This is a video that glorifies jihad for little kids, showing jews killing kids and then the Arab kids getting revenge.

Apparently it is top of the pops across the Middle East, comes out of Jordan.

http://www.youtube.com/v/qyNpYTt5WfU

The little girl's dark brown eyes look heavenward as she sings,
When we seek martyrdom, we go to heaven.
You tell us we're small, but from this way of life we have become big.
Without Palestine, what does childhood mean?

This is not a song from Hamas television in Gaza, nor is it a Hizballah anthem. "When We Seek Martyrdom" is the latest hit from a production house called Birds of Paradise. It is racking up millions of hits on Arabic and worldwide websites. Birds of Paradise, which appears to be based in Jordan, is quickly becoming one of the most popular children's groups in the Arab world.

My country and my blood are like its sands
Without Palestine, what does childhood mean?

Youtube, has dozens of editions and edits of the video, ranging from Arab parents having their children parrot the lyrics to Jihadists using it as background music in terrorist videos. "[Birds of Paradise] is one of the most widely distributed children's songs group in the Arab world, and it seems to have crossed the ocean to Canada and Britain," wrote journalist Fawzia Nasir al-Naeem in the Saudi Arabian newspaper, Al-Jazirah.

"Birds of Paradise" represents a new wave in Jihadist youth indoctrination. It is far more professional, better edited, and presented in a much more kid-friendly style than previous Jihadist children's programming. The themes are easily digestible even for toddlers. Child actors portray Israeli soldiers, all wearing yarmulkes, who ruthlessly gun down other children shown playing and dancing. Minutes later, the kids exact revenge and kill the soldiers.

"When We Seek Martyrdom" encourages children not simply to throw rocks, but to carry out militant attacks and to ambush Jews. It even broadcasts clips of the children carrying out practice attacks. Violence is not only the answer for children, but it is framed in a cute, kid-friendly way.

This material has not gone unnoticed in the Arab world, where despite its popularity it is beginning to sound alarms. Saudi writer Fawzia Nasir al-Naeem expressed her concerns about the video:
'
"It encourages the use of arms, killing, explosives, shedding blood and terrorism with all its synonyms. Our children parrot what they hear, and it enters their minds. This data is filed away, and over time it ripens into beliefs and principles which they believe in whenever the intensity is strong, so that when the dream is achieved, an explosive belt is put on, and he begins to proclaim the Jihad, which Allah revealed as his mandate…So, mother, open your half closed eyes to the bitter reality. Look at those who share with you in educating your children, and divert them from the right path. Lose the "Birds of Paradise" and other birds you and your sons are the 'firewood of hell.'"

The Effect of Training Preschoolers in Hate

The message of the video is directed at toddlers up to elementary school ages, the precise period of a child's life where they tend to copy educational materials as mental facts. Kids of these ages cannot process issues which contain subtleties and nuances. Thus, the material imprints itself into their memory as a part of 'what is normal,' said child psychologist Joan Lachkar. "Smaller children cannot organize the data of experience into concrete and abstract categories, as opposed to older children who possess abstract thought and wider varieties of mental decision making. This video is particularly dangerous in the shame/honor system of the martyrdom ideology, because it represses the child's ability for freedom of thought, individuality, and creative thinking," Lackhar said. "This society is teaching its youngest children that peace is linked to the destruction of non-believers and that violence is an acceptable and even preferred method of self-expression."

The psychological effects of such encouragement are profound, even in at an age where the complexities of the message are not fully grasped, Lachkar said.

"Children in the 'martyrdom culture' become robotic and clone-like, so much so that they are compelled not to express genuine emotions or any sense of vulnerability," she said. If they do so, they are shamed and punished. On the other hand, if they conform to the cultural standards set for them, they believe that they are good and that they will be loved." This system of violence becomes self-reinforcing and it is more difficult to break the hate which is connected to the children's earliest childhood memories.

A New Wave of Martyrdom Education

This is not an isolated video from the Birds of Paradise group, but rather part of a consistent pattern of encouraging violence. In another video, Muhammad Bashaar, the adult encouraging children in the "When We Seek Martyrdom" video, gives his own tribute to "resistance" in Gaza. His video features adults carrying out terror attacks on Israelis and a teenager throwing a Molotov Cocktail into an Israeli military position, setting it on fire. He prays for success from Allah and chants, "Victorious, as promised by Allah, we will have, we will have victory!"

http://www.investigativeproject.org/1072/birds-of-paradise-martyrdom-recruitment-as

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/1545/explodeyourself.jpg

But Cal, 'Palestinians' have the right to teach their children whatever they like, surely!

Wouldn't it be terribly intolerant of us, to criticise others, and their 'culture'?
/sarc off




We are a generation with no discernment of right or wrong, of good or evil.

Shame on us!

Today, to make such 'judgements', TO CONDEMN WHAT IS CLEARLY EVIL, is today perceived, as expressing our 'intolerance' of the rights of others.

Such a mindset is wicked, and evil.

It will be judged, we will be judged,
.....BECAUSE WE DO NOT SEPARATE OURSELVES, FROM THE EVIL IN OUR WORLD.





"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil."
Thomas Mann
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Mann





p.s. because of dialup, i am still in the process of d/l the video. i have not watched it yet.

Quote:

But Cal, 'Palestinians' have the right to teach their children whatever they like, surely!

Well, see that's the thing - this has gone beyond Palestinians now, this was produced in Jordan. Those who have produced it are very shady Jihadi types, I saw some investigations about it on various anti-jihadi blogs.

So its top of the pops across the Middle East, not just the usual Hamas videos. Remember how everyone always says how moderate and tolerant Jordan is?

This type of indoctrination of moslem children, to hate the 'unbelievers', is passe among moslem communities.

It happens within all Sharia jurisdictions, and in non-moslem countries too, where children are under the influence of Jihadists.





Money from the West [including Australia] is funding these hate 'education' programs, for moslem children worldwide...

5 October 2006
How UN aid helped extremists after Pakistan earthquake
The BBC has discovered that one of the charities linked with extremists is now using its position to gain access to orphaned or fatherless children.
In the days following the catastrophic earthquake, the government of Pakistan promised that all such children would be looked after either by their extended family or the state.
...He said they had already sent 400 such children under the age of nine to board at their madrassas, or religious schools, some hundreds of miles from their homes.
...But at one of their schools in the town of Mansehra - set up initially with the help of the United Nations Children's Fund, Unicef - primary children were singing a song at morning assembly which many might find disturbing.
It includes the line: "When people deny our faith, ask them to convert and if they don't, destroy them utterly."
I asked the Jamaat ud-Dawa spokesman, Abdullah Montazzer, why they were teaching such bloodthirsty songs to young children.
"No, they weren't singing that," he said. "Lots of infidels came in the aid effort and they weren't harmed. I don't believe these kids were singing these kind of songs."
I put it to him that virtually everyone I had spoken to in Pakistan said Jamaat and Lashkar were the same thing.
"We are not at all a militant organisation and we have no links with Lashkar at all."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5402756.stm







These same moslem 'ideals', of teaching moslem children, a hatred of the 'unbelievers' is common, and is sanctified, within all moslem 'communities'.

n.b. This teaching [hatred of the 'unbelievers'] comes straight from ISLAMIC 'religious' texts.

And is promoted, by moslem 'community leaders', even by moslems living within countries like Australia.

Use children as troops, says cleric
By Luke McIlveen and staff writers
January 18, 2007
SYDNEY'S most influential radical Muslim cleric has been caught on film calling Jews pigs and urging children to die for Allah.
Firebrand Sheik Feiz Mohammed, head of the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool [Australia], delivered the hateful rants on a collection of DVDs called the Death Series being sold in Australia and overseas.
.........Sheik Feiz says in the video.
"We want to have children and offer them as soldiers defending Islam. Teach them this: There is nothing more beloved to me than wanting to die as a mujahid (holy warrior). Put in their soft, tender hearts the zeal of jihad and a love of martyrdom."
An Australian citizen born in Sydney who has spent the past year living in Lebanon, Sheik Feiz was exposed this week in a British documentary Undercover Mosque.
......"The peak, the pinnacle, the crest, the highest point, the pivot, the summit of Islam is jihad," he declares in the film, before denouncing "kaffirs" (non-Muslims).
"Kaffir is the worst word ever written, a sign of infidelity, disbelief, filth, a sign of dirt."
......Sheik Feiz - who just two weeks ago said he felt like an "alien" in his own country - leads about 4000 followers through his Global Islamic Youth Centre in Sydney's southwest.
He also accused Australian authorities of being over-zealous in their approach to clerics like him.
"There are no sheiks preaching chaos there. No one is telling people to raise arms against the Australian community," he said.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21074839-2,00.html

abu - not going to comment here ?
Why not?
Can't delete or ban posters here?

how muslim of you

I saw some christian kids being prepared the same way to give life for cause.

Not too happy about that, but on a positive side at least there is chance for compatible force of persuasion.

Perhaps if you stopped killing them, then there'd be no need to teach their kids about it, would there?

If Australia had been under 60 years of occupation, I think a lot of Australians would be teaching their kids different stuff from their refugee camps also, or their exile in surrounding nations.

If you honestly don't want this kind of stuff to happen, look to the disease that causes it (ie. the occupations, invasions, air raids, obliteration of cities, installation of brutal dictators etc.), not just to the symptoms.

The simple fact is Muslims will never lay down and let you dominate them (and this is really what bothers you), they will struggle for eternity to remove it. Either learn this, or continue in the same futile ways to dominate us. Palestine has been occupied for 60 years, and the Muslims have resisted for 60 years, they will continue resisting for another 60, and another 60 and so on. The only cessation will be when the occupiers return to their homes, like the crusaders 1000 years ago did after their 100 year occupation.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 7^th, 2009 at 5:50pm:

Perhaps if you stopped killing them, then there'd be no need to teach their kids about it, would there? If Australia had been under 60 years of occupation, I think a lot of Australians would be teaching their kids different stuff from their refugee camps also, or their exile in surrounding nations. If you honestly don't want this kind of stuff to happen, look to the disease that causes it (ie. the occupations, invasions, air raids, obliteration of cities, installation of brutal dictators etc.), not just to the symptoms. The simple fact is Muslims will never lay down and let you dominate them (and this is really what bothers you), they will struggle for eternity to remove it. Either learn this, or continue in the same futile ways to dominate us. Palestine has been occupied for 60 years, and the Muslims have resisted for 60 years, they will continue resisting for another 60, and another 60 and so on. The only cessation will be when the occupiers return to their homes, like the crusaders 1000 years ago did after their 100 year occupation.

look to the disease that causes it

looking

The simple fact is Muslims will never lay down and let you dominate them (and this is really what bothers you), they will struggle for eternity to remove it.

the solution

The only cessation will be when the occupiers return to their homes

Arabs go to Arabia and take all muslims with you as Arabia is the Home of Islam.

AGREE.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 7^th, 2009 at 5:50pm:

Perhaps if you stopped killing them, then there'd be no need to teach their kids about it, would there?

Wouldn't think that anyone on this board is in the IDF, but could of course be wrong. Putting that to one side, people die because HAMAS and others keep firing rockets into Israel, setting suicide bombs, and killing people.

There would be an independent Palestine if the Arabs had not pursued a war of jewish extermination in 1948, which they lost. Even now they cannot come to the table for sensible negotiation, but engage in the most barbaric attacks on civilians.


Quote:

If Australia had been under 60 years of occupation, I think a lot of Australians would be teaching their kids different stuff from their refugee camps also, or their exile in surrounding nations.

Well maybe if we had decided to invade New Zealand and kill all the Kiwis, I'd be struggling to find a lot of sympathy for our predicament if NZ then occupied Australian in reply. Especially if we tried to destroy NZ, another two times, and fired thousands of rockets into its borders.


Quote:

If you honestly don't want this kind of stuff to happen, look to the disease that causes it (ie. the occupations, invasions, air raids, obliteration of cities, installation of brutal dictators etc.), not just to the symptoms.

Whatever the political point of view - there should not be jihadi videos directed at children. There just shouldn't. The 'disease' is Islam's quest for extermination of the ebil jew at all costs. That's the disease, and its desire to dominate the rest of the world under 'allah's rule.'



Quote:

The simple fact is Muslims will never lay down and let you dominate them (and this is really what bothers you), they will struggle for eternity to remove it. Either learn this, or continue in the same futile ways to dominate us. Palestine has been occupied for 60 years, and the Muslims have resisted for 60 years, they will continue resisting for another 60, and another 60 and so on. The only cessation will be when the occupiers return to their homes, like the crusaders 1000 years ago did after their 100 year occupation.

Yeah big talk from the safety of your living room you spineless jihadi wannabee. You'd cry for your mummy at the first crack of a gunshot, but you the big Osama tough guy in here on the net. Go and join your brothers in HAMAS, or Afghanistan if you think you are the stuff. You wouldn't last 5 minutes before you were screaming hysterically and wondering why you cant reload a saved game after you get shot in the arm.

I don't want to dominate anyone, I want Islam to bugger off and stop ruining this country, and everywhere else it goes.

Quote:

Wouldn't think that anyone on this board is in the IDF

The IDF would not exist without the billions of dollars of Western aid and military hardware it receives each year. We both know this, it would've collapsed decades ago, or not even come into existence to begin with. The Western powers created this situation and they continue to throw pure petrol onto it, claiming they're 'putting out the flames'. You reap what you sow, sorry, no sympathy for you whatsoever. If you don't like the current predicament, change it. Stop causing mischief and havoc in other people's lands, and you might find they'll leave you alone.


Quote:

Putting that to one side, people die because HAMAS and others keep firing rockets into Israel, setting suicide bombs, and killing people.

HAMAS was formed in the late 1980's you ignoramus, over 40 YEARS AFTER the occupation began. Claiming Hamas are the root cause is just ridiculous, I can't believe you feel comfortable presenting such an 'argument' in public.


Quote:

Even now they cannot come to the table for sensible negotiation, but engage in the most barbaric attacks on civilians.

That's right, and we will go another 60 years without coming to your table. So stop being so surprised about how things are turning out there. If the West wanted change, they would've abandoned their meddling policies a long time ago... They do not, they like the turmoil it creates. And since it's most Jews who die for their side, they're not too worried about it. Although when it boils over onto their own soil they aren't too pleased. It's one thing for them to bomb the crap out of Arab cities, murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, subjecting them to decades upon decades of war-torn hell... but don't ever bring any of that to our country!!!

Again, you reap what you sow, what goes around... inevitably comes around.


Quote:

Well maybe if we had decided to invade New Zealand and kill all the Kiwis

Please go and read your history. the Muslims didn't invade any Jewish land. We took it from the Byzantine Romans. They took it from the Jews centuries before that, and the Jews themselves took it from others. Either way, the analogy you gave doesn't fit whatsoever, since the Muslims never took it from the Jews.


Quote:

Whatever the political point of view - there should not be jihadi videos directed at children. There just shouldn't.

I agree with you for once. Children are pure and shouldn't be involved in such stuff, but the West has been involving Muslim kids in this for decades upon decades by dropping bombs on them, shooting them, raping them, burning them alive, starving them to death etc. The Muslims have been left with no choice but to prepare them for what they'll inevitably face anyway. Can't really blame them in that case.

You're so upset about them watching a video about it, but couldn't care less that they're actually suffering it daily.

Really.. do you expect to be taken seriously?


Quote:

The 'disease' is Islam's quest for extermination of the ebil jew at all costs.

I don't remember too many Palestinians prior to the 20th. century travelling to Lithuania or Russia or Poland or the UK and trying too hard to exterminate Jews. Jews made it their priority to mass immigrate into Muslim land, form militias and to take it over and expel the inhabitants... sorry but I can't see anywhere in that hinting at Muslims wanting to exterminate Jews.


Quote:

I don't want to dominate anyone, I want Islam to bugger off and stop ruining this country, and everywhere else it goes

You don't seem to mind your government invading and occupying Muslim countries... Sorry, what goes around...








inevitably comes around.

Outside Araby, Muslims are invaders everywhere.

Get out of the Levant.

soren, even someone as childish as yourself must recognise that water under the bridge is water under the bridge. The Muslims did conquer a lot of lands, but that was over a millenium ago, and also a lot of it was opened up to Islam by the choice/invitation of the people.

We're talking about Palestinian kids in refugee camps today, right now, as we type these messages.

If you can show me a displaced Byzantine, then I'll gladly endorse his right of return to the Levant.

Quote:

You don't seem to mind your government invading and occupying Muslim countries... Sorry, what goes around...

Well let it come around then. People like you will be the first against the wall when it does.

We invaded Afghanistan because 4 planes went into buildings. The country is now under the rule of muslims, democractically elected instead of installed by violence. Terrorists opposed that, and still do.

We invaded Iraq for lots of complex reasons, removed a dictator that slaughtered millions of muslims and was a secular governor, and installed an elected muslim government.

And those are bad things in your topsy turvy world apparently. Certaintly the brother muslims didnt help against Saddam, or against the Taliban while they were busily slaughtering fellow muslims.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 1:32am:

soren, even someone as childish as yourself must recognise that water under the bridge is water under the bridge. The Muslims did conquer a lot of lands, but that was over a millenium ago, and also a lot of it was opened up to Islam by the choice/invitation of the people. We're talking about Palestinian kids in refugee camps today, right now, as we type these messages. If you can show me a displaced Byzantine, then I'll gladly endorse his right of return to the Levant.

Palestinian kids are kept in refugee camps by their fellow Muslims. It is easier for a Palestinian to become a citizen of countries of which Her Britannic Majesty is the head of state than to become a Jordanian or Saudi one. Or any other Arab country.

It is not Israel's fault that the Pallos are despised enough by their fellow Muslims to be kept in refugee camps in, er, Mulism countries. Now why the hell is that?

With Muslims there is no water under the bridge. You and Bin Laden bang on about the Crusades at the drop of a turban. You are like the bloody Bourbons - forget nothing, learn nothing.

Quote:

Her Britannic Majesty is the head of state than to become a Jordanian or Saudi one.

Although I'd never sing the praises of any of the Arab regimes, you're right that they're all scum (not the people, the regimes, a distinction you conveniently omitted) but you're very wrong when it comes to who has and hasn't granted citizenship to Palestinians. Jordan for instance has probably 1000 times more Palestinian CITIZENS than all Britannic realms put together, so please go and do a little research. Saudi doesn't permit citizenship to anyone, Palestinian, Egyptian, Pakistani doesn't matter. Even if you lived and worked your whole life there, and so did your parents. No doubting it's a disgusting regime the British have setup there.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 8:59pm:

Quote: Her Britannic Majesty is the head of state than to become a Jordanian or Saudi one. Although I'd never sing the praises of any of the Arab regimes, you're right that they're all scum (not the people, the regimes, a distinction you conveniently omitted) but you're very wrong when it comes to who has and hasn't granted citizenship to Palestinians. Jordan for instance has probably 1000 times more Palestinian CITIZENS than all Britannic realms put together, so please go and do a little research. Saudi doesn't permit citizenship to anyone, Palestinian, Egyptian, Pakistani doesn't matter. Even if you lived and worked your whole life there, and so did your parents. No doubting it's a disgusting regime the British have setup there.

So... you are taking back the quip about Pallo children suffering in refugee camps because of evil western/jewish bloodsuckers?

No doubting that they suffer in refugee camps - but they are kept there by their 'bovvers'.

Not at all.

The British/Zionists are the ones who booted them out of their homes, so they are the ones who put them into the refugee camps. The fact the Arab regimes (who are all created/backed by Britain/US anyway) didn't clean up the mess very well says NOTHING about who made the mess to begin with.

Each year about 200,000 Jews migrate into occupied Palestine (under the 'Law of return' which permits any Jew born anywhere in the world to attain instant Israeli citizenship), daily the number of Palestinians made homeless continues to grow, as homes are demolished and land/farms are confiscated by the Zionist government. Those people generally end up in refugee camps... Can you see any connection between those events? Or is it just a co-incidence?

There are over a million Palestinians in Israel, most of them Muslims, none of them refugees.


Yeah, I can see the difference.

Firstly, The fact they kept a small minority of Palestinians there means little. They only wanted to boot out enough for them to become a minority, so they wouldn't be a threat to the "Jewishness" of the new state they created on top of their homes.

Secondly, the treatment of Palestinians inside Israel does not justify or excuse booting the others out and causing them to become homeless/refugees. Your argument is extremely flawed.

Like saying if I have two friends in my home, Tom and Fred, and I treat Fred well, but I kick Tom out of my home, and Tom gets treated poorly elsewhere, then my treatment of Fred somehow makes up for kicking Tom out, and Tom's poor treatment elsewhere cancels out the fact I kicked him out.... What kind of skewed logic is this?

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 9:30pm:

Firstly, The fact they kept a small minority of Palestinians there means little. They only wanted to boot out enough for them to become a minority, so they wouldn't be a threat to the "Jewishness" of the new state they created on top of their homes. Secondly, the treatment of Palestinians inside Israel does not justify or excuse booting the others out and causing them to become homeless/refugees. Your argument is extremely flawed. Like saying if I have two friends in my home, Tom and Fred, and I treat Fred well, but I kick Tom out of my home, and Tom gets treated poorly elsewhere, then my treatment of Fred somehow makes up for Tom's poor treatment elsewhere.... What kind of skewed logic is this?

Again, you've got it in one - 'my home'. Exactly. Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish.

So if the joo kicks out the intruders from his home and they get treated badly by their kin - well, that's is not the joo's bad, it's the intruders' bad and their brovvers' bad.


No skewed logic there, I'm afraid. i

Nice point, if we wanted to make the analogy more complete, we'd make it Tom's home, to boot.


Quote:

Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish.

And this is right where you depart from any normal sense of reality.

There was 2% or less Jews there for the past millenium and a half. For the past 1200 years, it's been a Muslim land, that's longer than both Jewish Kingdom/Temple periods combined.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 10:01pm:

Nice point, if we wanted to make the analogy more complete, we'd make it Tom's home, to boot. Quote: Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish. And this is right where you depart from any normal sense of reality. There was 2% or less Jews there for the past millenium and a half. For the past 1200 years, it's been a Muslim land, that's longer than both Jewish Kingdom/Temple periods combined.

abu, you live in some bizarre past Israel is jewish while Arabia is arabs and muslim at that.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 10:01pm:

Nice point, if we wanted to make the analogy more complete, we'd make it Tom's home, to boot. Quote: Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish. And this is right where you depart from any normal sense of reality. There was 2% or less Jews there for the past millenium and a half. For the past 1200 years, it's been a Muslim land, that's longer than both Jewish Kingdom/Temple periods combined.

Well, 'Muslim' is not a country. There never, ever, has been a 'Muslim' country in Israel or anywhere else for that matter.  All the previous sovereign powers in the region are gone. So now it is Israel, a sovereign country.


The jews - 3000 years old, would you say? At least twice as old as Islam. And they have never had any other country but Israel, for all those years. JUdea - geddit? The Muslims are takeover merchants and are peeved that the landlord has returned and is not going to be intimidated by the toughies. i

Quote:

Well, 'Muslim' is not a country.

"Jewish" is not a country either, didn't stop you from stating this:


Quote:

Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish.

Perhaps you should learn how to be at least a little consistent in your arguments, to avoid further embaressment?

The simple fact is that Omar Bin al-Khattab (May God be pleased with him) opened that land (known as Bilad ash-Sham in Arabic) to the ISLAMIC Caliphate, and it remained part of the Islamic Caliphate for 1200 years until the British arrived. You can try and toy with the semantics all you like, these are the historical facts.

Also a historical fact is that the Jews did have two brief kingdoms there, that lasted less time than the Islamic Caliphate, and also they ruled as subordinates to other foreign powers for brief periods of time also. Also historical fact is that they murdered en masse the Phillistines and Canaanites and others who lived there when they arrived there. They are by no means the original inhabitants of the land, just one group who happen to be there at certain point in history. If they (and this story) weren't in your holy book, you wouldn't give them a second look, simple. Anymore than yo'd consider Macedonians the rightful inhabitants of Afghanistan, simply because one of their leaders conquered it and happened to live there for some time.


Quote:

And they have never had any other country but Israel

Bzzt, wrong! They had a kingdom in Khazaria too.


Quote:

The Muslims are takeover merchants and are peeved that the landlord has returned and is not going to be intimidated by the toughies.

Sorry, but they were not there when Muslims arrived, and didn't even make any effort to claim it as their land until after 1200 years after we were there. Also many of the modern day Palestinians show genetic markers which trace them to that land long before the 1200 year arrival of Islam. There are Greek/Romans, Ghassanid Arabs, Hebrews etc. that are all ancestors of modern day Palestinians.

Just a question, if the Japanese rocked up in Australia and claimed "This was our historical homeland, which was mentioned in our Shinto texts, sure we weren't here when you arrived, but we were there about 400 years before that, we're taking our homeland back, you have to move to other Western countries" what would be your response? Consider it honestly, and then you will have understood the situation of the Palestinians. Just to make it a little more authentic, imagine it happened in the year 2988 (ie. 1200 years after 1788). We both know if it happened today, there'd be massive bloodshed, if it happened after we'd spent about another 1000 years settling in here, solidifying our attachment to this land, then I'm sure you can extrapolate...

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 9^th, 2009 at 9:56am:

Quote: Well, 'Muslim' is not a country. "Jewish" is not a country either, didn't stop you from stating this: ...

But Israel is a country and it is Jewish country at that. BTW, Palestine is not a country arab or otherwise and newer was while Arabia is full of Arab countries and they all muslim.
These are facts.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 8^th, 2009 at 9:14pm:

Not at all. The British/Zionists are the ones who booted them out of their homes, so they are the ones who put them into the refugee camps. The fact the Arab regimes (who are all created/backed by Britain/US anyway) didn't clean up the mess very well says NOTHING about who made the mess to begin with. Each year about 200,000 Jews migrate into occupied Palestine (under the 'Law of return' which permits any Jew born anywhere in the world to attain instant Israeli citizenship), daily the number of Palestinians made homeless continues to grow, as homes are demolished and land/farms are confiscated by the Zionist government. Those people generally end up in refugee camps... Can you see any connection between those events? Or is it just a co-incidence?

They booted themselves out of their homes by invading the Jewish state. Arabic radio broadcasts counselled Arabs to flee the invading Arab armies, and they would return later triumphant once they had killed all the ebil Jews. Didn't work out so well.

And after 1948, there still could have been a Palestinian state, but Egypt and Jordan occupied Gaza and the West Bank and squashed any attempt at Palestinian nationalism. So the Arab brothers were the first 'occupiers' after 1948, not the Jews. The Jews occupied the regions after they were again set to be invaded in 1967, and 1973.

The Jews bought land and worked desert into profitable areas. Bandit ridden desert, that the Palestinians didn't want, the Jews through hard work grew crops and built houses there. Now the Palestinians wanted it, and wanted to kill all the Jews. But their declared war of extermination in 1948 only led to many years of sorrow for them.

You reap what you sow.

Calanen wrote on Jul 9^th, 2009 at 1:31pm:

You reap what you sow.

They just refuse to move forward and saying that all Jews have to be killed or pushed out to sea does not sound legitimate in 21 century.

They and their mentality didn't change since 7-th century, and unfortunately for them rest of the World did.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 9^th, 2009 at 9:56am:

Quote: Well, 'Muslim' is not a country. "Jewish" is not a country either, didn't stop you from stating this: [quote]Israel is jewish. Has always been jewish.

Perhaps you should learn how to be at least a little consistent in your arguments, to avoid further embaressment?

[/quote]


So why don't the Pallos declare themselves a country and make a go of it already? Why keep kvetching and murdering? Because they are just a loose set of gangs, clans and families.


The Kazars, the schmazars, the caliphs and the japanese are all irrelevant. Muslims bellyache about the jews because they can't bear the thought that the living testaments to Islam's falsity are not only getting out of 1400 years of dhimmitude in the region but actually doing much, much better.

Quote:

They just refuse to move forward and saying that all Jews have to be killed or pushed out to sea does not sound legitimate in 21 century.

I'm sure if you'd been booted out of your home (that your family had probably owned for hundreds of years, with olive tress that'd been in your family stretching back many many generations) and you'd had your car run over by a tank, and several of your family members murdered by IDF snipers, that you'd just say "Oh well, better get on with it and move into the 21st. century". I'm truly amazed at how stupendously detached from reality some people are when it comes to other people's predicaments.

Quote:

So why don't the Pallos declare themselves a country and make a go of it already?

If you knew even the slightest thing about the history of the conflict, you'd know they already did.

Kinda hard to make a go of anything though when you're completely blockaded, most of your drinking water is siphoned off by your enemy and your citizens are expelled from their homes daily. And no, not one single rocket came from the West Bank, where almost ALL evictions in the past 10 years have occured, so don't give us these bodgey arguments about "You launched rockets, so you deserve everything you get".

Anyway, I'm not really going to continue with this. You support the aggressor, the invader, the unwelcome entrant into the region. This will play out much like the Crusades, in that the occupation will last perhaps a century, then it will be removed. Anyone who really believes in peace will call for an earlier end to the occupation, anyone who wants war and suffering will try to prolong it, by supporting the foreign entity there.

We both know an oil rig can only stand in the middle of the ocean whilst it produces something profitable, and therefore it will be maintained.... after that, the tides of the ocean will wash it away, like the ocean of Muslims in the Middle East will wash the Zionist cancer away that infects their body right now. The Zionists simply don't belong there, and you know in the long run it's simply not sustainable. But you have your little Biblical/Apocalyptic fantasies to dream about I guess.

You are an evil person soren, and a supporter of evil people. You support oppression, and the wrongful persistence of all this violence. Just admit the British made a mistake, evacuate the Zionists back to your own countries where they belong (remember you're all part of the Judaeo-Christian civilisation, but we Muslims are not, so please remove the Judaeo part, from our land and take it back into your own) and everyone can return to normal. But we know you don't want that, you want the cycle of violence, you find it entertaining in some sick and twisted way I think.

Zionists are in their country, which is Israel. That is allah's will  :)

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 10^th, 2009 at 12:21am:

We both know an oil rig can only stand in the middle of the ocean whilst it produces something profitable, and therefore it will be maintained.... after that, the tides of the ocean will wash it away, like the ocean of Muslims in the Middle East will wash the Zionist cancer away that infects their body right now. The Zionists simply don't belong there, and you know in the long run it's simply not sustainable. But you have your little Biblical/Apocalyptic fantasies to dream about I guess.

abu,

Yes i see what you mean, a nice metaphor,
".....the ocean of Muslims in the Middle East will wash the Zionist cancer away".



Nothing new here.

Devout moslems always promise a bloodbath will occur, against their enemies.


Iranian President Ahmadinejad agrees with you too, abu...

"The ocean of rage of the people of the region will surge and eradicate the Zionist regime."

YOUTUBE
Farewell Israel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-IwwfeLp4M




"......you have your little Biblical/Apocalyptic fantasies to dream about I guess."

abu,

But i thought that you believed in God's power to intervene in the affairs of man?

Ah,  .....but my God is a moslem, yeah?
/sarc off


In your dreams abu.








Quote:

You are an evil person soren, and a supporter of evil people. You support oppression, and the wrongful persistence of all this violence.....

abu,

Kettle calling pot, black.








++++++++++


"The ocean of rage of the people of the region will surge and eradicate the Zionist regime."
President Ahmadinejad


Like i said, a nice metaphor.iThose who come against God's people and his land....

Isaiah 17:12
Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!
13  The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.
14  And behold at eveningtide trouble; and before the morning he is not. This is the portion of them that spoil us, and the lot of them that rob us.


Isaiah 59:19
So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
20  And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
21  As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.


Jeremiah 46:7
Who is this that cometh up as a flood, whose waters are moved as the rivers?
8  Egypt riseth up like a flood, and his waters are moved like the rivers; and he saith, I will go up, and will cover the earth; I will destroy the city and the inhabitants thereof.
9  Come up, ye horses; and rage, ye chariots; and let the mighty men come forth; the Ethiopians and the Libyans, that handle the shield; and the Lydians, that handle and bend the bow.
10  For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.



"....Come up.......For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries:"




There is going to be a bloodbath.




The wicked in this world, are blind.

Nothing can stop God's plan.
....man's own nature is driving it forward.

Quote:

Ah,  .....but my God is a moslem, yeah?

Yes, the one you call God, in fact bowed down and prostrated himself to the one true God, he was a submitter (Muslim), unlike you, a rebeller.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 10^th, 2009 at 12:23pm:

Quote: Ah,  .....but my God is a moslem, yeah? Yes, the one you call God, in fact bowed down and prostrated himself to the one true God, he was a submitter (Muslim), unlike you, a rebeller.

abu,

That is not my reading of the scripture.....


Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9  And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10  Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.


Luke 4:5
And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
6  And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
7  If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
8  And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.



+++++++++++


The hadith...

"The Prophet said, "The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any sariya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah's cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause." "
hadithsunnah/bukhari/002   Volume 1, Book 2, Number 35




+++++++++++





My God, knows what is in my heart, and he is my redeemer.


Job 19:25
For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

Psalms 146:8
The LORD openeth the eyes of the blind: the LORD raiseth them that are bowed down: the LORD loveth the righteous:

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 10^th, 2009 at 12:21am:

Quote: So why don't the Pallos declare themselves a country and make a go of it already? If you knew even the slightest thing about the history of the conflict, you'd know they already did.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... you know everything, being Muslim, and everyone else knows nothing.

The Pallos don't declare themselves a country because they are not a people. They are a bunch of warring clans, at best. And they don't declare themselves a country because that would mean TAKING SOME FRICKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEMSELVES. And that is the bridge way too far for the pallos. And muslims in general. That would mean actually doing some work.

Lobbing granades and dressing toddlers in suicide vests is a lot easier than organisiing rubbish removal and school maintenance. Better leave that to the aid agencies, eh. Let the infidel aidd money take care of the practicalities of life while the pallo clans and gangsters play at being 'people's liberators'.


BTW, Australia has about 30% first or second generation immigrants. It is coping relatively well. How come the Pallos could not cope with a bit of Jewish immgration way back when?

Quote:

BTW, Australia has about 30% first or second generation immigrants. It is coping relatively well. How come the Pallos could not cope with a bit of Jewish immgration way back when?

Jews migrated into Palestine with the stated aim of taking it over and "transferring" them out.

Muslims just speak about having halal food available at council meetings or prayer rooms in Uni's and you begin jumping up and down wanting to riot. The Palestinians were FAR FAR FAR too tolerant and naive about the impending threat that was landing on their doorstep.

So if you don't mind Muslims becoming about 30% of Australia's population within a few decades and begin writing books about transferring Aussies out and forming militias to patrol the streets and raid Aussie towns, then I'll start accepting your arguments.

hahahah abu you fool.

by showing your islamic traits you have pushed everyone here strongly against all muslims.

good - you fkwt.
your abuse of the freedom you have been granted here has displayed your obscene beliefs

the same freedom no infidel is granted under the iron rule of islam.

bugger off you kunt , go and be a murdering paed like your leader elsewhere.

all the lurkers have seen the truth of the intolerance of you treacherous slime

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 10^th, 2009 at 10:25pm:

Quote: BTW, Australia has about 30% first or second generation immigrants. It is coping relatively well. How come the Pallos could not cope with a bit of Jewish immgration way back when? Jews migrated into Palestine with the stated aim of taking it over and "transferring" them out. Muslims just speak about having halal food available at council meetings or prayer rooms in Uni's and you begin jumping up and down wanting to riot. The Palestinians were FAR FAR FAR too tolerant and naive about the impending threat that was landing on their doorstep. So if you don't mind Muslims becoming about 30% of Australia's population within a few decades and begin writing books about transferring Aussies out and forming militias to patrol the streets and raid Aussie towns, then I'll start accepting your arguments.

Glad to see you ignored the meat and went for the scraps as usual. No wakey-wakey for you then.  


To recall:

The Pallos don't declare themselves a country because they are not a people. They are a bunch of warring clans, at best. And they don't declare themselves a country because that would mean TAKING SOME FRICKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEMSELVES. And that is the bridge way too far for the pallos. And muslims in general. That would mean actually doing some work.

Lobbing granades and dressing toddlers in suicide vests is a lot easier than organisiing rubbish removal and school maintenance. Better leave that to the aid agencies, eh. Let the infidel aidd money take care of the practicalities of life while the pallo clans and gangsters play at being 'people's liberators'.



Discuss.

Quote:

Glad to see you ignored the meat and went for the scraps as usual

That 'meat' was just chewed up scraps anyway.

I clearly mentioned that the Palestinians already declared a state, but that it has been sabotaged, attacked, and had all it's resources stripped from it at every turn. As well as the fact it's citizens don't even have the basic security of knowing their properties won't be confiscated tomorrow.

You might consider those "suitable conditions" for your enemy to live under, but excuse them for not bowing down and accepting it.

soren - agreed. muslims are a thankless intolerant controlling prejudiced violent narroweyed people.

abu - tell us all about the 11 or so wives your sex crazed idol had and his sex slaves on top of that.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 11^th, 2009 at 5:29pm:

soren - agreed. muslims are a thankless intolerant controlling prejudiced violent narroweyed people. abu - tell us all about the 11 or so wives your sex crazed idol had and his sex slaves on top of that.

Don't forget his favourite, the 6 year old Aisha.

The Jews didn't attack anyone until they were attacked. Jews are the biggest pacifists around. Do you ever see hoards of Jews beating people up or raping people or committing crimes in Europe? Now? Ever?

The same way Jews moved to any place, they kept to themselves in Palestine, but had to form resistance groups to stop the wholesale slaughter of them by Arabic muslims, whose religion calls Jews the 'sons of apes and pigs' and recites gleefully Mohammed's beheading of Jews.

So the ancient enemies of Islam, the Jews were nearby and were attacked repeatedly. And then once the UN gave the Jews 10 per cent of the BMP, that wasn't enough for the muslims, oh no. They had not only have that 10 per cent, but also kill all the Jews as well. And that plan ended in abject failure.

The ebil joo civilians defeated what 7 professional (well as professional as they may get) Arab armies. And even then, there was no Palestine. Egypt and Jordan took the occupied territories until 1967.

Can we Muslims have 10% of Australia?

no.
the free world has learnt what islam means.
it is not freedom, it is lies and servitude

you muslims can find your own planet.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 11^th, 2009 at 5:41pm:

Can we Muslims have 10% of Australia?

You can have 10 per cent of the blast radius. That should be enough.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 11^th, 2009 at 5:41pm:

Can we Muslims have 10% of Australia?

;D      ;D      ;D



All of the lairs, you and yours,  ....can go to hell.

Revelation 21:8

As I thought, it sounds good when you're recommending it for someone else, but not something you yourself would do. Learn to take your own advice before offering it to others. If you're not willing to take it, then don't criticise others for not doing so either.


Quote:

The ebil joo civilians defeated what 7 professional (well as professional as they may get) Arab armies.

Only someone as simple minded as you could produce such a stupendous statement Calanen.

To a dim wit such as yourself, 7 to 1 is pretty big difference isn't it? 7 what though.. 7 armies of less than 1/7th. of the other army? The combined "Arab forces" had still much less than the Jewish force. The Jordanian army was the only professionally trained army, and guess what, it was trained, and in fact commanded by the same people who trained the Jewish army, and who in fact created the Jewish proto-state. The British were running both sides of the show (and we both know who they wanted to win), so in effect it was a one man show.

It's like today when the U.S (the bastard child of Britain) claims to be an objective peace broker in the conflict, when in fact they've armed one side to the teeth. And drop kicks like yourself, sit back thinking how fair and impartial they are. And then you throw the word "muppet" around? You should look in the mirror kermit.

abu,

A coupla, 3, tutorials for you, and yours.

Wow, i wish i had broadband!!




Part 142 - Palestine and Palestinians
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciUb9wSkbnE




Part 146A - Two States - Israel and Palestine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHUTxazD-Hw
CORRECTION...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-HkGLs-KVU

Part 146B - Two States - Israel and Palestine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tpcPbZ9NM0

Part 146C - Two States - Israel and Palestine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOg5_qUsS10




Part 188A - Islam's Culture of DENIAL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSXMuJMuUH0

Part 188B - Islam's Culture of DENIAL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWmy1BHZTTY

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 11^th, 2009 at 9:50pm:

Quote: The ebil joo civilians defeated what 7 professional (well as professional as they may get) Arab armies. [quote]To a dim wit such as yourself, 7 to 1 is pretty big difference isn't it? 7 what though.. 7 armies of less than 1/7th. of the other army? The combined "Arab forces" had still much less than the Jewish force. The Jordanian army was the only professionally trained army, and guess what, it was trained, and in fact commanded by the same people who trained the Jewish army, and who in fact created the Jewish proto-state. The British were running both sides of the show (and we both know who they wanted to win), so in effect it was a one man show.

What was the excuse in 1967 and 1973 then? The Arabs got their asses handed to them by the Joos..In'sh'allah.

That's gotta sting.

And yes, you are a muppet. While I may be Kermit, I think you are a bit more of a Gonzo type character. Or maybe Miss Piggy.

Quote:

What was the excuse in 1967 and 1973 then?

From the beginning of the 20th. century until today, all of the Arab regimes, without exception have been Western puppets. They're playing for the other side, so it's no wonder the Zionists always appear triumphant and invincible (to gullible idiots anyway).

Calanen wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 12:59am:

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 11th, 2009 at 9:50pm: Quote: The ebil joo civilians defeated what 7 professional (well as professional as they may get) Arab armies. [quote]To a dim wit such as yourself, 7 to 1 is pretty big difference isn't it? 7 what though.. 7 armies of less than 1/7th. of the other army? The combined "Arab forces" had still much less than the Jewish force. The Jordanian army was the only professionally trained army, and guess what, it was trained, and in fact commanded by the same people who trained the Jewish army, and who in fact created the Jewish proto-state. The British were running both sides of the show (and we both know who they wanted to win), so in effect it was a one man show. What was the excuse in 1967 and 1973 then? The Arabs got their asses handed to them by the Joos..In'sh'allah. That's gotta sting. And yes, you are a muppet. While I may be Kermit, I think you are a bit more of a Gonzo type character. Or maybe Miss Piggy.

He is the resident White Queen
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1247224680/5#5

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 10:17am:

Quote: What was the excuse in 1967 and 1973 then? From the beginning of the 20th. century until today, all of the Arab regimes, without exception have been Western puppets. They're playing for the other side, so it's no wonder the Zionists always appear triumphant and invincible (to gullible idiots anyway).

Riiiight...

So the Arab armies, were actully just *pretending* to fight, and die, and get all their airforces and tanks blown up, just as part of a staged play for the benefit of the Ebil Jooz Zionist Alliance - but REALLY they wanted the jooz to win all the time. Thanks for setting us straight their Abu. Was Spielberg one of the directors? He's an ebil joo.

Bigger than Ben Hur - the staged production of the Six Day War. Wow, I'm waiting for the editors cut to be released on DVD where you can see the Zionists in the background directing Arab tanks.

I hope they negotiated their contracts through Actors Equity. Getting blown up as part of a world stage play would have to attract a good penalty rate.

Quote:

So the Arab armies, were actully just *pretending* to fight, and die, and get all their airforces and tanks blown up

I doubt you possess the mental capacity to understand it.

The Jordanian army (the only properly trained army) was commanded by a man known as Glubb Pasha (John Glubb, who incidentally named his son Godfrey after the Crusader king, but Godfrey later converted to Islam and changed his name to Faris, Allahu Akbar), who was a British military intelligence officer. The Jordanian (and other) regimes were from the beginning loyal puppets of the Western powers, their soldiers were just gullible lambs to the slaughter.

So in effect yes the soldiers were seriously fighting, but their commanders were either British themselves, or were under the orders of the British (who we both know were the instigators of the Zionist movement), many many sincere soldiers were killed due to this treachery.

Again,  I doubt this will penetrate that dense skull of yours, but no harm in trying I guess. You love to believe the myth that the Zionists are invincible and that Muslim armies couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. Afghanistan and Iraq put this speculation to a clear end :)

None of the armies that invaded Israel was Muslim.

just as well he was not initially a muslim wanting to leave islam, then he would have been murdered.As it was, he was free to go.

Gives the world of freedom the complete ethical superiority

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 3:16pm:

Quote: So the Arab armies, were actully just *pretending* to fight, and die, and get all their airforces and tanks blown up I doubt you possess the mental capacity to understand it. The Jordanian army (the only properly trained army) was commanded by a man known as Glubb Pasha (John Glubb, who incidentally named his son Godfrey after the Crusader king, but Godfrey later converted to Islam and changed his name to Faris, Allahu Akbar), who was a British military intelligence officer. The Jordanian (and other) regimes were from the beginning loyal puppets of the Western powers, their soldiers were just gullible lambs to the slaughter. So in effect yes the soldiers were seriously fighting, but their commanders were either British themselves, or were under the orders of the British (who we both know were the instigators of the Zionist movement), many many sincere soldiers were killed due to this treachery. Again,  I doubt this will penetrate that dense skull of yours, but no harm in trying I guess. You love to believe the myth that the Zionists are invincible and that Muslim armies couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. Afghanistan and Iraq put this speculation to a clear end :) None of the armies that invaded Israel was Muslim.

This sort of thing makes me think that Islam may not be a serious threat to anything but istelf, after all. You have enthusiasm and an overarching theory but it is all hopelessly unmoored from anything actually going on in the world.

Non-muslims have repeatedly and unsuccesfully attacked Israel? And these attacking armies were puppets of the British who created Israel in the first place? Is this a big enough conspiracy? Go on, you can do better. Let your imagination fly.

Or ease up on banging your head on the floor. You are even more inchoate than usual.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 11^th, 2009 at 9:50pm:

As I thought, it sounds good when you're recommending it for someone else, but not something you yourself would do. Learn to take your own advice before offering it to others. If you're not willing to take it, then don't criticise others for not doing so either. Quote: The ebil joo civilians defeated what 7 professional (well as professional as they may get) Arab armies. Only someone as simple minded as you could produce such a stupendous statement Calanen. To a dim wit such as yourself, 7 to 1 is pretty big difference isn't it? 7 what though.. 7 armies of less than 1/7th. of the other army? The combined "Arab forces" had still much less than the Jewish force. The Jordanian army was the only professionally trained army, and guess what, it was trained, and in fact commanded by the same people who trained the Jewish army, and who in fact created the Jewish proto-state. The British were running both sides of the show (and we both know who they wanted to win), so in effect it was a one man show.

This is why the joos say: 'Thank god we have the Arabs for enemies". They may be numerous but, by God, they are thick.

Soren wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 9:10pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 12th, 2009 at 3:16pm: Quote: So the Arab armies, were actully just *pretending* to fight, and die, and get all their airforces and tanks blown up I doubt you possess the mental capacity to understand it. The Jordanian army (the only properly trained army) was commanded by a man known as Glubb Pasha (John Glubb, who incidentally named his son Godfrey after the Crusader king, but Godfrey later converted to Islam and changed his name to Faris, Allahu Akbar), who was a British military intelligence officer. The Jordanian (and other) regimes were from the beginning loyal puppets of the Western powers, their soldiers were just gullible lambs to the slaughter. So in effect yes the soldiers were seriously fighting, but their commanders were either British themselves, or were under the orders of the British (who we both know were the instigators of the Zionist movement), many many sincere soldiers were killed due to this treachery. Again,  I doubt this will penetrate that dense skull of yours, but no harm in trying I guess. You love to believe the myth that the Zionists are invincible and that Muslim armies couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. Afghanistan and Iraq put this speculation to a clear end :) None of the armies that invaded Israel was Muslim. This sort of thing makes me think that Islam may not be a serious threat to anything but istelf, after all. You have enthusiasm and an overarching theory but it is all hopelessly unmoored from anything actually going on in the world. Non-muslims have repeatedly and unsuccesfully attacked Israel? And these attacking armies were puppets of the British who created Israel in the first place? Is this a big enough conspiracy? Go on, you can do better. Let your imagination fly. Or ease up on banging your head on the floor. You are even more inchoate than usual.

Hang on a sec soren, people like mantra probably believe him. Shall we do a poll? All sound kosher..er I mean halal to you mantra? Zionist joo infiltrators leading the mighty Muslim Armies to ruins in 3 wars?

Crafty buggers them joos. Can infiltrate Arab armies! They pretended a bit too well in 1973, they nearly beat the Joos. Luckily though, the director called 'CUT!' just in time to avoid that disaster. Imagine having  to wait for the sequel! Oh the funders would be mortified!

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 3:16pm:

So in effect yes the soldiers were seriously fighting.......You love to believe the myth that the Zionists are invincible and that Muslim armies couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. Afghanistan and Iraq put this speculation to a clear end :)

abu,

HISTORY DEMONSTRATES, that unless they know that they have overwhelming numbers, moslems never stand and fight.

Moslem tactics are to assassinate the unsuspecting, and then run, to 'fight' another day.

Assassinating soldiers with roadside bombs may be an effective form of terror,
.....but its not fighting.




http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41725000/jpg/_41725714_bus_getty.jpg
Assassinating civilians with bombs may be an effective form of terror,
.....but its not fighting.




http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44326000/jpg/_44326171_afp203indexfire.jpg
[Benazir Bhutto assassination pic]
Assassinating your political 'enemies' may be an effective form of terror,
.....but its not fighting.






http://www.jihadwatch.org/London_Bus_2.jpg
Hell, moslems don't even dare, come out and declare that they are at war with us.
source of image...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018326.php




With ISLAM / moslems, it is all lies, deception, violence.

Snakes in the grass.






++++++++







Isaiah 26:10
Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness: in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the LORD.


Psalms 28:3
Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts.


Psalms 36:2
For he [the wicked] flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful.
3  The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good.
4  He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil.


Psalms 37:30
The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment.
31  The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide.
32  The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him.


Romans 12:9
Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.


3 John 1:11
Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

Quote:

With ISLAM / moslems, it is all lies, deception, violence. Snakes in the grass.

The Sikhs have a saying;

'A muslim is one side snake, one side muslim. To kill the snake, you must kill the muslim.'

Quote:

HISTORY DEMONSTRATES, that unless they know that they have overwhelming numbers, moslems never stand and fight.

You are the prince of fabricators.

This is what HISTORY DEMONSTRATES.

The first Muslim battle, Badr: Muslims - 300, Polytheists - 1,000
Battle of Uhud: Muslims - 700-1,000, Polytheists - 3,200
al-Khandaq/al-Ahzab: Muslims - 3,000 (mostly besieged civilians), Polytheist/Jewish alliance - 10,000
Battle of Mu'tah: Muslims - 3,000, Romans (Byzantines) - 100,000
Battle of Marj-ud-Deebaj: Muslims - 4,000, Romans - 10,000
Battle of Walaja: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 25,000-30,000
Battle of Ullais: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 70,000
Battle of Firaz: Muslims - 15,000, Persians/Romans/Arabs - 100,000-300,000

I doubt you have any idea about the history of Islam, other than the tripe you've read from anti-Islamic sources. I've read both, and the crap you believe is very unhistorical.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 12:52pm:

Quote: HISTORY DEMONSTRATES, that unless they know that they have overwhelming numbers, moslems never stand and fight. You are the prince of fabricators. This is what HISTORY DEMONSTRATES. The first Muslim battle, Badr: Muslims - 300, Polytheists - 1,000 Battle of Uhud: Muslims - 700-1,000, Polytheists - 3,200 al-Khandaq/al-Ahzab: Muslims - 3,000 (mostly besieged civilians), Polytheist/Jewish alliance - 10,000 Battle of Mu'tah: Muslims - 3,000, Romans (Byzantines) - 100,000 Battle of Marj-ud-Deebaj: Muslims - 4,000, Romans - 10,000 Battle of Walaja: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 25,000-30,000 Battle of Ullais: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 70,000 Battle of Firaz: Muslims - 15,000, Persians/Romans/Arabs - 100,000-300,000 I doubt you have any idea about the history of Islam, other than the tripe you've read from anti-Islamic sources. I've read both, and the crap you believe is very unhistorical.

abu,


LOL

ISLAMIC sources, and accounts, of ISLAMIC history?

LOL

A compendium of distortion, deception, and lies.

e.g.

LISTEN TO WHAT THE Koran has to say,
about the character of Mohammad,
and about the character of the moslem community...

LOL

It is a TOTAL fantasy!!!

LOL

The Koran....

The murderer, the pirate, the thief, the breaker of covenants, 'a wonderful example to mankind'....

"Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah. "
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.021


The murderers, the pirates, the thieves, the breakers of covenants....

"Ye [muslims] are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors."
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/003.qmt.html#003.110


ISLAM'S ACCOUNT OF ITS OWN HISTORY, AND MORALITY.....
HARDLY IMPARTIAL,
HARDLY CREDIBLE,
HARDLY ACCURATE.







http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Isllam2.jpg
".....the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah."


LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL.i
++++++++++





see....

Part 152 A - Muhammad and Projective Identification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV94fxLPSuY

Part 152 B - Muhammad and Projective Identification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEA5mbRjITs



A full list of all, al Rassooli's "AhmadsQuran3" talks on YOUTUBE....
http://www.al-rassooli.com/ahmadsquran3/

Calanen wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 10:04am:

Quote: With ISLAM / moslems, it is all lies, deception, violence. Snakes in the grass. The Sikhs have a saying; 'A muslim is one side snake, one side muslim. To kill the snake, you must kill the muslim.'

They say something similar about Hindus as well.

Sorry I forgot, only sources emanating from the West are considered historically accurate.

My mistake.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 12:52pm:

I doubt you have any idea about the history of Islam, other than the tripe you've read from anti-Islamic sources. I've read both, and the crap you believe is very unhistorical.

An old I.T. truism....

Rubbish-in = = rubbish-out.

ISLAMIC accounts of ISLAMIC history.....
....are RUBBISH [lies].



If we build our house on sand [lies], it will be swept away by the storms of TRUTH.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 12:52pm:

This is what HISTORY DEMONSTRATES. The first Muslim battle, Badr: Muslims - 300, Polytheists - 1,000 Battle of Uhud: Muslims - 700-1,000, Polytheists - 3,200 al-Khandaq/al-Ahzab: Muslims - 3,000 (mostly besieged civilians), Polytheist/Jewish alliance - 10,000 Battle of Mu'tah: Muslims - 3,000, Romans (Byzantines) - 100,000 Battle of Marj-ud-Deebaj: Muslims - 4,000, Romans - 10,000 Battle of Walaja: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 25,000-30,000 Battle of Ullais: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 70,000 Battle of Firaz: Muslims - 15,000, Persians/Romans/Arabs - 100,000-300,000

abu,

I'm just waiting for the ISLAMIC propagandists to 'write up', the current 'inner struggle', being conducted in Afghanistan.

Battle of Afghanistan: Mujahadeen - 375, Infidel Coalition forces 150,000



LOL

You're onto something there Yadda, if Muslims from Afghanistan supposedly attacked the U.S, then indeed they certainly don't go for the smallest armies to fight against, and again, your claims are shown to be utter fabrications.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 12:52pm:

This is what HISTORY DEMONSTRATES. The first Muslim battle, Badr: Muslims - 300, Polytheists - 1,000 Battle of Uhud: Muslims - 700-1,000, Polytheists - 3,200 al-Khandaq/al-Ahzab: Muslims - 3,000 (mostly besieged civilians), Polytheist/Jewish alliance - 10,000 Battle of Mu'tah: Muslims - 3,000, Romans (Byzantines) - 100,000 Battle of Marj-ud-Deebaj: Muslims - 4,000, Romans - 10,000 Battle of Walaja: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 25,000-30,000 Battle of Ullais: Muslims - 15,000, Persians - 70,000 Battle of Firaz: Muslims - 15,000, Persians/Romans/Arabs - 100,000-300,000

So here goes the myth about peaceful advancement of islam  8-)

Quote:

So here goes the myth about peaceful advancement of islam

Can't see anywhere in any of those statistics where it says Muslims violently advanced anywhere.

Badr, Uhud and Ahzab were all fought in close promixity to Medinah against invading polytheist/jewish forces. Ahzab was in fact a siege of Medinah...

Perhaps you'd better at least read the basics of Islamic history before commenting tallow?

Also just out of curiosity can you name a single nation/empire/civilisation that didn't have a few battles in it's first coupla centuries of existence? It's nothing out of the ordinary at all. It would've simply been impossible not to. The idea that there should be no battles in the history of Islam is just ludicrous, and demonstrates a clear lack of intellect on the part of anyone posing such a preposterous idea.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 10:29pm:

Quote: So here goes the myth about peaceful advancement of islam Can't see anywhere in any of those statistics where it says Muslims violently advanced anywhere. Badr, Uhud and Ahzab were all fought in close promixity to Medinah against invading polytheist/jewish forces. Ahzab was in fact a siege of Medinah... Perhaps you'd better at least read the basics of Islamic history before commenting tallow? Also just out of curiosity can you name a single nation/empire/civilisation that didn't have a few battles in it's first coupla centuries of existence? It's nothing out of the ordinary at all. It would've simply been impossible not to. The idea that there should be no battles in the history of Islam is just ludicrous, and demonstrates a clear lack of intellect on the part of anyone posing such a preposterous idea.

Slyly, as usual, you equate imperial exopansionist conquests with battles of self-defence within defined borders.

Just ludicrous. Who do you think you are kidding?

Quote:

Slyly, as usual, you equate imperial exopansionist conquests with battles of self-defence within defined borders.

Are you going to now attempt to impose the rules of engagement in the era of the nation-state (with it's clearly defined borders) on people from a very different time, 1400 years ago? You gotta be consistent with the rest of your garbage I guess.

Anyway as I pointed out, those first 3 battles were all fought defensively. So defensively, they were pretty much all within the precincts of Medinah itself.

Most of those with the Romans and Persians were fairly similar. As more of the Arabian peninsula embraced Islam, the two superpowers felt threatened and began to move their proxy Arab tribes in to heavy people into not accepting Islam, which of course the Muslims had to counter. It was a fledgling city-state (not even an empire yet) defending itself against two hungry superpowers. And only by the grace of God did they manage to survive it, and not only that, but replace those two superpowers within a very short time.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 14^th, 2009 at 12:56am:

Quote: Slyly, as usual, you equate imperial exopansionist conquests with battles of self-defence within defined borders. Are you going to now attempt to impose the rules of engagement in the era of the nation-state (with it's clearly defined borders) on people from a very different time, 1400 years ago?

Are you attempting to impose the jihadi rules of engagement of tribal nomads 1400 years ago on people of modern nation states with clearly defined borders?
Yes, you are.

That is why you lot still treat the Crusades and the Reconquista as if they were events directly relevant today - but the Arab conquests are water under the bridge, historic past, different era, nothing to see here.


It does not really matter whether you are a sly jihadi and know exctly the sleight of hand you are employing or you are really so Islamic in your thinking that basic concepts and rules of reasing escape you because you can think only in the garbled hotch-potch of Islamic rhetoric , much of it modelled for you in the Koran, a singularly gormless, tedious and incoherent book. (Can I have this opinion?)

Quote:

Are you attempting to impose the jihadi rules of engagement of tribal nomads 1400 years ago on people of modern nation states with clearly defined borders? Yes, you are.

I am?

Where?

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 13^th, 2009 at 10:29pm:

Quote: So here goes the myth about peaceful advancement of islam Can't see anywhere in any of those statistics where it says Muslims violently advanced anywhere. Badr, Uhud and Ahzab were all fought in close promixity to Medinah against invading polytheist/jewish forces. Ahzab was in fact a siege of Medinah... Perhaps you'd better at least read the basics of Islamic history before commenting tallow? Also just out of curiosity can you name a single nation/empire/civilisation that didn't have a few battles in it's first coupla centuries of existence? It's nothing out of the ordinary at all. It would've simply been impossible not to. The idea that there should be no battles in the history of Islam is just ludicrous, and demonstrates a clear lack of intellect on the part of anyone posing such a preposterous idea.

polytheist and jews were there before muslims and if the basics of islamic history don't teach you this it isn't worth of learning as history, maybe as fairy tales.

BTW, I did not say that military battles are non violent or that they are not part of a conquest, you on another hand claimed how peaceful islam conquest was. This demonstrates a clear lack of intellect in islamic (or is it just yours?), writings about history.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 14^th, 2009 at 6:26pm:

Quote: Are you attempting to impose the jihadi rules of engagement of tribal nomads 1400 years ago on people of modern nation states with clearly defined borders? Yes, you are. I am? Where?

Here:


Quote:

Also just out of curiosity can you name a single nation/empire/civilisation that didn't have a few battles in it's first coupla centuries of existence? It's nothing out of the ordinary at all. It would've simply been impossible not to. The idea that there should be no battles in the history of Islam is just ludicrous, and demonstrates a clear lack of intellect on the part of anyone posing such a preposterous idea.

You are slyly trying to justify Islam's ongoing and current bloody borders on the basis of what the Arabs did 1400 years ago and have not stopped, regardless of nation states coming into existence in the meantime. Islam will always have bloody borders and it it will not stop fighting until it is either strangled or it conquers the world.



Take the Israelis. They declared their country, as voted to them by the UN. and that would have been the end of the matter, no battles. Except your lot attcked it on day one. So there's one modern country, with declared borders, that did not need to fight battles was it not for your coreligionists.

East Timor is another. It only had to fight defensive battles against your mob.

Australia and NZ -heard of them? - had the great good fortune of not needing to fight themselves into existence. (Luckily they were not bordering a Muslim-ruled entity, eh?)

Quote:

BTW, I did not say that military battles are non violent or that they are not part of a conquest, you on another hand claimed how peaceful islam conquest was. This demonstrates a clear lack of intellect in islamic (or is it just yours?), writings about history.

You show lack of intellect insane infidel. In the overwhelming majority of cases, Islam entered new lands because they were invited for a cup of tea with the rulers who then, after tea, agreed to destroy their whole culture, burn their libraries and convert to Islam voluntarily.

In any case where muslims were violent, it was only when the evil Christians/Jews/Hindus/Buddhists attacked them ferociously without provocation, and the muslims were required to defensively bring about a war of conquest where they moved into their attackers land and raped all their women.

I hope this corrects your historical misunderstanding, infidel.

Quote:

Take the Israelis. They declared their country, as voted to them by the UN. and that would have been the end of the matter, no battles.

So if the U.N votes 50% of Australia must goto Muslims to create a Muslim state, you'll leave the matter at that? No battles?

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 14^th, 2009 at 9:52pm:

Quote: Take the Israelis. They declared their country, as voted to them by the UN. and that would have been the end of the matter, no battles. So if the U.N votes 50% of Australia must goto Muslims to create a Muslim state, you'll leave the matter at that? No battles?

abu, can you link to UN resolution about voting for Australia to become muslim or is it usual islamic fantasy about caliphate?

BTW, here is link to United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181  that was approved by a vote of 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions. And that is reality not a fantasy like islamic history toll tails.

I couldn't care less if the U.N voted 56 to 0 for 50% of my country to be given to someone else, and I don't think a single nation/people on earth would accept it either.

When you, or anyone else here can tell me it'd be acceptable for your country, then I'll listen to your arguments, until then it's nothing but garbage.

You cannot criticise the Palestinians for not doing what you yourself would not do. It's nothing but pure hypocrisy, and in fact just demonstrates how empty your arguments are.

abu, Palestinians never had country it was British Mandate and you know it. I don't think you care about Palestinians either or you would be against them blowing themselves and their children up to bits of meat.

tallow, I know you're not the brightest spark on this forum, but I think you can manage to transpose the situation of the Palestinians onto the situation of Australia, just to give yourself a little better insight into their plight, if indeed you care. If you don't care, then let us just finish it here, and cut the crap.

If Australia were divided up into smaller provinces and you happened to live in one of those provinces that they were offering to give 50% of to the Muslims, just because it didn't exist previously as an independant nation, would that somehow 'cheapen' your claim to your home?, to your land, to your community? The "It was a British mandate at the time" argument is just bollocks and you know it. It doesn't alter people's position whatsoever, nor does it justify displacing them from their homes, nor does it weaken their claims to their land, not even by a nanometre.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 15^th, 2009 at 4:55pm:

I couldn't care less if the U.N voted 56 to 0 for 50% of my country to be given to someone else, and I don't think a single nation/people on earth would accept it either. When you, or anyone else here can tell me it'd be acceptable for your country, then I'll listen to your arguments, until then it's nothing but garbage. You cannot criticise the Palestinians for not doing what you yourself would not do. It's nothing but pure hypocrisy, and in fact just demonstrates how empty your arguments are.

Listen up.....

'PALESTINIANS' HAVE A HOMELAND.

JORDAN, IS THE 'PALESTINIAN' HOMELAND.
JORDAN, IS THE 'PALESTINIAN' HOMELAND.
JORDAN, IS THE 'PALESTINIAN' HOMELAND.


http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/oren/Transjordan%20separation%201922.jpg
The Arabs were allotted the land of the BMP, Transjorden, east of the river Jordan.
.....WHERE, [BY AGREEMENT WITH THE ARABS OF THE AREA], JEWS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SETTLE.





Paraphrasing abu, paraphrasing the 'Palestinians', and paraphrasing all other moslems, re the 'inner struggle' over 'Palestine',

"The wicked Jews made me do it [i.e. they made me fight for the 'Palestinians' land]!"

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e303/michk89/child_suicide_bomber.jpg
MOSLEM INGRAIN THE HATRED OF THE ENEMIES OF ALLAH, INTO THEIR CHILDREN





And when moslems murder other moslems, or non-moslems,

"The wicked apostates / non-moslems made me do it [i.e. they made me kill them, because they are 'unbelievers' ]!"

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-05/12/xin_06050112085844514911.jpg
Nick Berg, with his arms bound, moments before his beheading by Allah's 'finest', the 'warriors' of ISLAM.

Nick Berg's fatal error/fault?

Nick Berg was an 'unbeliever', he was breathing, and he came into an area controlled by devout moslems, with a grievance against non-moslems.




Listen up.....

ISLAM - IS A DEATH CULT.

"......in the words of Islamism's most influential thinker, Sayyid Qutb,
....."the death of those who are killed for the cause of God gives more impetus to the cause, which continues to thrive on their blood." "
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8802-2243871,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb



Listen up.....

ISLAM's greatest cultural 'trick', is the projecting of 'BLAME', onto non-moslems, for all the 'grievances' of moslems...

Part 152 A - Muhammad and Projective Identification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV94fxLPSuY

Part 152 B - Muhammad and Projective Identification
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEA5mbRjITs



A full list of all, al Rassooli's "AhmadsQuran3" talks on YOUTUBE....
http://www.al-rassooli.com/ahmadsquran3/







FURTHER....

The land of present day Israel, is the ancient homeland of the Jewish people.

Parts of modern Israel still retain their ancient names, like for example, 'Judea'.

Does the root of the name, Judea, ring a bell?

This [Judea] is an area which the Western mainstream media now cravenly refer to as, "The West Bank",
....seeking to to obfuscate its proper and original inhabitants.

And please remember, that the 'Palestinians' Arabs, have a homeland.

Jordan, is the 'Palestinian' homeland.

But the local Arabs still today declare that it is an abomination, that the Jewish people should be allowed to return to what is, THEIR OWN ANCIENT HOMELAND.

So, putting aside this ISLAMIC malice, against the local unbelievers [i.e. the Jewish people],
.....don't the Jewish people have just as much right [historically] as anyone to and area of land, so many of us now, glibly, call 'Palestine'?





AND WHY NO PEACE?

Why won't local moslems allow the Jewish people to live in their own ancient homeland??

Why can't there be peace between moslems and Jews?

Is the lack of peace between moslems and Jews because the 'Palestinians' do not have a 'homeland'?

No.

Jordan, is the 'Palestinians' homeland.



The lack of peace between moslems and Jews is solely because of the sadistic, unmerciful, ISLAMIC cultural pride, inherent in all true moslems.

A pride that, cannot, WILL NOT, allow non-moslems [the Jewish people] to live in their their own ancient homeland.



"Jews forced out of homelands by arabs"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1244453456/21#21

"Israeli treatment of Palestinians"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1229690857/123#123

"Jews"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1240754602/15#15

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 15^th, 2009 at 8:00pm:

tallow, I know you're not the brightest spark on this forum, but I think you can manage to transpose the situation of the Palestinians onto the situation of Australia, just to give yourself a little better insight into their plight, if indeed you care. If you don't care, then let us just finish it here, and cut the crap. If Australia were divided up into smaller provinces and you happened to live in one of those provinces that they were offering to give 50% of to the Muslims, just because it didn't exist previously as an independant nation, would that somehow 'cheapen' your claim to your home?, to your land, to your community? The "It was a British mandate at the time" argument is just bollocks and you know it. It doesn't alter people's position whatsoever, nor does it justify displacing them from their homes, nor does it weaken their claims to their land, not even by a nanometre.

You probably would have a working analogy if you talked about the British granting independence to the Germans in the Adelaide Hills and the Barossa before 1901, before an actual, independent country called Australia was declared.

But your spluttering about the British or the UN giving anything of post-1901 Australia to anyone is thick and clueless.

soren,

The analogy is quite valid. Australia today is a huge single nation. Likewise all of the Middle east was huge single nation prior to the British invasion.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 15^th, 2009 at 8:55pm:

soren, The analogy is quite valid. Australia today is a huge single nation. Likewise all of the Middle east was huge single nation prior to the British invasion.

SO you want to give Israel and Palesinian territories back to Turkey? But Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire, only one its successor countries. And who should get all the other successor countries like Syria, Lebanon and Armenia and the rest? Well, where is the entity to which they can all be handed? There is no caliphate in existence, so who should get them? "Muslimia" that was the Ottoman Empire is gone.
The Muslims destroyed the Eastern Roman Empire, the Western powers destroyed the Ottoman Empire. 1:1.

Now what?

soren, stop wasting my time and yours with your juvenile antics.

We both know I didn't mention anything about Turkey. The people who live in the land are the ones being dispossessed of their homes. If you can't sympathise with their plight, then you're just a heartless bastard, and I pity you.

End of dialogue.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 15^th, 2009 at 9:30pm:

soren, stop wasting my time and yours with your juvenile antics. We both know I didn't mention anything about Turkey. The people who live in the land are the ones being dispossessed of their homes. If you can't sympathise with their plight, then you're just a heartless bastard, and I pity you. End of dialogue.

Ok, princess.


Which country had jurisdiction over Palestine on 27 April 1947? In other words, for the slow boys in the back, Israel declared independence from which political entity the next day?
Not the ottoman empire, not Turkey, not glorious Muslimia, not the the mighty non-existent wet dream of a caliphate, not Mohammedania, not the great Muslim pie-in-the-sky glorious fatherland.
From the British. Why? because the British had jurisdiction over the land. Not the Arabs. Not the Palestinians. Not the Jordanians or the Egyptians or the Saudies or Syrians or anyone else.

If you are thick and your head is hurting, I cant help you. Talk to Lestat, he will feel your pain.

"end of dialogue" ?
what does that mean in muslimspeak?

Who cares ?
just more islam shiite

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 15^th, 2009 at 8:00pm:

tallow, I know you're not the brightest spark on this forum, but I think you can manage to transpose the situation of the Palestinians onto the situation of Australia, just to give yourself a little better insight into their plight, if indeed you care. If you don't care, then let us just finish it here, and cut the crap. If Australia were divided up into smaller provinces and you happened to live in one of those provinces that they were offering to give 50% of to the Muslims, just because it didn't exist previously as an independant nation, would that somehow 'cheapen' your claim to your home?, to your land, to your community? The "It was a British mandate at the time" argument is just bollocks and you know it. It doesn't alter people's position whatsoever, nor does it justify displacing them from their homes, nor does it weaken their claims to their land, not even by a nanometre.

abu, I don't claim to be he brightest spark on this forum but I am brighter then any mohammedan who have proverbial mohammed's rocks with which he wiped his ass in their heads.
But let's dispense with this islamic pleasantries and look at facts and reason.

The facts are that Arab Palestinians were given more then 50% of the British mandate but the islamic do gooders like you who have nothing to loose told them "no, take it all" and they tried to do it by butchering Jews. But Jews in self-defence kicked their sorry bums against all odds because Allah was on the Jewish  side. The reason is that Allah is all knowing and omnipotent and is always right. Don't you agree with that? If you don't then Allah is not your god but shaitan is. If you agree then you should submit to the will of Allah and stop making fool out of yourself and your religion. The choice as you know is yours and Allah is my witness.

Tallow, the "Jordan is the Arab part of the BMP" nonsense has been addressed enough times before, read back over the countless places in which I wiped Calanen and Grendel out of the discussion on that one.

I can't believe anyone is still game enough to bring out this piece of poorly crafted Zionist propaganda.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 16^th, 2009 at 12:20am:

Tallow, the "Jordan is the Arab part of the BMP" nonsense has been addressed enough times before, read back over the countless places in which I wiped Calanen and Grendel out of the discussion on that one. I can't believe anyone is still game enough to bring out this piece of poorly crafted Zionist propaganda.

My old bearded White Queen, you wiped nothing except perhaps your nose.  And we know you can't believe a lot of plain and obvious things, but have no difficulty believing as many as six impossibilities before breakfast, as long as they are derived from old Arabic folklore.

Soren wrote on Jul 16^th, 2009 at 7:57am:

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 16th, 2009 at 12:20am: Tallow, the "Jordan is the Arab part of the BMP" nonsense has been addressed enough times before, read back over the countless places in which I wiped Calanen and Grendel out of the discussion on that one. I can't believe anyone is still game enough to bring out this piece of poorly crafted Zionist propaganda. My old bearded White Queen, you wiped nothing except perhaps your nose.  And we know you can't believe a lot of plain and obvious things, but have no difficulty believing as many as six impossibilities before breakfast, as long as they are derived from old Arabic folklore.

soren,

Why would moslems believe anything from the un-ISLAMIC 'sphere'?

When moslems KNOW that ISLAM is perfect, and KNOW that ISLAM has perfected them?

When the ISLAMIC doctrine and scripture, assure moslems , that they are the masters of the universe?





All devout moslems believe, are convinced, in their own hearts, that their mastery of all, is all preordained.

All that is required of them, is their submission [to evil ISLAM].

In their own eyes, moslems do no wickedness, because they merely submit to Allah's will,
....see! ....all moslems are blameless!
/sarc off


Part 017 - Predestination in the Quran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3SYaKxYKvw




A full list of all, al Rassooli's "AhmadsQuran3" talks on YOUTUBE....
http://www.al-rassooli.com/ahmadsquran3/






+++++++++++





Psalms 36:2
For he [the wicked] flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful.
3  The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good.
4  He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil.

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 16^th, 2009 at 12:20am:

Tallow, the "Jordan is the Arab part of the BMP" nonsense has been addressed enough times before, read back over the countless places in which I wiped Calanen and Grendel out of the discussion on that one.

Only in your own mind, but that's good enough. I think Lestat was with you, in between challenging me to a fight at the Preston mosque.