskin scout

Then fine, let them lose that battle. That's what you want.

No, it is just a plain fact, and it is main reason there are millions of dispossessed Palestinian Arabs and the state of Israel only grants the 'right of return' to Jews.

And how much of that 50% was actually owned by Palestinian land owners? Very little. And almost half of that was the Negev, which the Arabs didn't even want.

They were the indigeneous peoples weren't they? That were promised by the British government made to the Arabs if they revolted. Here is what Britain promised the Arabs: a] guaranteeing the liberation of the peoples subject to Germany and its allies, b] establishing national governments which derive their authority from the initiative and free choice of the indigeneous peoples, c] recognizing Arab independence as soon as effectively established, d] ensuring impartial and equal justice to all, and e] facilitating economic development and education.

But in an act of total duplicity, Britain's new Prime Minister Lloyd George thought that British control of Palestine would help protect the nearby Suez Canal. British Zionists supported this idea, but stressed that the canal would be even safer if Palestine had a National Home populated by Jews sympathetic to Britain. Chaim Weizmann and other European Zionists began negotiating with the new foreign minister Arthur Balfour, about a British statement that would support a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Weizmann, a major author of the proposed declaration, was in frequent contact with Balfour. Lloyd George supported such a statement because of its potential wartime propoganda value among Jews, especially in America (alot of U.S. Jews had emigrated from Russia). He also thought it would help Britain gain sole postwar control of Palestine rather than share it with France, as Britain recently agreed to do in the Sykes-Picot. Lloyd George realized that Zionists wanted their homeland to be under Britain's initial protection rather than France's.

There was alot of opposition especially from Lord George Curzon, chairman of the cabinet committee on Middle East acquisitions, especially during the declaration's final debate and passage, when he again objected that Palestine was already inhabited by more than half a million Arabs who "will not be content either to be expropriated for Jewish immigrants or to act merely as hewers of wood and drawers of water for the latter."

But Arthur Balfour stressed three points to reconsider:

1. Germany might pre-empt Britain by making their own declaration in support of a Jewish national home in Palestine, thus beating Britain to the punch, and win Jewish support throughout the world, including America.

2. The declaration would increase Russian Jews' support for the Allied war effort. Despite Russia's ability to fight was very quetionable due to several months of political turmoil and the October Revolution. But the triumphant Bolsheviks, including Jewish Bolsheviks, wanted Russia to the leave the war completely. And within two months, Russia signed an armistice with Germany.

3. The declaration favoring a Jewish national home in Palestine would increase U.S. Jews' support of the Allied war effort. President Wilson gave an initial refusal and would not have approved it had he not been pressured by U.S. Zionists. Within two weeks Wilson reversed himself and approved it. Wilson's approval proved to decisive to Curzon and he did not further press his objection and the War Cabinet approved the declaration with stated approval from America's president.

The majority of the indigenous peoples could not produce a legitimate land deed. That is why Palestine was listed as unorganized territory. Plus, the British had become the rightful owners. They didn't have to try to restore property rights in the first place. They could have emptied the entire land of everyone, Muslim and Jew alike. That was their legal authority. The indigenous peoples had no rights. That is what happens when you are conquered or you lose a war. The Balfour Declaration gave a legal direction to go.

What the hell are you talking about? You know nothing about the UN charter or the Mandate authority, and every time you spew your nonsense propaganda it reminds of 19th century Imperialism and colonialism. It quite frankly, makes me want to vomit. The British weren't the owners of the land they were the "temporary trustees" I guess is one way to put it that was still answerable to the League of Nations.

In that damned age, the spoils of war have traditionally been garnered through protectorships over or direct annexation of occupied territory. Britain and France expected protectorships to ensure their permanent control over military and foreign affairs in the Middle East. But President Wilson sought independence for liberated subject nationalities and rejected the idea of protectorships. A compromise was drawn up as new legal entity authored by the League of Nations called the "mandate"

The League of Mandate System is as follows:

1. the mandate authority (the controlling state) had a primary obligation to facilitate the self-government of the territory's inhabitants 2. the mandate was to be temporary, to terminate when the inhabitants were ready for independent statehood; and 3. the mandate authority was accountable to the League. Former German and Ottoman colonies were ranked by their degree of readiness to assume self-government. The "Class A" territories in the Middle East (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine) were considered to be nearly ready for self-government, i.e., statehood. All Class A territories did, in fact, become states when the mandate powers withdrew.

But this mandate system only partially satisfied Wilson's ideal of nonacquisition of territory by war and national self-determination because it permitted delay of national independence for the territory's indigeneous people and could perpetuate European dominance for an indefinite period.

I wonder why? Under dhimmitude, they are eventually forced to convert. And many did not but except for a couple of exceptions, the non Muslim populations never grew beyond about 6%. If it did, it would threaten the Ummah in having to share authority with other religions which Islam cannot allow. And that would instigate pogroms to reduce the threat.

Palestine had a real rocky history, its up and downs for both Christians and Jews. There were prosperous period were Arab and Jews lived in peace together too. But by the first crusade, Jews had better opportunities and Jewish centres for education in Mesopotamia, Europe, and North Africa. In other words, most of the world Jewry would not have emigrated to Palestine and chose not to because Palestine had become a Jewish backwater compared to the Jewish Diaspora.

In 1919, there more than 700,000 Arabs in Palestine. In 1931, there were 1,033,314 Arabs compared to 174,606 Jews in Palestine. And the natural Palestinian Jews got along just fine with the Palestinian Arabs until the mass immigration of Jewish Zionists began.

Edited by GoSC
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeem

Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep aproximately 750,000 Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting both in 1948 and in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast

One guy used verse from Qur'an to prove Islam a religion of violence(he misinterpret those verse) that was OK.

Now I do the same thing to prove Islam a peaceful religion which is questionable. In this thread of biased(some with

Islamist,some with Zionist) I am pleased to learn your remarkable neutral position.

It´s not just one person only who named Qur'an verses of violent content here, those are still executed, I and a few others did that also.

And I´m not in a neutral position to the Islam and how it is exercised these times by the so called "bad ones" of this religion in a way that

I by myself have to fear and to take care of the fact that my understanding of humanity and my freedom for individual belief is endangered

by this group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.