i never really understood the hatred muslims and jews have for each other, surley the has to be more reason then israel.

Prior to the creation of the modern state of Israel (in 1948), Jews and Muslims (and Arabs prior to Islam) lived together for 1000's of years.

Tell me bob, if a people, let's say Muslims, booted most Aussies from their homes, and turned Australia into a state exclusively for Muslims, do you think the average Aussie might hate Muslims a bit? Many Aussies already hate Muslims merely for being different to them, imagine if we booted them out of their homes.

That was not convincing at all Abu, try a bit harder. This is some answers for you and the answers are many!


It is actually a biblical event. It has to do with Ishamel and Isaac. Also, it is believed that Esau and Jacob are involved. When Isaac, father of Jacob and Esau was ready to sleep, He blessed the minor(Jacob) and not Esau, so the blessing was, that all his brothers would bow and serve him(Israel/Jacob). Esau then run away and started the arab people or something like that which later became Muslim mainly. If you read in Genesis chapters 27 and on. So up to this day, they fight. Plus, the Jews fight because they want the land that the Muslims are occupying where the Dome of the Rock is, because that's where the Jews need to re-build the temple of the Lord
The reason why they hate Jews is because: 1. they kill them. example Gaza. they've killed over 250 people, and the majority are civilians. 2. apparently the Jews want to over take their country.


Some believe that the Jews have been keeping a sense of hatred towards the Muslims when Muhammad (PBUH) was chosen as the offical last Prophet for humankind till eternity. They believe this problem among the Jews and the Arabs did not happen before Islam came. Both tribes lived happily and respected each other before Muhammad announced his prophethood. As Muhammad came from the Arab lineage, this led to anger and frustration amongst the Jews as they were hoping that their promised Messiah would be among the Jews itself. They did not accept that their Messiah was not from their own kind. They believe the Jews kept hating Muslims and tried to destroy them.
One reason why Arabs hate Jews is because they believe that Jews have been oppressing the Palestinians and other Arabs, and that includes children, the elderly, and women, destroying homes and that this cannot be tolerated in the interests of world peace.
Some also believe that when Islam was civilised and glorified centuries ago, the Jews were treated fairly and that their rights were respected and recognised. Muslims thought of them as their friend and let the Jews lived with them on the same land, using the same natural resources without any barrier. All were equal in the eyes of the Muslims. Only Jews who hate and wanted to destroy Islam were the ones who cannot be tolerated by the Muslims. Muslims or the Arabs do not hate all Jews. This is one of the misconceptions that should be corrected.

However the main reason these days is Prior to the Balfour Declaration at the end of World War II, the area now known as Israel/Palestine was governed by Britain, and Jews and Arabs both lived there in peace, mostly as subsistence farmers. The Allied decision to create "a Jewish State" to house the displaced Jews of Europe (in part so they would not have to absorb the refugees themselves) rapidly increased the numbers of Jews in Israel. Israel's Arab neighbors immediately declared war on Israel. Since then, fanatics on both sides have perpetuated the myth that Jews and Arabs cannot live in peace, that one community or the other must be driven out. Generations have grown up seeing loved ones slaughtered and both sides have embraced vengeance.
And yet there are groups of Palestinians and Arabs struggling for peace, convinced that conflict is not inevitable. Let us pray they will eventually prevail.


This is the part where Abu Dissects and minipulates everything in the post. But according to him it has only to do with the Jews being giving land after a mass Genecide of the Jewish people. Understandable considering the amount Holy site's and land they had to give up but seriously the Jews were almost entirley wiped out by Hitler and zero compassion was given to them by the Muslim people of the area. After what the Jewish people went through they will never again let it happen.

See to conclude they have been fighting for the best oart fo two centuries.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 7^th, 2011 at 6:01pm:

Prior to the creation of the modern state of Israel (in 1948), Jews and Muslims (and Arabs prior to Islam) lived together for 1000's of years. Tell me bob, if a people, let's say Muslims, booted most Aussies from their homes, and turned Australia into a state exclusively for Muslims, do you think the average Aussie might hate Muslims a bit? Many Aussies already hate Muslims merely for being different to them, imagine if we booted them out of their homes.

i understand were your coming from abu rashid, i dont necessary agree with israel, bbut what i mean is the sterotypes that jews control the world, theyre evil, all they want is money, they cant be trusted, and the stereo type that all muslims are terrorist now i no thats not true. i ve done abit research on the innternet and it seems this has been going on for ever

by the way in no way am i trying to attack youre religion

I have a final solution for the Jewish question.

We should give them an equal amount of coastline & land in Australia to live on.
We have 12,000 miles of coastline - we can spare 100 miles of it
& the Jews can live happily there.
Of course they wouldn't be allowed to bring their nuclear or other weapons with them.
That way they will be a long way away from any Arabs & we will all know peace.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 7^th, 2011 at 7:44pm:

I have a final solution for the Jewish question. We should give them an equal amount of coastline & land in Australia to live on. We have 12,000 miles of coastline - we can spare 100 miles of it & the Jews can live happily there. Of course they wouldn't be allowed to bring their nuclear or other weapons with them. That way they will be a long way away from any Arabs & we will all know peace.

smack that, they breed like rabbits - promise them 100km of land and they'll feel entitled take the lot...

Equitist wrote on Mar 7^th, 2011 at 7:57pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 7th, 2011 at 7:44pm: I have a final solution for the Jewish question. We should give them an equal amount of coastline & land in Australia to live on. We have 12,000 miles of coastline - we can spare 100 miles of it & the Jews can live happily there. Of course they wouldn't be allowed to bring their nuclear or other weapons with them. That way they will be a long way away from any Arabs & we will all know peace. smack that, they breed like rabbits - promise them 100km of land and they'll feel entitled take the lot...

Come on - you need to have faith in mankind.
The alternative is a nuclear war one day -
do you want that?

bob,


Quote:

bbut what i mean is the sterotypes that jews control the world, theyre evil, all they want is money, they cant be trusted

That's related to this topic?

I don't think anyone can deny that there's a very disproportionate amount of Jews in very high places in many countries around the world. We need look no further than our own government, and the immense influence that Zionist lobby groups have within it, especially in light of the recent events like the deposing of Rudd and the rise of Gillard (a public  Zionist sympathiser). And our government doesn't even come close to the U.S and their subservience to groups like AIPAC.


Quote:

i ve done abit research on the innternet and it seems this has been going on for ever

This is one of the most commonly peddled myths. Supposedly (according to late night TV evangelists anyway), this is an age old battle between the "Sons of Israel & the Sons of Ishmael". This is just nonsense. The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British.

As the British Prime Minister from the begining of the Zionist colonisation project stated:

“There are people who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradle of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another… if per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state, it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects." (Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman)

This is not an ongoing problem or an accident or a natural culmination of people's aspirations, it's a very cold, calculated state of affairs, that was deliberately brought about, in order for Britain, and later the U.S, to fulfill their foreign policy goals in the region.

Prior to the 20th. century, Jews were a tiny minority in Palestine, as they were in all Arabic countries. We are told the British merely tried to reconcile the differences between two people living in a land, but in fact they brought most of the Jews to the land, there not there before the 1900's.

Quote:

I have a final solution for the Jewish question. We should give them an equal amount of coastline & land in Australia to live on. We have 12,000 miles of coastline - we can spare 100 miles of it & the Jews can live happily there.

Not sure if you're aware, but this was a real plan floated at the time.

---

A Jewish colony in the Kimberleys

One afternoon in the second half of 1940, 1 was speaking with John Curtin in Collins Street, Melbourne, when a little old man with a greying beard walked past us. Curtin looked hard at him and said to me: 'Do you know that man?' I replied: 'I don't' and Curtin said: 'Well, his name is Steinberg. He was a minister in Lenin's Government and he signed more death warrants than any other man in Russia.' This all seemed very strange to me. I had never heard of Steinberg; nor had I heard that any of Lenin's ministers had come to Australia. I found out later that another one went to Sydney and died there.

I never raised this question with Curtin again and he never mentioned it either. But I could see that this little man, Dr I N Steinberg, was causing him a lot of worry. In 1938, the Lyons Government had signed an agreement at Evian, in France, under which Australia would accept 15,000 political refugees from Germany and Austria during the succeeding three years. In fact, we admitted 6,475 refugees between 1938 and 1945. Once war' broke out in 1939, there was no chance of any more Jews being allowed out of Germany.

Steinberg came to Australia in mid-1939 to try to plant a Jewish colony in the Kimberleys district of north-west Western Australia. He envisaged another area like the State of Israel, built on what he described as seven million acres of virgin soil. From subsequent events and conversations that I had with leading Jewish people in London, I know that Steinberg tried to interest the Rothschilds and other wealthy Jewish people in his scheme, but they did not agree with his proposition. However, Steinberg was indefatigable. He was a man of great ability and great pertinacity. Within a few days of his arrival in Australia, he discussed the whole project with Mr John Collings Willcock, the Labor Premier of Western Australia. Steinberg had arrived in Perth from London as a representative of the Freeland League for Jewish Territorial Colonization. He claimed later that Willcock was agreeable to the proposition. Willcock said: 'Of course, we must have the guarantee that your people will stay in the Jewish settlement, develop it and not leave for the cities to become a charge on the government.' This was a very wise observation on the part of Premier Willcock, and it was the same question that was worrying Curtin. If a Jewish settlement was to be established in the Kimberleys, how could anybody who came under the auspices of the Freeland League be made to stay in the area if he wanted to leave? Curtin knew full well that it would not be long before a number of people from the settlement would become dissatisfied and want to move to Sydney, Melbourne or one of the other State capitals. He knew that that would create problems between the Freeland League and the Western Australian and Commonwealth governments. He also knew that it would cause a great deal of anti-Semitism to grow in the Australian community.

Despite Curtin's hostility to the idea, Steinberg soon enlisted the support of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, a number of church leaders and some sections of the press. Thinking back on it now, it was all so foolish that people could, out of a great humanitarian regard for human suffering, agree to a proposal that was never feasible at any stage. In the first place, there was never enough money to start the project. Secondly, there was no guarantee that the people who went there could be forced to stay there. And the biggest objection was that no part of Australia should ever be handed over to any one race or religion for the establishment of a completely separate entity from the rest of the nation. We believe, in this country, as all democrats do, that when you live in a pluralistic community, every person has the same rights and privileges as any other person. He also has the same responsibilities and duties as any other person. Nobody has the right to establish what could become a ghetto, or any right to the exclusive possession of land to keep out other people.

The ACTU was very keen on Steinberg's scheme. Mr P J Clarey, acting secretary, wrote to Curtin and said: 'The writer has been instructed by the executive committee of the ACTU to convey to you the ACTU's approval of the proposed Jewish settlement in the Kimberleys. This matter has received the earnest consideration of the ACTU during the past two years, and approval and support of the ACTU to the proposed settlement has previously been intimated to the Hon. R G Menzies and the Hon. A W Fadden during their periods as Prime Minister.' It is interesting to note that this letter was written on October 24, 1941, when we were in the depths of war and only seventeen days after Curtin had become Prime Minister.

TBC...

Curtin had already made up his mind that there would be no such settlement, but that did not deter the ACTU from continuing to press the government. Then on March 31, 1943, when Edward James Holloway was a senior minister in the Curtin Government, he wrote in his personal capacity to Ernest Bevin, then Minister for Labour in the British Cabinet, saying: 'Dr Steinberg's mission to Australia was to establish a Jewish settlement in the unoccupied north-west. The proposed settlement was to be on the lines of the splendid agricultural settlement in Palestine. The Federal Government were giving favourable consideration to the proposal when the war put all projects, other than war, aside.' I am not so sure that the Menzies or Fadden governments ever gave any favourable consideration to the proposition.

Steinberg left Australia in June, 1943, and two months later he wrote to Curtin from Toronto, Canada, urging him to take a personal initiative in hastening his government's decision on the scheme. In the course of his letter, Steinberg said: 'I hope you will not mind if I permit myself to address you this time in a private, informal way. There are some problems concerning the most intimate needs of people that should be considered not as mere political or economic questions but as problems of our common social and moral conscience. It seems, then, that the best way to discuss them is not on the political field, but if possible, from man to man.' Steinberg said that the happiest part of his experience in Australia had been the expressions of sympathy and support he received from members of the Labor Party.

Curtin replied to Steinberg: 'The Commonwealth Government sympathizes with the serious plight of your people in Europe. It will be appreciated, however, that the whole question of immigration into Australia, particularly having regard to the conditions that will exist at the conclusion of hostilities, is one that requires to be fully explored from all aspects. Plans are at present in progress to set up a committee to study various phases of general problems and until recommendations are made by that body, the government is not in a position to formulate a definite policy.'

I was present, as Minister for Information, at a subsequent Cabinet meeting when Curtin appointed an inter-departmental committee to study immigration problems. The committee later opposed the Kimberleys project, and Curtin wrote to Steinberg: 'After mature consideration of all the circumstances ... the government is unable to see its way to depart from the long-established policy in regard to alien settlement in Australia.' Therefore, he said, the government could not entertain 'the proposal for a group settlement of the exclusive type contemplated by the Freeland League.'

However, the ACTU and church leaders continued to support the scheme, and nothing daunted, Steinberg appeared at the first United Nations conference in San Francisco in May, 1945, and took the opportunity to raise the pressing problem of Jewish homelessness before world opinion. He submitted a memorandum to all the delegations at the conference, and he specifically made contact with the leader of the Australian delegation, Mr Frank Forde, who was then Deputy Prime Minister. Forde assured Steinberg that he would discuss the matter fully and favorably with Prime Minister Curtin when he arrived back in Australia. Two months later, Curtin died and Forde succeeded him as Prime Minister for seven days. Forde then wrote to the Freeland League as Prime Minister: 'With reference to your personal representation to me in San Francisco for reconsideration of the government's decision against allowing a Jewish settlement to be established in the Kimberleys district or in some other undeveloped part of Australia, I desire to inform you that further careful consideration has been given to the matter. It has been decided, however, to adhere to the decision previously conveyed to you.'

Mr Chifley was elected Prime Minister in succession to Mr Forde, and Dr Steinberg continued to pursue his fruitless campaign by writing to Chifley while he was in London in April, 1946. Chifley delayed his reply until he returned to Australia. He then wrote: 'Your representations have received full consideration. The Commonwealth Government, however, is unable to see its way to vary its decision concerning this matter. I may add, that as a post-war contribution to the settlement of the problem of finding homes for Jewish refugees, the Commonwealth has issued landing permits since the cessation of hostilities in Europe, in favour of close relatives of Jewish people already settled in Australia.' As Minister for Immigration, I helped Mr Chifley prepare that letter and, as I have explained in another chapter, we did much, much more for the Jewish people who had survived the terrible trials and tribulations they suffered in Europe, than any other country did proportionately. As it turned out, our scheme was a far better one than that propounded by the Freeland League. I think we should all be happy that the Freeland scheme never got off the ground.

TBC...

In a book called Australia-The Unpromised Land, which he published in 1948, Steinberg wrote: This is where the matter rested after seven years of persistent efforts and negotiation. As Mr Chifley's letter indicates, Australia is willing to help alleviate the plight of the Jews by permitting a number of them to enter its borders as individual migrants, but she is not as yet ready to implement the broader concept of a Jewish colonization. Unfortunately, the Jewish people cannot wait, and thus the Freeland League has been forced to turn its attention to other lands for Jewish resettlement. But I firmly believe that in the 'Book of Jewish Hopes', the Australian chapter is not closed, and that a plan which has aroused the enthusiasm of so many Australians will yet become a reality.

I have never known of any other land where the Freeland League has successfully implemented a scheme of Jewish colonization. And twenty-six years after Prime Minister Chifley's last letter to Dr Steinberg, Australians have no reason to be unhappy or ashamed about what they did to help relieve Jewish homelessness. Neither Dr Steinberg nor anybody else ever told me what was the underlying reason for the creation of the Freeland League. I concluded, when I became Minister for Immigration, that Dr Steinberg and his backers were convinced of three things: There was no future for the three million Jews in Russia, and the Jews living in other European, Asian and African territories; there was not enough room for all these millions of Jews in Israel; it was better to create a second Jewish theocratic state than to increase the Jewish content of pluralistic societies by emigration, which would result ultimately in the loss of most of the emigres and their descendants to Jewry. The Jewish people constitute both a race and a religion and this is something that most non-Jewish peoples in Western countries, including Russia, have never accepted.

Jewish people, over thousands of years, have been torn by schisms and the creation of new sects. To many Jews, Christianity is just another of such sects. Persecuted, dispersed, confined to ghettos and often the victims of pogroms, the Jewish people have clung tenaciously to their 5,000-years-old belief that they are God's chosen people. Twenty years or more ago, I read that the USSR had denounced them as a 'vestigial anachronism'. But all the Jews arriving in Israel today from Russia, as a result of Russia's recent liberalization policy, are often difficult and un-cooperative and unhappy in their new homeland. It will not be long before some of them will be seeking admission to America, Canada and Australia.

The 1917 revolution was warmly welcomed by Russian Jews. They had bitter memories of Czarism and the pogroms, and naturally they helped Lenin in the October revolution. Almost everybody in the Russian public service refused to serve the Bolshevik regime. In the Russian Foreign Office, for instance, all the posts vacated, right down to the charwomen, were taken by Jewish men and women. Leon Trotsky, Grigori Zinoviev and Lev Kameneff are the names of three highly intellectual Jews who joined Lenin's administration. But the anti-semitic feelings of the Russian people have been so long ingrained that Stalin, having purged many Jews in the 1937 faked trials, had arranged for the infamous trial of seven Jewish doctors on bogus charges of having conspired to murder Russia's leaders before death overtook him in 1953. It was this alone that saved his intended victims from extermination.

Dr Steinberg knew all about the 1937 trials, but died before Stalin had planned to murder seven of his co-religionists. There was a time in the early 1930s when many Jews were allowed to leave Russia. I knew several of these people who, as young boys, were members of the Komsomol, the Russian Communist Youth Movement. In Australia, they all became wealthy men. None of them, however, gave any financial or moral support, as far as I know, to the Steinberg plan. They felt, instinctively, that they were part of the 'Babylonian Captivity', the 'Babylonian Exile', and their loyalty was to Zion, which is Israel, and not the Australian Kimberleys, which could never be an alternative Zion.

As for those Australians who supported the Kimberleys settlement, I do not suppose it ever occurred to them to inquire whether Australia had the right to take this land from the Aboriginals in the north-west and give it to people from Europe or from Asia or from Africa. If any people are homeless in Australia today, it is the Aboriginals. They are the only non-European descended people to whom we owe any debt. Some day, I hope, we will do justice to them.

Source

Quote:

If a Jewish settlement was to be established in the Kimberleys, how could anybody who came under the auspices of the Freeland League be made to stay in the area if he wanted to leave? Curtin knew full well that it would not be long before a number of people from the settlement would become dissatisfied and want to move to Sydney, Melbourne or one of the other State capitals. He knew that that would create problems between the Freeland League and the Western Australian and Commonwealth governments. He also knew that it would cause a great deal of anti-Semitism to grow in the Australian community.

Interesting that it's a 'given' that if Jews overrun a Western country, then anti-Semitism would skyrocket, yet Arabs are condemned for the same, after they've suffered over 60 long years of the menace that's ravaged their land and turfed them out into refugee camps.

---

Mason, you used the same old line about Jews suffering in WWII... who was it that made them suffer again? Arabs or Westerners? Why should Arabs/Muslims have to live in refugee camps, to compensate for the West's misdeeds against Jews?

It seems to go something like this:

Jews annoy Europeans -> Europeans gas Jews -> Europeans feel sorry for Jews, and thrust them upon Arabs -> Arabs end up in refugee camps and wanna blow Europeans up for causing all this tyranny.....

You reap what you sow.

Thanks Abu - interesting story.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 7^th, 2011 at 7:44pm:

I have a final solution for the Jewish question. We should give them an equal amount of coastline & land in Australia to live on. We have 12,000 miles of coastline - we can spare 100 miles of it & the Jews can live happily there. Of course they wouldn't be allowed to bring their nuclear or other weapons with them. That way they will be a long way away from any Arabs & we will all know peace.

You may want to re-think that term BTB.  ;)

Well Abu, like you say about change. At the time the Arab world changed and Arabs couldn't deal with it.

Just like you said to me countless times, Australia is changing deal with it. Seems that these people couldn't deal with the change.

You seem to have a hatred for Western civilisations. Concerning seeing as you are western yourself, seems you are taking on an attitude that majority of Arabs choose to let go when they migrate to Australia because they feel freedom for the first time. Yet you sit here free with a chip on your shoulder.

Prior to the creation of the modern state of Israel (in 1948), Jews and Muslims (and Arabs prior to Islam) lived together for 1000's of years.

Tell me bob, if a people, let's say Muslims, booted most Aussies from their homes, and turned Australia into a state exclusively for Muslims, do you think the average Aussie might hate Muslims a bit? Many Aussies already hate Muslims merely for being different to them, imagine if we booted them out of their homes.

- Abu

Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it.

The modern State of Israel was declared in 1948, and traces its historical and religious roots to the Biblical Land of Israel, also known as Zion, a concept central to Judaism since ancient times. Political Zionism took shape in the late-19th century Europe under Theodor Herzl, and the Balfour Declaration of 1917 formalized British policy preferring the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people. Following World War I, the League of Nations granted Great Britain the Mandate for Palestine, which included responsibility for securing "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people". In November 1947, the United Nations voted in favor of the partition of Palestine, proposing the creation of a Jewish state, an Arab state, and a UN-administered Jerusalem. Partition was accepted by the Zionist leadership but rejected by Arab leaders, and a civil war began. Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948 and neighboring Arab states invaded the next day. Since then, Israel has fought a series of wars with neighboring Arab states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

The country of Israel has been around for thousands of years.

It isn't a country that just suddenly appeared in 1948.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 3:35pm:

Prior to the creation of the modern state of Israel (in 1948), Jews and Muslims (and Arabs prior to Islam) lived together for 1000's of years. Tell me bob, if a people, let's say Muslims, booted most Aussies from their homes, and turned Australia into a state exclusively for Muslims, do you think the average Aussie might hate Muslims a bit? Many Aussies already hate Muslims merely for being different to them, imagine if we booted them out of their homes. - Abu Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it. The modern State of Israel was declared in 1948, and traces its historical and religious roots to the Biblical Land of Israel, also known as Zion, a concept central to Judaism since ancient times. Political Zionism took shape in the late-19th century Europe under Theodor Herzl, and the Balfour Declaration of 1917 formalized British policy preferring the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people. Following World War I, the League of Nations granted Great Britain the Mandate for Palestine, which included responsibility for securing "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people". In November 1947, the United Nations voted in favor of the partition of Palestine, proposing the creation of a Jewish state, an Arab state, and a UN-administered Jerusalem. Partition was accepted by the Zionist leadership but rejected by Arab leaders, and a civil war began. Israel declared independence on 14 May 1948 and neighboring Arab states invaded the next day. Since then, Israel has fought a series of wars with neighboring Arab states, and has occupied territories, including the West Bank, Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights, beyond those delineated in the 1949 Armistice Agreements. The border between Israel and the neighboring West Bank is not formally defined by the Israeli government, as a result of a complex and unresolved political situation. Israel has signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, but efforts by elements within both parties to diplomatically solve the problem have so far only met with limited success.

ERM....

I don't think anyone can deny that there's a very disproportionate amount of Jews in very high places in many countries around the world. We need look no further than our own government, and the immense influence that Zionist lobby groups have within it, especially in light of the recent events like the deposing of Rudd and the rise of Gillard (a public  Zionist sympathiser). And our government doesn't even come close to the U.S and their subservience to groups like AIPAC.

- Abu

In short .. you're Anti-Semitic. But that's nothing new.

Oh and there's no need to try and hide behind the term Zionism either. The context within which you write .. basically tells the true story.

Jews annoy Europeans -> Europeans gas Jews -> Europeans feel sorry for Jews, and thrust them upon Arabs -> Arabs end up in refugee camps and wanna blow Europeans up for causing all this tyranny.....

- Abu

Is that how it actually happened? Or is that how YOU PERSONALLY THINK it happened?

The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British.

- Abu

History begs to differ with your interesting personal view.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 4:01pm:

Jews annoy Europeans -> Europeans gas Jews -> Europeans feel sorry for Jews, and thrust them upon Arabs -> Arabs end up in refugee camps and wanna blow Europeans up for causing all this tyranny..... - Abu Is that how it actually happened? Or is that how YOU PERSONALLY THINK it happened?

Sums it up pretty neatly I thought.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 4:03pm:

The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British. - Abu History begs to differ with your interesting personal view.

Hi Lisa,
The Europeans have been killing Jews for at least the last 1000 years.
Abu needs a history lesson.

Lisa,


Quote:

Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it. The country of Israel has been around for thousands of years.

The Kingdom of Israel came to an end in the year 720 B.C.E. The Kingdom of Judah, its 'sister' kingdom survived it until about 586 B.C.E, at which point it also fell. In 539 B.C.E a token Kingdom of Judah was established by the Persians, and eventually changed hands to the Greeks, then the Romans. However after the Bar Kokhba revolt in the year 135 C.E, even the token kingdom was abolished and no Jewish state existed in the region, token or otherwise until 1948. Jews were dispersed in what is known as the diaspora all around the world, and had no more of a presence in their former homeland than they did in any other lands of the Middle East until the massive waves of illegal immigration in the early 20th. century, that led to the current mess, whereby they expelled people who have an UNBROKEN history in the land over 2500 years long.

You seriously need a history lesson.

The Land of Israel, known in Hebrew as Eretz Yisrael, has been sacred to the Jewish people since Biblical times. According to the Torah, God promised the Land of Israel to the three Patriarchs of the Jewish people. Scholars place the period of the three Patriarchs somewhere in the early 2nd millennium BCE. According to Biblical evidence the first Kingdom of Israel was established around the 11th century BCE. Subsequent Israelite kingdoms and states ruled intermittently over the next thousand years, and are known from various extra-biblical sources.

Between the time of the First Kingdom of Israel and the Muslim conquests of the 7th century, the Land of Israel fell under Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Sassanian, and Byzantine rule. Jewish presence in the region dwindled after the failure of the Bar Kokhba revolt against the Roman Empire in 132 CE. Nevertheless, Jewish presence in the Land of Israel remained continuous and the Galilee became its religious center. The Mishnah and part of the Talmud, central Jewish texts, were composed during the 2nd to 4th centuries CE in Tiberias and Jerusalem. Following years of persecution at the hands of Byzantine rulers, the Jews revolted in 610 CE, allying themselves with the Persian invaders. After capturing Jerusalem, the Persians and Jews killed thousands of Christians and destroyed many churches. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius recaptured Jerusalem in 628–629 CE, and was responsible for the massacre and expulsion of the Jews. During the initial Muslim conquests, in 635 CE, the Land of Israel, including Jerusalem, was captured from the Byzantine Empire. Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads, Abbasids, and Crusaders throughout the next six centuries, before falling in the hands of the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260. In 1516, the Land of Israel was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, which ruled the region until the 20th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

See?? It existed well before 1948 Abu! Told you you're hopeless at rescripting history!

Bobby. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 6:24pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 4:03pm: The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British. - Abu History begs to differ with your interesting personal view. Hi Lisa, The Europeans have been killing Jews for at least the last 1000 years. Abu needs a history lesson.

Abu needs more than just a history lesson. He needs treatment for denial (of actual history). Rescripting history isn't one of his fortes Bobby.

He has attempted it a number of times .. never successfully though lol :)

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 6:39pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 6:24pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 4:03pm: The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British. - Abu History begs to differ with your interesting personal view. Hi Lisa, The Europeans have been killing Jews for at least the last 1000 years. Abu needs a history lesson. Abu needs more than just a history lesson. He needs treatment for denial (of actual history). Rescripting history isn't one of his fortes Bobby. He has attempted it a number of times .. never successfully though lol :)

Yes Lisa - I have corrected him countless times.
I don't know where he learnt history -
maybe from one of those Imams who had a biased view.
Most history can be found in simple online pages such as Wikipedia
where Abu would have a chance to edit it if he thought it was wrong.
I bet he would be soon banned for doing it.  :)

Bobby. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 6:44pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 6:39pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 6:24pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 4:03pm: The conflict did not begin until the early 20th. century when European Jews began writing books detailing their plan to expel the Arabs from their land and turn it into a Jewish state. When Britain invaded and occupied it during WWI that became a reality, and the conflict was born. This conflict is very recent, and it was specifically engineered by the British. - Abu History begs to differ with your interesting personal view. Hi Lisa, The Europeans have been killing Jews for at least the last 1000 years. Abu needs a history lesson. Abu needs more than just a history lesson. He needs treatment for denial (of actual history). Rescripting history isn't one of his fortes Bobby. He has attempted it a number of times .. never successfully though lol :) Yes Lisa - I have corrected him countless times. I don't know where he learnt history - maybe from one of those Imams who had a biased view. Most history can be found in simple online pages such as Wikipedia where Abu would have a chance to edit it if he thought it was wrong. I bet he would be soon banned for doing it.  :)

I've corrected him many times also Bobby.

It's a thankless task .. but well worth it lol :)

Quote:

See?? It existed well before 1948 Abu! Told you you're hopeless at rescripting history!

It existed, and then it ceased to exist, long long ago. In 1947, it did not exist, and hadn't existed for well over a millennium.

No independant soveriegn Jewish rule over the land has existed for well over 2000 years. And no vassal rule has been there since 135 C.E, and the vassal rule was only over a fraction of what they have today booted the Arabs out of.

Between 135 C.E and 1948, there was no Jewish rule of the land, do you deny this fact? It seems you can't even read what you posted:


Quote:

after the failure of the Bar Kokhba revolt against the Roman Empire in 132 CE. Nevertheless, Jewish presence in the Land of Israel remained continuous and the Galilee became its religious center. The Mishnah and part of the Talmud, central Jewish texts, were composed during the 2nd to 4th centuries CE in Tiberias and Jerusalem. Following years of persecution at the hands of Byzantine rulers, the Jews revolted in 610 CE, allying themselves with the Persian invaders. After capturing Jerusalem, the Persians and Jews killed thousands of Christians and destroyed many churches. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius recaptured Jerusalem in 628–629 CE, and was responsible for the massacre and expulsion of the Jews. During the initial Muslim conquests, in 635 CE, the Land of Israel, including Jerusalem, was captured from the Byzantine Empire. Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads, Abbasids, and Crusaders throughout the next six centuries, before falling in the hands of the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260. In 1516, the Land of Israel was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, which ruled the region until the 20th century.

Jewish presence is not a state. In the last Ottoman census, in the late 19th. century, Jews were no more than 2% of the population of the land, ie. about the same as Muslims are of Australia today.

Abu ... there has been a tug of war over the land of Israel .. ie the original homeland of the Jewish people for some time.

And the Jews have their homeland once more.

Deal with it.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 4:01pm:

Jews annoy Europeans -> Europeans gas Jews -> Europeans feel sorry for Jews, and thrust them upon Arabs -> Arabs end up in refugee camps and wanna blow Europeans up for causing all this tyranny..... - Abu Is that how it actually happened? Or is that how YOU PERSONALLY THINK it happened?

And it's such a shame that idea to create (or recreate) a jewish homeland in Palestine came into effect 17 years BEFORE the europeans did any gassing, isn't it Abu???
The Balfour Declaration was written in 1917 as well.

Even Napoleon Bonaparte had the idea, in 1799....

Quote:

Abu ... there has been a tug of war over the land of Israel .. ie the original homeland of the Jewish people for some time.

There's not one single instance of "tugging" during the entire 1200 years Muslims have ruled over it. The only "tugging" during that time was with your ancestors the Crusaders, and the Mongols.

It's quite sad that in 1260 C.E., thousands of Muslims laid down their lives to halt the Mongol onslaught, effectively preventing it from reaching Europe, and today the town where the epic battle of Ain Jalut occurred, where the saviour of East & West, Sayf ud-Deen Qutuz defeated the Mongol hordes and turned them back, Muslims are not even able to enter their own homes there.

The idea of a constant tug of war, which finally resulted in a partition is just fantasy. For the 1200 years Muslims ruled the land, and prior to that even, Jews were nothing in the land. they were a tiny minority, no more than Greeks or Persians. In fact for the past 2000 years, Arabs, even before Islam, have constituted the only continuous majority in the land, until the despicable expulsions in the 1940's and thereafter, continuing up until the very moment these words appear on your screen.

Quote:

And the Jews have their homeland once more.

No, they are squatting in someone else's land. And that someone else isn't going away until the squatters vacate.

It ceased to be their land long ago, thousands of years ago in fact. This kind of reasoning is like saying that in another 1200 years time, Muslims should goto Spain and boot the Spaniards out, because it was once our land.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 7:12pm:

Abu ... there has been a tug of war over the land of Israel .. ie the original homeland of the Jewish people for some time. And the Jews have their homeland once more. Deal with it.

Yes Abu,
The Jews were in Israel 2000 years ago - just read the Bible for some proof.
Didn't they crucify Christ?

Abu .. it's probably a good idea that you NOT read the Bible.

Why? Because what it says about the wonderful future of Israel .. the homeland of the Jewish people .. will depress you greatly.

Good night and sweet dreams :)

No, they are squatting in someone else's land. And that someone else isn't going away until the squatters vacate.

- Abu

No! The Jews are in THEIR original homeland.

And furthermore God states quite clearly in the Bible .. that it will remain THEIR homeland .. forever.

Now Abu .. I'm going to go to bed happy and comforted. Why? Because I know that the holy word of GOD will always supersede the unstable and nonsensical word of ABU.

Night and sweet dreams  xxx Lisa

Muslims should go to Spain and boot the Spaniards out, because it was once our land ???

- Abu

Huh? Just caught this nonsense on the way out.

Spain was never originally your land.

Likewise  .. the Jews are the original owners of their land.

And you keep bringing up this notion of squatters. You do realise that the Palestinians are the squatters HENCE why Israel is a nation state .. and Palestine isn't.

sighs

Anyways .. I'm off to bed .. I've taught you enough history for 1 night Abu.  

Going a bit off topic here, sorry, however I have to ask. Abu. it seems you were born in Australia and grew up with all the benefits that entails. So what has possessed you to embrace a religion that is the antithesis of all you grew up with?

bobby,


Quote:

Yes Abu, The Jews were in Israel 2000 years ago - just read the Bible for some proof.

Can you read? As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left, and for the past 2500 years have had no sovereign state there, and for the past 1800 years no state at all, and no sizable presence. That's the point here, in case you hadn't noticed.


Quote:

Didn't they crucify Christ?

Well they did incite it, but they didn't actually carry out the sentence, because they weren't the rulers of the land, the Romans were. This is all very well known fact, I can't believe you dead heads are here contesting it all. Honestly it's as tedious as trying to sweep a desert in a sandstorm.

Lisa,


Quote:

Abu .. it's probably a good idea that you NOT read the Bible.

Hold onto that thought...


Quote:

No! The Jews are in THEIR original homeland.

Obviously haven't read your own Bible have you? Never heard of a little place called Ur Kasdim? Strangely enough the Bible tells us it's the _original_ homeland of the Jews.


Quote:

And furthermore God states quite clearly in the Bible .. that it will remain THEIR homeland .. forever.

Well for most of their recorded history it hasn't been their homeland, so one would have to therefore call into account the authenticity of the Bible.


Quote:

Huh? Just caught this nonsense on the way out. Spain was never originally your land. Likewise  .. the Jews are the original owners of their land.

Again, don't seem too clued up on your own Bible. I'd suggest you go and have a little read about the Canaanites, Jebusites, Girgashites etc.


Quote:

You do realise that the Palestinians are the squatters HENCE why Israel is a nation state .. and Palestine isn't.

The simple fact is that Palestinians can trace their ancestry in the land back hundreds or thousands of years. About 95% of Jews cannot trace their ancestry in the land back more than 100 years... Most are quite obviously Russian, Ukrainian, English, Polish, German, American etc. they have no traceable origin in the land at all. They ARE squatters, and not native to the land.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 8^th, 2011 at 6:27pm:

Lisa, Quote: Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it. The country of Israel has been around for thousands of years. The Kingdom of Israel came to an end in the year 720 B.C.E. The Kingdom of Judah, its 'sister' kingdom survived it until about 586 B.C.E, at which point it also fell. In 539 B.C.E a token Kingdom of Judah was established by the Persians, and eventually changed hands to the Greeks, then the Romans. However after the Bar Kokhba revolt in the year 135 C.E, even the token kingdom was abolished and no Jewish state existed in the region, token or otherwise until 1948. Jews were dispersed in what is known as the diaspora all around the world, and had no more of a presence in their former homeland than they did in any other lands of the Middle East until the massive waves of illegal immigration in the early 20th. century, that led to the current mess, whereby they expelled people who have an UNBROKEN history in the land over 2500 years long. You seriously need a history lesson.

History is always good to learn Abu, but your the only one that has your version unfortunately, which seems to contradict the official version.
Perhaps you could publish your version though.
'World History according to Abu' would be a fitting title.
To be found in all good paper shops next to the Commando comics.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 7:09am:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 6:27pm: Lisa, Quote: Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it. The country of Israel has been around for thousands of years. The Kingdom of Israel came to an end in the year 720 B.C.E. The Kingdom of Judah, its 'sister' kingdom survived it until about 586 B.C.E, at which point it also fell. In 539 B.C.E a token Kingdom of Judah was established by the Persians, and eventually changed hands to the Greeks, then the Romans. However after the Bar Kokhba revolt in the year 135 C.E, even the token kingdom was abolished and no Jewish state existed in the region, token or otherwise until 1948. Jews were dispersed in what is known as the diaspora all around the world, and had no more of a presence in their former homeland than they did in any other lands of the Middle East until the massive waves of illegal immigration in the early 20th. century, that led to the current mess, whereby they expelled people who have an UNBROKEN history in the land over 2500 years long. You seriously need a history lesson. History is always good to learn Abu, but your the only one that has your version unfortunately, which seems to contradict the official version. Perhaps you could publish your version though. 'World History according to Abu' would be a fitting title. To be found in all good paper shops next to the Commando comics.

Actually the version Abu has described is the accurate version. When you say the 'official' version, you don't really mean the official version...do you. You actually mean the 'Zionist' version. Unfortunately for you, your zionist version is nothing but Zionist lies and fairy tales.

'A land without people, for a people without a land'. Sound familiar? Just one of many zionist lies that have been exposed.

Fact is that muslims ruled over Spain longer then Jews over Palestine, don't see you advocating the return of muslim rule over Spain.

Why is that??

Actually, no I don't mean the 'Zionist' version.
Do you see Zionists under the bed too?
I mean't the Western version.
And no, you wont hear any call for the Muslims to take back Spain.
Don't know whether you've noticed but the Muslim world as such is a bit of a basket case right now.

Abu,

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

Well that's news to me.
I think should publish that on Wikipedia.

Come on, all historical accounts (excepting the Zionist revisionist one) say the same thing regarding the Jews and their expulsion from their former land (long before the Muslims arrived) and their removal from power about 1000 years before that. There's even a word invented to describe the situation (diaspora). You people are as dense as osmium.

There's no arguing with an idiot, who doesn't even have the basic awareness to recognise when he's been blown away.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 5:35pm:

Come on, all historical accounts (excepting the Zionist revisionist one) say the same thing regarding the Jews and their expulsion from their former land (long before the Muslims arrived) and their removal from power about 1000 years before that. There's even a word invented to describe the situation (diaspora). You people are as dense as osmium. There's no arguing with an idiot, who doesn't even have the basic awareness to recognise when he's been blown away.

I can't fault anything you've said here.

Thanks Wes, glad to see I have at least one other rational human being here with me.

Abu's history of the Jews in Israel:

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel

Quote:

Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day)

Why would I need to edit it, when it clearly already says the same as what I've stated?

For example:

Quote:

and lost the Negev, the Shephelah, and part of the Judean hill country, including Hebron, to encroachments from Edom and other neighbours.

Not sure if you're aware, but that's about 75% of the total land that the Jews are today claiming. They lost it 2500 years ago, your own source clearly corroborates this, yet you just can't seem to even comprehend it.

This map of the Greek period clearly shows that over half of what they claim today was not under their puppet rule (as they were not independant sovereign rulers anyway).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/Hasmoneese_rijk.PNG/250px-Hasmoneese_rijk.PNG

And it quite clearly states that by the Byzantine period (320~ C.E) the region was called Palestine and was completely under Byzantine rule, there was no Jewish state left at all. They were just a tiny minority scattered around in a few little communities, whilst the bulk of the population were mostly Greeks & Arabs.


Quote:

Jews at this time in the province of Palestine were living under the rule of the Byzantines.. ..Jews still lived in at least forty-three Jewish communities in Palestine

When the Muslim empire came into existence, and it expanded north into Palestine, there was no mention of any Jewish state there. The Muslims encountered Romanised Arab Christians.


Quote:

In 638 CE the Byzantine Empire lost control of the Levant. The Arab Islamic Empire under Caliph Omar conquered Jerusalem and the lands of Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine and Egypt.

The nonsense like this: "According to Israeli historian Moshe Gil, at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish" that is sprinkled into that article is obviously completely contrary to all historical evidence of the time. Surely if there was a Jewish kingdom there, the Muslims would've noticed it  ;D


Quote:

In 1099, along with the other inhabitants of the land, the Jews vigorously defended Jerusalem against the Crusaders. When the city fell, the Crusaders gathered them in a synagogue and set it alight.

This is partially true, although probably quite overstated. The people who defended Jerusalem, and eventually liberated it again were Muslims, not Jews. Never heard of Salah-ud-deen (saladin)? Sorry, am I getting too historical for you now? When the crusaders arrived, they did indeed murder Jews, Muslims & Christians alike. And they all united together to try and fight off the crusader menace.


Quote:

Jews were not allowed to hold land in the Crusader period but concentrated their efforts on the commerce in the coastal towns during times of quiescence.

Interesting, they didn't hold any land, but they supposedly had a kingdom there  ;D


Quote:

In the years 1260-1516, Palestine was part of the Empire of the Mamluks who ruled first from Turkey

Really??? I thought it was ruled by Jews  ;D ;D ;D ;D

This statement is incorrect though, so I'll let you off on that one, since it's just completely unfactual that the Mamelukes ruled from Turkey. The Mamelukes were largely Turkic by ethnicity, but they most certainly never ruled from Turkey.

Zionist revisionists never worried about actual historical facts though.... And those who subscribe to their nonsense are not the brightest of sparks, so they'd never notice.


Quote:

A notable event during the period was the settlement of Nachmanides in the Old City of Jerusalem in 1267 which since then a continuous Jewish presence existed in Jerusalem until modern day occupation of Jordan in 194

Isn't this an admission there was no continuous Jewish presence in the city prior to that?

But it was under Jewish rule right?  ;D


Quote:

During the siege of Acre in 1799, Napoleon prepared a proclamation declaring a Jewish state in Israel, though he did not issue it.

How on earth could he do this??? Didn't anyone tell him there was already a Jewish state there, and had been all along? Poor Napoleon just had no idea did he?


Quote:

Between 1882 and 1948, a series of Jewish migrations to what is the modern nation of Israel, known as Aliyahs commenced. These migrations preceded the Zionist period.

Right... and that's how about 95% of Jews ended up in Palestine. They are recent illegal immigrant squatters, who booted others out of their homes. And they should go back to whence they came.

So Bobby... did you actually read your source before you posted it? doesn't seem like it to me.

Abu,

Quote:

So Bobby... did you actually read your source before you posted it? doesn't seem like it to me.

Don't shoot the messenger - get in there and edit it.
Wikipedia would appreciate your editing considering your great knowledge.

Abu - you are still missing my point.
Your history of Jews in Israel was a one liner:


Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

Now you are changing your story.
Which is the correct story?

Quote:

Don't shoot the messenger - get in there and edit it.

I used to care, and corrected a few articles many years ago, but there's little point. I'll let others battle it out and waste their time. Wikipedia has no final authority as a source anyway, it's merely a place, and arena for people to publish what they think is fact. It is still up for scrutiny. Clearly unfactual nonsense is definitely in there, but it's quite obvious since it has no source and disagrees completely with all known reported historical accounts (eg. "the Mamelukes ruled from Turkey").


Quote:

Abu - you are still missing my point. Your history of Jews in Israel was a one liner: Now you are changing your story. Which is the correct story?

I'm not changing anything, they quite clearly have had no sovereign state there for about 2500 years, and for the past 1850~ years, they had no state at all, token or otherwise. Your own article overtly states this, that the Byzantines, Muslims, Crusaders then Muslims again were the ones who've had states there during the past 1850~ years.

There's Muslims still in Spain today, does that mean we still have a state there? Is Spain still ours? Should we boot all Spaniards out of their homes and into refugee camps on the doorsteps of France and Italy?

Abu,

Quote:

they quite clearly have had no sovereign state there for about 2500 years, and for the past 1850~ years, they had no state at all, token or otherwise.

They do have a State now & the Arabs have been able to do nothing about it.
Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost.
Now it's time for everyone to get on with their lives.

What you're saying is the same as -
The Aboriginals here should now be our rulers & own all our houses & land.

The Maoris in New Zealand should own everything there & kick out all the whites.

The Red Indians in the USA should kick out all the Yanks.

etc etc

You're just living in a dream world Abu.

Quote:

Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost.

Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce.

Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)...

We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts.

Quote:

What you're saying is the same as - The Aboriginals here should now be our rulers & own all our houses & land. The Maoris in New Zealand should own everything there & kick out all the whites. The Red Indians in the USA should kick out all the Yanks. etc etc You're just living in a dream world Abu

Why shouldn't they? Why should they have had their land thieved from them by the British?

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 8:39pm:

Quote: What you're saying is the same as - The Aboriginals here should now be our rulers & own all our houses & land. The Maoris in New Zealand should own everything there & kick out all the whites. The Red Indians in the USA should kick out all the Yanks. etc etc You're just living in a dream world Abu Why shouldn't they? Why should they have had their land thieved from them by the British?

Because they were conquered.
I'd like to see an Abo push you out of your home with a spear  ;D

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 8:37pm:

Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts.

I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ?

I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is.

Abu,

Quote:

We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts.

If Israel was ever invaded there would be a nuclear sting in their tail.
They hold nuclear annihilation over the heads of all Arabs.

It's a no win situation Abu - get over it.

Belgarion wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 8:50pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is.

And which army would that be? Israels?

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 8:50pm:

Abu, Quote: We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. If Israel was ever invaded there would be a nuclear sting in their tail. They hold nuclear annihilation over the heads of all Arabs. It's a no win situation Abu - get over it.

Israel nuking the wailing wall...now that I'd like to see.

We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts.

- Abu

Well you personally won't live long enough to see that.

GOD in the Holy Bible states that Israel will be an established state for ever once the Jews have been returned to their original homeland ISRAEL (which happened in 1948).

Deal with it Abu!

Oh and stop attempting to rescript history on this forum everyday .. it only makes you look more stupid and desperate than ever.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 7:09am:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 8th, 2011 at 6:27pm: Lisa, Quote: Go back a bit further .. there's no need to pretend Israel never existed before 1948. Oh and you should stop rescripting history Abu .. you've never been good at it. The country of Israel has been around for thousands of years. The Kingdom of Israel came to an end in the year 720 B.C.E. The Kingdom of Judah, its 'sister' kingdom survived it until about 586 B.C.E, at which point it also fell. In 539 B.C.E a token Kingdom of Judah was established by the Persians, and eventually changed hands to the Greeks, then the Romans. However after the Bar Kokhba revolt in the year 135 C.E, even the token kingdom was abolished and no Jewish state existed in the region, token or otherwise until 1948. Jews were dispersed in what is known as the diaspora all around the world, and had no more of a presence in their former homeland than they did in any other lands of the Middle East until the massive waves of illegal immigration in the early 20th. century, that led to the current mess, whereby they expelled people who have an UNBROKEN history in the land over 2500 years long. You seriously need a history lesson. History is always good to learn Abu, but your the only one that has your version unfortunately, which seems to contradict the official version. Perhaps you could publish your version though. 'World History according to Abu' would be a fitting title. To be found in all good paper shops next to the Commando comics.

WELL SAID! ONYA CHICKEN lol !!!

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 7:12pm:

Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: Quote: As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel [quote]Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day)

[/quote]


GOOD STUFF BOBBY!!

The fact remains .. whilst Abu spends all day and night on this forum saying whatever he dreams up and imagines (and that is all he has been posting in here thus far) .. the Jews have returned to THEIR ORIGINAL HOMELAND once more as per God's Holy Word  .. which also states that their homeland Israel will last forever.


Last time I checked .. forever was a very LONG time lol :)

Lestat wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 8:25am:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is. And which army would that be? Israels?

No. Egypts actually.

....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory?

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 9:56am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 7:12pm: Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: Quote: As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel [quote]Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day)

GOOD STUFF BOBBY!!

The fact remains .. whilst Abu spends all day and night on this forum saying whatever he dreams up and imagines (and that is all he has been posting in here thus far) .. the Jews have returned to THEIR ORIGINAL HOMELAND once more as per God's Holy Word  .. which also states that their homeland Israel will last forever.


Last time I checked .. forever was a very LONG time lol :)[/quote]

Thanks Lisa,
Abu is an intelligent guy but he has a habit of throwing ridiculous one liners into his posts e.g.

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate.
e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do.
Otherwise his whole section on Islam is becoming nothing more than pub talk.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 9:56am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 7:12pm: Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: Quote: As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel [quote]Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day)

GOOD STUFF BOBBY!!

The fact remains .. whilst Abu spends all day and night on this forum saying whatever he dreams up and imagines (and that is all he has been posting in here thus far) .. the Jews have returned to THEIR ORIGINAL HOMELAND once more as per God's Holy Word  .. which also states that their homeland Israel will last forever.


Last time I checked .. forever was a very LONG time lol :)[/quote]


hahaha...well if it's in the bible it MUST be true!

;D ;D ;D ;D

Bobby. wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:19am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 9:56am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 7:12pm: Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: Quote: As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel [quote]Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day) GOOD STUFF BOBBY!! The fact remains .. whilst Abu spends all day and night on this forum saying whatever he dreams up and imagines (and that is all he has been posting in here thus far) .. the Jews have returned to THEIR ORIGINAL HOMELAND once more as per God's Holy Word  .. which also states that their homeland Israel will last forever. Last time I checked .. forever was a very LONG time lol :)

Thanks Lisa,
Abu is an intelligent guy but he has a habit of throwing ridiculous one liners into his posts e.g.

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate.
e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do.
Otherwise his whole section on Islam is becoming nothing more than pub talk.

[/quote]

It isn't gonna happen.

FD and I have been through this road with him a few times before.

I'm pretty sure denial is at the core of all Abu's troubles.

Poor sod! He has my pity these days.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:16am:

....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory?

Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague.
Otherwise it's just banter.
And I'm assuming that 'Occupied Palestinian' land you are referring to is the West Bank.
If this is so, the Israeli's seized that land in the West Bank in 1948 off the Jordanians,  who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans, who got it off the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians etc.
Perhaps the Jordanians should have learnt to make war better when attacking their neighbor.
In fact you might be better off calling Jordan 'Occupied Palestinian' land as this countries population is actually 60% Palestinian.
And the Arab League actually gave their opinion of the proposed 2 state solution way back in 1948, when they attacked Israel and were repulsed.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:53am:

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:16am: ....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory? Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague. Otherwise it's just banter. And I'm assuming that 'Occupied Palestinian' land you are referring to is the West Bank. If this is so, the Israeli's seized that land in the West Bank in 1948 off the Jordanians,  who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans, who got it off the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians etc. Perhaps the Jordanians should have learnt to make war better when attacking their neighbor. In fact you might be better off calling Jordan 'Occupied Palestinian' land as this countries population is actually 60% Palestinian. And the Arab League actually gave their opinion of the proposed 2 state solution way back in 1948, when they attacked Israel and were repulsed.

Well said!

bobby,


Quote:

Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate. e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do.

Your own sources already proved it. I don't need to quote and link when you already provided the source, not even having the requisite intellect to realise it.

chicken,


Quote:

who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans

I don't mean to upset your applecart by actually adding some historical accuracy to your point, but the Ottomans did not get it off the Romans. The Ottomans absorbed the Mameluke Sultanate, which had grown out of the Ayyubid Sultanate which had expelled the Crusaders who were temporarily occupying it. the Romans (Byzantines actually) held it prior to the arrival of Islam, but the kings of the land were Romanised Arabs.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 6:32pm:

bobby, Quote: Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate. e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do. Your own sources already proved it. I don't need to quote and link when you already provided the source, not even having the requisite intellect to realise it.

What does the " it " refer to?
This - referring to Jews in Israel?

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

My link does not prove that.

As for requisite intellect - you're just being stubborn when caught out
with another one of your ridiculous one-liners.

Look bobby, the fact is Jews ceased ruling independently over the land 2500+ years ago, and as of 1850 years ago they were reduced to nothing but a tiny minority with no rulership at all. when the Muslims arrived there were no more Jews there than there was Jews in Arabia or Iraq or Egypt etc. This is simple historical fact you just can't seem to grasp, and your own links corroborate it. I'm not going to bother repeating it over and over, because you didn't comprehend it the first time. You are the one being stubborn here, stubbornly refusing to accept well established historical facts.

You're a sore loser, plain and simple.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:53am:

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:16am: ....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory? Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague. Otherwise it's just banter. And I'm assuming that 'Occupied Palestinian' land you are referring to is the West Bank. If this is so, the Israeli's seized that land in the West Bank in 1948 off the Jordanians,  who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans, who got it off the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians etc. Perhaps the Jordanians should have learnt to make war better when attacking their neighbor. In fact you might be better off calling Jordan 'Occupied Palestinian' land as this countries population is actually 60% Palestinian. And the Arab League actually gave their opinion of the proposed 2 state solution way back in 1948, when they attacked Israel and were repulsed.

What boundaries did Israel agree to in 1948?
Why hasnt Israel retreated to pre 1967 boundaries as required by UN resolutions and the UN charter of the rigth of return.

(Surely you are kidding about the nature of the many Israeli the war crimes carried out by the IDF in occupied Palestinian territory? These are on the public record)  

Quote:

Surely you are kidding about the nature of the many Israeli the war crimes carried out by the IDF in occupied Palestinian territory? These are on the public record?

It's interesting that even though they appointed a Zionist Jewish judge to head the U.N report into war crimes during the invasion of Gaza, evidence of war crimes were still discovered, and they still didn't accept it...

It's illustrative of the entire conflict, even though the media and the superpowers are incredibly pro-Zionist, they still claim the whole world is against them.


Quote:

What boundaries did Israel agree to in 1948?

They agreed to any borders anyone would give them, because effectively the Jews were going from 0% of a country to > 0%... surely a profitable gain.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

Quote: Surely you are kidding about the nature of the many Israeli the war crimes carried out by the IDF in occupied Palestinian territory? These are on the public record? It's interesting that even though they appointed a Zionist Jewish judge to head the U.N report into war crimes during the invasion of Gaza, evidence of war crimes were still discovered, and they still didn't accept it... It's illustrative of the entire conflict, even though the media and the superpowers are incredibly pro-Zionist, they still claim the whole world is against them. [quote]What boundaries did Israel agree to in 1948?

They agreed to any borders anyone would give them, because effectively the Jews were going from 0% of a country to > 0%... surely a profitable gain.[/quote]

Well if that is the case then Israeli borders should be set along 1948 guidelines. Security barriers dismantled. And most importanlty a recognition that Palestine has a right to exist. Compensation can be worked out by the legal system.

I dont see what the problem is here.

It canbe simply and quickly resolved - provided the USA takes no part in any peace process (I think they have done enough damage in the region on behalf of their corporate masters)

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

It's interesting that even though they appointed a Zionist Jewish judge to head the U.N report into war crimes during the invasion of Gaza, evidence of war crimes were still discovered, and they still didn't accept it...

Youre joking right? You mean that GOldsteen report? I though he was a South African? CHosen to be impartial

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:53am:

[quote author=Foolosophy link=1299483524/60#62 date=1299716166]....Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague.

Are violations of the 4th Geneva Convention considered war cirmes?

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 6:32pm:

bobby, Quote: Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate. e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do. Your own sources already proved it. I don't need to quote and link when you already provided the source, not even having the requisite intellect to realise it. chicken, [quote]who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans

I don't mean to upset your applecart by actually adding some historical accuracy to your point, but the Ottomans did not get it off the Romans. The Ottomans absorbed the Mameluke Sultanate, which had grown out of the Ayyubid Sultanate which had expelled the Crusaders who were temporarily occupying it. the Romans (Byzantines actually) held it prior to the arrival of Islam, but the kings of the land were Romanised Arabs.[/quote]

Thank you Abu, I knew there was a few more in my list.

Belgarion wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:08am:

Lestat wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 8:25am: Belgarion wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is. And which army would that be? Israels? No. Egypts actually.

I suggest you go back and study your history. What combat experience did the Egyptian military have pre-47?

The Jordanian military was really the only true competition the Jews faced, and they were trained and controlled by the British (The jordanian Foriegn Legion).

Different sides of the same coin really.

The Jews were better armed (by the French and US), better trained (by the US and French), and had better financial backing (US dollars, as well as major players such as the Rothschilds, JP Morgan).

The wars were a farce, a carefully staged facade designed to give Israel some semblence of credibility.

When Islam rises, and muslims truly fight for the sake of Allah and our brothers in Palestine, Israel will have no hope.

The only thing going for the zionists is that we will show them far more mercy then they have showed the Palestinians.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 8:08pm:

Look bobby, the fact is Jews ceased ruling independently over the land 2500+ years ago, and as of 1850 years ago they were reduced to nothing but a tiny minority with no rulership at all.

They were slaughtered by the millions - true but some always remained.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel

Quote:

Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) Judeans continued to live in their land in significant numbers, and were allowed to practice their religion, until the 2nd century when Julius Severus ravaged Judea while putting down the Bar Kokhba revolt. 985 villages were destroyed. Banished from Jerusalem, the Jewish population now centred on Galilee. In the Byzantine period (324-638) In 438, The Empress Eudocia removed the ban on Jews' praying at the Temple site In 613, a Jewish revolt against the Byzantine Empire coming into aid of the Persian invaders erupted. The Jews gained autonomy in Jerusalem for 5 years but were frustrated with its limitations. Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish.[27] In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In 1099, along with the other inhabitants of the land, the Jews vigorously defended Jerusalem against the Crusaders. At this time there were Jewish communities scattered all over the country, including Jerusalem, Tiberias, Ramleh, Ashkelon, Caesarea, and Gaza. In the Mamluk period (1260-1517)Jews suffered persecution and humiliation but the surviving records cite at least 30 Jewish urban and rural communities at the opening of the 16th century. In 1488 Obadiah ben Abraham, commentator on the Mishnah, arrived in Jerusalem and marked a new epoch for the Jewish community in The Land. In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) The 8,000 or 10,000 Jews in Safed in 1555 grew to 20,000 or 30,000 by the end of the century. In 1577, A Hebrew printing press was established in Safed. It's the first press in Palestine and the first in Asia. In 1660, the events surrounding the arrival of the self-proclaimed Messiah Sabbatai Zevi, causes the massacre of the Jews in Safed and Jerusalem. During the siege of Acre in 1799, Napoleon prepared a proclamation declaring a Jewish state in Israel, The connection of the Jewish people to the land was kept strongly.

Abu's history of the Jews in Israel:

Quote:

As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 7:27am:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 6:32pm: bobby, Quote: Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate. e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do. Your own sources already proved it. I don't need to quote and link when you already provided the source, not even having the requisite intellect to realise it. chicken, [quote]who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans I don't mean to upset your applecart by actually adding some historical accuracy to your point, but the Ottomans did not get it off the Romans. The Ottomans absorbed the Mameluke Sultanate, which had grown out of the Ayyubid Sultanate which had expelled the Crusaders who were temporarily occupying it. the Romans (Byzantines actually) held it prior to the arrival of Islam, but the kings of the land were Romanised Arabs.

Thank you Abu, I knew there was a few more in my list.[/quote]

lol, you should thank Abu more often, its quite a common occurance where I see him correcting you.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 9:09pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:53am: [quote author=Foolosophy link=1299483524/60#62 date=1299716166]....Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague. Are violations of the 4th Geneva Convention considered war cirmes?

The victorious never commit war crimes, its only the defeated enemy.

Besides, whats the use of having laws against 'war crimes' when certain countries can just 'veto' any decisions made.

International law is a joke, and when this facade (as well as the UN) is destroyed, only then will world affairs improve.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 10:44am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:19am: Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 9:56am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 7:12pm: Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: Quote: As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left The history of the Jews -  on Wikipedia -   that Abu is welcome to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel [quote]Origins of Israel and Judah (1200-586 BCE) Babylonian exile, The Return to Zion and the Persian rule (538-332 BCE) Hellenistic period (332-37 BCE) Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) In the Byzantine period (324-638) Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In the Mamluk period (1260-1517) In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) British Mandate (1917-1948) 1948 Arab-Israeli War The modern nation of Israel (1948–present day) GOOD STUFF BOBBY!! The fact remains .. whilst Abu spends all day and night on this forum saying whatever he dreams up and imagines (and that is all he has been posting in here thus far) .. the Jews have returned to THEIR ORIGINAL HOMELAND once more as per God's Holy Word  .. which also states that their homeland Israel will last forever. Last time I checked .. forever was a very LONG time lol :) Thanks Lisa, Abu is an intelligent guy but he has a habit of throwing ridiculous one liners into his posts e.g. [quote]As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate.
e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do.
Otherwise his whole section on Islam is becoming nothing more than pub talk.

[/quote]

It isn't gonna happen.

FD and I have been through this road with him a few times before.

I'm pretty sure denial is at the core of all Abu's troubles.

Poor sod! He has my pity these days.
[/quote]

lol @ Lisa.

Abu has made you look the fool you are numerous times. And the funniest thing is...you don't even know it.

Keep it up Lisa...if anything you are good entertainment value. :D

Lestat.

Quote:

lol @ Lisa. Abu has made you look the fool you are numerous times. And the funniest thing is...you don't even know it. Keep it up Lisa...if anything you are good entertainment value.

Leave Lisa alone - she's a good person -  you bully.

Lestat wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 8:28am:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:08am: Lestat wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 8:25am: Belgarion wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is. And which army would that be? Israels? No. Egypts actually. I suggest you go back and study your history. What combat experience did the Egyptian military have pre-47? The Jordanian military was really the only true competition the Jews faced, and they were trained and controlled by the British (The jordanian Foriegn Legion). Different sides of the same coin really. The Jews were better armed (by the French and US), better trained (by the US and French), and had better financial backing (US dollars, as well as major players such as the Rothschilds, JP Morgan). The wars were a farce, a carefully staged facade designed to give Israel some semblence of credibility. When Islam rises, and muslims truly fight for the sake of Allah and our brothers in Palestine, Israel will have no hope. The only thing going for the zionists is that we will show them far more mercy then they have showed the Palestinians.

Before the Six Day War  Egypt deployed some 100,000 troops, of whom around 30,000 had previous combat experience in Yemen.  If you are talking about the 1948 war then I will agree that the Israelis were better trained and equipped. However this only shows that in 60 odd years the Arabs have learned nothing.

All these boasts of driving the jews into the sea are not worth a pinch of sh@t as the Arabs have failed in every attempt to do so, in spite of the lavish amounts of equipment and training provided by the Eastern Bloc.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10^th, 2011 at 8:30pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:53am: Foolosophy wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:16am: ....and how exaclty is all this Historical banter relevant to the Israeli war crimes carreid out on occupied Palestinian territory? Well, if you have any evidence of Israeli war crimes carried out anywhere, you better let someone know in the Hague. Otherwise it's just banter. And I'm assuming that 'Occupied Palestinian' land you are referring to is the West Bank. If this is so, the Israeli's seized that land in the West Bank in 1948 off the Jordanians,  who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans, who got it off the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians etc. Perhaps the Jordanians should have learnt to make war better when attacking their neighbor. In fact you might be better off calling Jordan 'Occupied Palestinian' land as this countries population is actually 60% Palestinian. And the Arab League actually gave their opinion of the proposed 2 state solution way back in 1948, when they attacked Israel and were repulsed. What boundaries did Israel agree to in 1948? Why hasnt Israel retreated to pre 1967 boundaries as required by UN resolutions and the UN charter of the rigth of return. (Surely you are kidding about the nature of the many Israeli the war crimes carried out by the IDF in occupied Palestinian territory? These are on the public record)

Agree, there was no agreement.
Israel got what it was given.
The bounderies were established by the UN in 1948 which included land allocated for Palestine, and it was those bounderies set during the time of Partition that the Arab League took exception to, and attacked Israel with the intent of reclaiming all the territory.
If those Arabs succeeded in destroying that fledgling Israel, would there be one today do you think?
And why on earth would Israel ever retreat to the 1967 borders?
Those countries which attacked Israel again in 1967 after 1956 and 1948 should have been happy Israel settled for what it did.
If Israel was overrun in 1967, would the Arabs have handed the land back or would Jordan, Syria and Egypt have kept the land for themselves?
So take your pick because I don't believe for one moment they would have handed the land back to Israel and the UN would have done what they always do, nothing.
Do you honestly think they would have established a 'Palestine', because they had thousands of years to do this and never did let alone speak or write about this.
The Ottomans certainly never did.
Handing back those territories only places Israel's major cities closer to former and potential enemies, and those countries rolled the dice of war four times and lost every time.
It's called the spoils of war.
And as far as the 'Palestinians territories are concerned, I guess where some would call something a war crime, others would call it war.
Some would call firing missiles into Israel's towns or blowing up schoolbuses and seaside cafeteria's a war crime too, but none outside Israel discuss those things.
And whether you like it or not, the only democratic country in the Middle East, Israel, has a right to defend itself and yes innocents are hurt in war.
The days are 66 long years gone where the Jews used to line up naked in the snow and shuffle off silently to the 'showers' to be sent up the chimney, whilst the Mufti of Jeruselem supplied men to serve Hitler.

Lestat wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 8:28am:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:08am: Lestat wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 8:25am: Belgarion wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is. And which army would that be? Israels? No. Egypts actually. I suggest you go back and study your history. What combat experience did the Egyptian military have pre-47? The Jordanian military was really the only true competition the Jews faced, and they were trained and controlled by the British (The jordanian Foriegn Legion). Different sides of the same coin really. The Jews were better armed (by the French and US), better trained (by the US and French), and had better financial backing (US dollars, as well as major players such as the Rothschilds, JP Morgan). The wars were a farce, a carefully staged facade designed to give Israel some semblence of credibility. When Islam rises, and muslims truly fight for the sake of Allah and our brothers in Palestine, Israel will have no hope. The only thing going for the zionists is that we will show them far more mercy then they have showed the Palestinians.

Who is 'We'?
How about how the Muslim brothers treat there own.
The Jordanians slaughtered thousands upon thousands during the Black September Massacres in 1970, and recently tore up all dual Palestinian / Jordnaian passports because they don't want any more of them, despite Jordan's population being 60% Palestinian.
The Lebanese treat Palestinians as 3rd class citizens by keeping them behind razor wire, and heavily restricting employment opportunities.
The Egyptians would rather deal with Israel and keep Palestinians out of Egypt.
The Saudi's treat them as low paid coolies.
The Iraqi's deported them by the thousands 2 or 3 years ago.
And you are dreaming if you think those 4 Arab / Israeli Wars were stage managed.
It was war, and men died by the thousands and the Arab League were not 'acting' like they were in some school play.
And if those that died were here today, they would not agree with your assessment either.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 8:29am:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 8:08pm: Look bobby, the fact is Jews ceased ruling independently over the land 2500+ years ago, and as of 1850 years ago they were reduced to nothing but a tiny minority with no rulership at all. They were slaughtered by the millions - true but some always remained. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_Land_of_Israel Quote: Under Roman rule (37 BCE-324 CE) Judeans continued to live in their land in significant numbers, and were allowed to practice their religion, until the 2nd century when Julius Severus ravaged Judea while putting down the Bar Kokhba revolt. 985 villages were destroyed. Banished from Jerusalem, the Jewish population now centred on Galilee. In the Byzantine period (324-638) In 438, The Empress Eudocia removed the ban on Jews' praying at the Temple site In 613, a Jewish revolt against the Byzantine Empire coming into aid of the Persian invaders erupted. The Jews gained autonomy in Jerusalem for 5 years but were frustrated with its limitations. Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish.[27] In the Crusaders period (1099-1260) In 1099, along with the other inhabitants of the land, the Jews vigorously defended Jerusalem against the Crusaders. At this time there were Jewish communities scattered all over the country, including Jerusalem, Tiberias, Ramleh, Ashkelon, Caesarea, and Gaza. In the Mamluk period (1260-1517)Jews suffered persecution and humiliation but the surviving records cite at least 30 Jewish urban and rural communities at the opening of the 16th century. In 1488 Obadiah ben Abraham, commentator on the Mishnah, arrived in Jerusalem and marked a new epoch for the Jewish community in The Land. In the Ottoman period (1517-1917) The 8,000 or 10,000 Jews in Safed in 1555 grew to 20,000 or 30,000 by the end of the century. In 1577, A Hebrew printing press was established in Safed. It's the first press in Palestine and the first in Asia. In 1660, the events surrounding the arrival of the self-proclaimed Messiah Sabbatai Zevi, causes the massacre of the Jews in Safed and Jerusalem. During the siege of Acre in 1799, Napoleon prepared a proclamation declaring a Jewish state in Israel, The connection of the Jewish people to the land was kept strongly. Abu's history of the Jews in Israel: [quote]As has been stated, they were there 2000 years ago, but they left

[/quote]


Thank you Bobby, you made the point well.

Chicken,

Quote:

Thank you Bobby, you made the point well.

Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners
on this forum to re-write history.

Lestat wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 8:29am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 7:27am: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 6:32pm: bobby, Quote: Abu - as the moderator should set the standard for debate. e.g  quote + link to verify it. It's not that hard to do. Your own sources already proved it. I don't need to quote and link when you already provided the source, not even having the requisite intellect to realise it. chicken, [quote]who got it off the British, who got it off the Ottomans, who got it off the Romans I don't mean to upset your applecart by actually adding some historical accuracy to your point, but the Ottomans did not get it off the Romans. The Ottomans absorbed the Mameluke Sultanate, which had grown out of the Ayyubid Sultanate which had expelled the Crusaders who were temporarily occupying it. the Romans (Byzantines actually) held it prior to the arrival of Islam, but the kings of the land were Romanised Arabs. Thank you Abu, I knew there was a few more in my list.

lol, you should thank Abu more often, its quite a common occurance where I see him correcting you. [/quote]

Yes he did a very good job in proving my point better.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 10:06am:

Chicken, Quote: Thank you Bobby, you made the point well. Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners on this forum to re-write history.

How can Abu explain this?

Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099)
at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE,

the majority of the population was Jewish.

Lestat wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 8:28am:

When Islam rises, and muslims truly fight for the sake of Allah and our brothers in Palestine, Israel will have no hope.

Those armies that attacked Israel in 1948, 1956, 1967 & 1973 weren't fighting for any 'brothers' in Palestine.
They attacked to kill Jews and wipe Israel off the map, and steal the land for themselves.
They couldn't give a crap for Palestinian brotherhood then, and they still treat them like lepers today.
If they were so interested in their 'brothers' in Palestine having their own nation state, they had twelve or so hundred years to establish this.
But of course the term 'Palestinian' is a twentieth century invention which explains why Palestine was never formed as a nation state during this time.
And as for Islam rising and destroying Israel, this has been tried four times before with total failure.
And today Israel has the 'bomb' if some are to be beleived.
I would suggest Islam has seen enough of 100's of 1000's of their young men crispy fried, lying on the desert floor in twisted metal which was once tanks & aircraft in those four wars.
Today, most of Israel's former enemies would rather trade  than make war.
And Israel remains the centre piece of modern invention in the entire Middle East with which these Islamic nations deal with.
The Muslims in Israel also enjoy the highest standard of living, so you wont find many outside of the extremist nations calling for Israel's destruction.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 11:35am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 10:06am: Chicken, Quote: Thank you Bobby, you made the point well. Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners on this forum to re-write history. How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish.

I think you will find Abu prefers his own history book that he wrote rather than the official version.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 11:52am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 11:35am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 10:06am: Chicken, Quote: Thank you Bobby, you made the point well. Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners on this forum to re-write history. How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish. I think you will find Abu prefers his own history book that he wrote rather than the official version.

With Allah's will he will apologise.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 12:05pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 11:52am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 11:35am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 10:06am: Chicken, Quote: Thank you Bobby, you made the point well. Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners on this forum to re-write history. How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish. I think you will find Abu prefers his own history book that he wrote rather than the official version. With Allah's will he will apologise.

Possibly when it snows in Mecca Bobby.

Belgarion wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 9:00am:

Lestat wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 8:28am: Belgarion wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 10:08am: Lestat wrote on Mar 10th, 2011 at 8:25am: Belgarion wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9th, 2011 at 8:37pm: Quote: Even when the Arabs attacked from all sides at once they still lost. Yeh right... you mean when the only actual trained army was the Jordanians, and they were commanded by British officers? Yeh they really lost.... If anyone lost, it was the British, but it was quite obviously all a farce. Let us see when the puppet regimes are all swept out, and the Muslims gain back control of their countries from the Western puppets (something they haven't had since Ottoman times)... We'll see how long 'Israel' lasts. I assume you don't consider an army some 100,000 strong, 30,000 with previous combat experience, equipped with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft to be an 'actual, trained army' ? I would be interested in what your definition of a trained army is. And which army would that be? Israels? No. Egypts actually. I suggest you go back and study your history. What combat experience did the Egyptian military have pre-47? The Jordanian military was really the only true competition the Jews faced, and they were trained and controlled by the British (The jordanian Foriegn Legion). Different sides of the same coin really. The Jews were better armed (by the French and US), better trained (by the US and French), and had better financial backing (US dollars, as well as major players such as the Rothschilds, JP Morgan). The wars were a farce, a carefully staged facade designed to give Israel some semblence of credibility. When Islam rises, and muslims truly fight for the sake of Allah and our brothers in Palestine, Israel will have no hope. The only thing going for the zionists is that we will show them far more mercy then they have showed the Palestinians. Before the Six Day War  Egypt deployed some 100,000 troops, of whom around 30,000 had previous combat experience in Yemen.  If you are talking about the 1948 war then I will agree that the Israelis were better trained and equipped. However this only shows that in 60 odd years the Arabs have learned nothing. All these boasts of driving the jews into the sea are not worth a pinch of sh@t as the Arabs have failed in every attempt to do so, in spite of the lavish amounts of equipment and training provided by the Eastern Bloc.

I suggest you re-read Abu's post. The topic was the 48 war, not 67.

Lestat wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 2:56pm:

I suggest you re-read Abu's post. The topic was the 48 war, not 67.

Sorry. The Arabs have lost so many wars it's hard to keep track.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 2:28pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 12:05pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 11:52am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 11:35am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 11th, 2011 at 10:06am: Chicken, Quote: Thank you Bobby, you made the point well. Thankyou - all I want is for Abu to apologise for using cheap one liners on this forum to re-write history. How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish. I think you will find Abu prefers his own history book that he wrote rather than the official version. With Allah's will he will apologise. Possibly when it snows in Mecca Bobby.

Chicken - with God's will anything is possible.
If Allah commanded that snow would fall in Mecca then it would.  ;)

Lestat, to be perfectly honest...IF Israel disappeared tomorrow, the 'Arab World' would destroy itself within a decade...

All the various Arab countries hate each other...ALMOST as much as they hate Israel and the Jews...
If Israel didn't exist, they'd wipe each other out inside of one generation....

Quote:

How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish.

Sounds like this is one of the "Mamelukes ruled from Turkey" claims. When the Muslims arrived in Palestine, they wrote about a Byzantine Christian land. There were no historical accounts of it being majority Jewish, this is pure Zionist fantasy. If, however, you can bring a relevant reference _from_ the time period in question, then you might have something to stand on. Merely reposting an unauthenticated wiki-claim is not going to cut it I'm sorry, when all known historical records tell a completely different story.

Surely if there were any Jewish state, or a majority Jewish population there when the Muslims arrived, then it would've been documented somewhere, something like that is kinda hard to miss. The Islamic Caliphate was always meticulous in keeping records, and they fairly regularly completed censuses, yet there's no record of a Jewish majority there ever until the massive illegal population saturations of the 20th. century, known in Hebrew as Aliyahs.

Even in the late 1800's when the illegal Jewish immigration had already begun, Jews were still less than 2% of the population... And there's no record of any great mass exodus of Jews from the land, except after their final defeat at Masada, about 1800+ years ago, as I've already stated.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 7:06pm:

Quote: How can Abu explain this? Under the Islamic Empire (638-1099) at the time of the Arab conquest in 7th century CE, the majority of the population was Jewish. Sounds like this is one of the "Mamelukes ruled from Turkey" claims. When the Muslims arrived in Palestine, they wrote about a Byzantine Christian land. There were no historical accounts of it being majority Jewish, this is pure Zionist fantasy. If, however, you can bring a relevant reference _from_ the time period in question, then you might have something to stand on. Merely reposting an unauthenticated wiki-claim is not going to cut it I'm sorry, when all known historical records tell a completely different story. Surely if there were any Jewish state, or a majority Jewish population there when the Muslims arrived, then it would've been documented somewhere, something like that is kinda hard to miss. The Islamic Caliphate was always meticulous in keeping records, and they fairly regularly completed censuses, yet there's no record of a Jewish majority there ever until the massive illegal population saturations of the 20th. century, known in Hebrew as Aliyahs. Even in the late 1800's when the illegal Jewish immigration had already begun, Jews were still less than 2% of the population... And there's no record of any great mass exodus of Jews from the land, except after their final defeat at Masada, about 1800+ years ago, as I've already stated.

That quote was referenced at the bottom of the page on Wiki. to number 27:


Quote:

^ Moshe Gil, "A History of Palestine: 634-1099"

I suppose you would have to read his book.
I don't know if it's online.

Btw, here's a few nice quotes from wikipedia about the Jews in Palestine after the Roman period:


Quote:

Eventually, the Jews rose against Roman rule in 66 CE in a revolt that was unsuccessful. Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 CE and much of the population was killed or enslaved

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea)


Quote:

The Jews rebelled again 70 years later under the leadership of Simon bar Kokhba and established the last Kingdom of Israel, which lasted three years, before the Romans managed to conquer the province for good, at a high cost in terms of manpower and expense.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea)


Quote:

The Romans vanquished the Galilee, and an estimated 100,000 Jews were killed or sold into slavery.

(http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/revolt.html)


Quote:

It is estimated that as many as one million Jews died in the Great Revolt against Rome.

(http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/revolt.html)


Quote:

When people today speak of the almost two-thousand-year span of Jewish homelessness and exile, they are dating it from the failure of the revolt and the destruction of the Temple

(http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/revolt.html)

It's hard to fathom that well over a million Jews were murdered and sold off into slavery or fled, yet they remained a majority in the land. Also that last quote clearly admits they've been exiled from the land for 2000 years, precisely as I stated.

Why on earth you still can't comprehend this is beyond me. Personally I thought it was a part of common general knowledge the Jews were exiled from their former land, into the "diaspora". Seems now that it's become politically advantageous to claim otherwise, the Zionists have begun doing so, not realising it goes against all historical records for the past 2000 years.

Nevermind though, when they've only got idiots such as yourself to convince, they're on a winner no matter what garbage they concoct.

Quote:

That quote was referenced at the bottom of the page on Wiki. to number 27: Quote: ^ Moshe Gil, "A History of Palestine: 634-1099"

Yeh, referenced to a fantasy Zionist propaganda book, sounds quite authentic.

So we've got hundreds of thousands of historical documents from all around Palestine from that time until now which shows us Jews were a tiny minority, compared to one book written by a Zionist Jew in the past 50 years.... yes it's very hard to discern fact from fiction isn't it?

Abu,
Don't shoot the messenger.
If I am wrong it's because  Moshe Gil wrote lies in his book:
"A History of Palestine: 634-1099"

At least you're starting to give quotes to back up your history - well done!

No, you are wrong because you debate issues about which you obviously have not even a rudeimentary layman's understanding. You are wrong because you base your views upon what a few whacko propagandists have begun claiming in the past few decades.

And the whole time you've been claiming I am against the tide of history... you are a joke seriously. If I were you, I'd honestly be ashamed to show myself on this forum again. I don't know how people such as yourself just have so little integrity that you post this garbage, for page after page and then say "ahhh my source is weak, not my fault".

Abu,
I never said that Moshe Gil was wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Gil

Quote:

Moshe Gil specializes in the historical interaction between Islam and the Jews, including the history of Palestine under the Islamic domination, the institution of the Exilarchate, and Jewish merchants such as the Radhanites. Gil is professor emeritus of the Chaim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies at Tel Aviv University and holds the Joseph and Ceil Mazer Chair in the History of the Jews in Muslim Lands.

Abu,
Are you saying that you are more knowledgable than a university professor
who specialises in this topic?

But aren't the Jews the CHOSEN people?

Why would GOD discriminate and adopt a cast system of royalty and slavery?

What sort of GOD is that?

I am fairly certain that the Talmud specifically outlines the way that gentiles are to be treated by the CHOSEN people.

Now you can't argue with that my friends

We must all lower our heads in submission and receive our inferiority punishment without resistance.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 7:47pm:

Abu, I never said that Moshe Gil was wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Gil Quote: Moshe Gil specializes in the historical interaction between Islam and the Jews, including the history of Palestine under the Islamic domination, the institution of the Exilarchate, and Jewish merchants such as the Radhanites. Gil is professor emeritus of the Chaim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies at Tel Aviv University and holds the Joseph and Ceil Mazer Chair in the History of the Jews in Muslim Lands. Abu, Are you saying that you are more knowledgable than a university professor who specialises in this topic?

Abu's posts suggest YES Bobby lmao :)

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 11:36pm:

But aren't the Jews the CHOSEN people? Why would GOD discriminate and adopt a cast system of royalty and slavery? What sort of GOD is that? I am fairly certain that the Talmud specifically outlines the way that gentiles are to be treated by the CHOSEN people. Now you can't argue with that my friends We must all lower our heads in submission and receive our inferiority punishment without resistance.

EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people.....

Bobby

Quote:

Abu, Are you saying that you are more knowledgable than a university professor who specialises in this topic?

Lisa,

Quote:

Abu's posts suggest YES Bobby lmao

Yes Lisa - it's a bit like free financial advice.
You get what you pay for.  ;)

Bobby. wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 10:32am:

Bobby Quote: Abu, Are you saying that you are more knowledgable than a university professor who specialises in this topic? Lisa, [quote]Abu's posts suggest YES Bobby lmao

Yes Lisa - it's a bit like free financial advice.
You get what you pay for.  ;)[/quote]

Quite true. Bobby .. why is that every time I enter here .. I feel like I'm hitting my head against the same brick wall?

You also feeling that way?

Don't worry lisa, everyone can't be right or wrong.

Lisa,
Quite true. Bobby .. why is that every time I enter here .. I feel like I'm hitting my head
Quote:

against the same brick wall? You also feeling that way?

I enjoy a good argument sometimes  ;D

zuluwarrior wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 2:48pm:

Don't worry lisa, everyone can't be right or wrong.

?

So if everyone CANT be right or wrong what are they?

[/quote]

EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people.....

[/quote]

Name them please!

As far as we know only the Jewish tribe believe that GOD has Chosen them

In other words that GOD is a racist

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:34pm:

EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people.....

[/quote]

Name them please!

As far as we know only the Jewish tribe believe that GOD has Chosen them

In other words that GOD is a racist[/quote]


Ok, Christianity, Islam, Hindi, Buddhist...etc...

And it's ONLY the jewish religion that SAYS out loud that they are 'God's Chosen People'....all the others THINK it, they just don't say it...

Baptists 'know' they'll be the only ones in Heaven, as do Church of England, and Lutherans, and Catholics and Presbyterians and all the other various Christian churches..

The same applies to the various Islamic sects etc etc...even the "branch Davidians" thought that...as did Jim Jones, and the Solar Temple..

'God' isn't racist.....but the people who create religions ARE...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:43pm:

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:34pm: EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people.....

This is simply not true

So now you are a mind reader of all the other religions of the world.

Are you not aware of the Jewish axiom that there are 2 types of people on this planet? The Jews (GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE) and the gentliles (GODS CHOSEN SLAVES FOR THE JEWS)

I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic.

And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism.
Its also why todays Judaic faith rejects CHristianity.

In the streets of Israeli cities today, Orthodox Jews collect copies of the New Testament or Gospels and burn them publically.

why is that?

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:43pm: EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people..... This is simply not true So now you are a mind reader of all the other religions of the world. Are you not aware of the Jewish axiom that there are 2 types of people on this planet? The Jews (GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE) and the gentliles (GODS CHOSEN SLAVES FOR THE JEWS) I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic.

Foolosophy declares then, "I am not well read."  ?????

Try ISLAM;
While ISLAM is not a philosophy strictly based on 'race', ISLAM does exhibit an irrational and violent bigotry towards ALL 'unbelievers' - for the reason that they are, 'unbelievers'.

e.g.

"Ye [moslems] 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."
Koran 3.110

"...And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah...Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan:.."
Koran 4.74-76

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29






Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism. Its also why todays Judaic faith rejects CHristianity. In the streets of Israeli cities today, Orthodox Jews collect copies of the New Testament or Gospels and burn them publically. why is that?

They are men.

Men are flawed.

We are supposed to make mistakes.

That is what being human is.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 11^th, 2011 at 11:36pm:

I am fairly certain that the Talmud specifically outlines the way that gentiles are to be treated by the CHOSEN people. Now you can't argue with that my friends We must all lower our heads in submission and receive our inferiority punishment without resistance.

Yes i can.




Talmud, Talmud, Talmud, Talmud.

The Talmud is not the law [of God.]


more here, if you are willing to open your eyes ??? ...

Quote:

Strangers under the law of Moses; Exodus 12:49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you. Exodus 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him... Exodus 23:9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger... Leviticus 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34  But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself... Leviticus 25:47-49 [these verses clearly speak of [and reveal that it was entirely 'lawful'] for Hebrews [themselves] to become bond servants [slaves], to prosperous strangers living among the Hebrews.] Deuteronomy 1:16 And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Deuteronomy 10:17-19 For the LORD your God... loveth the stranger, ...Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. Deuteronomy 24:17 Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow's raiment to pledge: 18  But thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee thence: therefore I command thee to do this thing. Deuteronomy 27:19 Cursed be he that perverteth the judgment of the stranger...

"An eye-opening analysis of terrorism in Europe"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1294223444/46#46

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic. And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism.

Incorrect.

Jesus did not reject 'Judaism', and Jesus certainly did not reject God laws.

Read your Bible.

Jesus was Torah observant and a Torah [law!] teacher.


What was Jesus message?
#1, Love God.            Matthew 22:36-37
#2, Obey God's !!laws!!, study the scriptures.            Matthew 19:16-19 John 14:15-21 Luke 24:45
#3, Love your fellow man.            Matthew 22:39 Leviticus 19:18

'Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you'
Matthew 15:2-9

+++
Thou shalt do no murder,
Thou shalt not commit adultery,
Thou shalt not steal,
Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Honour thy father and thy mother

All of the above were quoted by Jesus, from the book(s) of the !!law!!, the Torah,
Exodus 20:12-16
Deuteronomy 5:16-20

And including,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
From, Leviticus 19:18


+++

What did Jesus reject ???

The religious hypocrites of his time.

Those who use religion, and a pretence of a love for God, so as to rule over men.


e.g.
Speaking to the Pharisees, Jesus said;

Luke 16:15
....Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.



ALSO,

Revelation 2:6
But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Revelation 2:15
So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

"...thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

'Nicolaitan' is a word that refers to those who 'rule over' or 'conquer' [Nico] 'the people' [the laity].



Matthew 20:25
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
26  But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
27  And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
28  Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

Mark 10:42
But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them.
43  But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister:
44  And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.

Luke 22:23
And they began to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.
24  And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.
25  And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
26  But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
27  For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.

Yadda wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:54pm: I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic. And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism. Incorrect. Jesus did not reject 'Judaism', and Jesus certainly did not reject God laws.

And by reading the Bible you mean the Old Testament?

lol

How does and "eye for an eye" fit in with the Christian ethic of "turning the other cheek"?

One of the biggest spin jobs perpetrated on people was the glueing of the Old Testament to the Gospels and presenting it as one book.

What sort fo Poltical system would Jesus adovate if he was alive today?

The undemocratic corporate tyranny that enslaves us????

take your time - think about it. Was Jesus a Socialist or a Capitalist?

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 9:32pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 7:30pm: Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:54pm: I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic. And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism. Incorrect. Jesus did not reject 'Judaism', and Jesus certainly did not reject God laws. And by reading the Bible you mean the Old Testament? lol How does and "eye for an eye" fit in with the Christian ethic of "turning the other cheek"?

LOL

Do you think that you will cheat God ?






Quote:

One of the biggest spin jobs perpetrated on people was the glueing of the Old Testament to the Gospels and presenting it as one book. What sort fo Poltical system would Jesus adovate if he was alive today? The undemocratic corporate tyranny that enslaves us???? take your time - think about it. Was Jesus a Socialist or a Capitalist?

Matthew 25:14
For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15  And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16  Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17  And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18  But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
19  After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
20  And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
21  His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
22  He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
23  His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
24  Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
25  And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
26  His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
27  Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
28  Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
29  For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
30  And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.


Proverbs 1:10
My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
11  If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:
12  Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:
13  We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil:
14  Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:



Do you believe that God is a socialist ?

Do you believe that that, is God's intent for us ?

I believe that we are here, because God wishes to us to know and to understand what we will do with the 'talents' that are revealed within ourselves.

And that God wishes to us to know and understand, what we will do with our 'talents', when left to our own devices [choices].

Not so?

Romans 1:19
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Who is without excuse ???

Ourselves.

We all make our own choices, to do good, or, to do evil.

We all have a choice, in how we conduct ourselves in this life.
We all choose.

We ourselves, are the 'gatekeepers' of our hearts.
We choose which spirits we allow [invite] into our hearts.
And nobody [and no spirit] can compel us, to join with them.
And no spirit can compel us to do what is evil.

No body compels us, to choose the evil.

When we choose the evil, we ourselves choose it.

"...so that they are without excuse:"

+++


Is Allah a socialist ???

Moslems?

"And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things."
Koran 8:41

Yadda,

Was Jesus more of a socialist or leaning towards a corporate based capitalist system?

Surely you know - after all that biblical scholary energy you have injected into your life

Even if you have an opinion - you are allowed to have your own personal opinions about issues arent you?

Or has this been banned in your world of immoral jargon and nuerotic Judaic literalism?

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 10:54pm:

Yadda, Was Jesus more of a socialist or leaning towards a corporate based capitalist system? Surely you know - after all that biblical scholary energy you have injected into your life Even if you have an opinion - you are allowed to have your own personal opinions about issues arent you? Or has this been banned in your world of immoral jargon and nuerotic Judaic literalism?

Jesus came, as a servant, and Jesus came as an example to us.

But Jesus is not a servant today.

And God's kingdom, is no 'democracy'.

Neither is it [or God's authority] a tyranny.

Isaiah 55:8
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9  For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.




God, is a spirit.

And we too, are created spirit beings, [somehow] locked within these physical bodies.

'Imprisoned', if you like.


What, or where is, God's kingdom?

And, do any of us have a place in it?

The best way i can explain it to you, is the comparison between light and darkness.



Many atheists say;
"Where is God? I can't see God. God does not exist."

Q.
But can light and darkness, exist together?

A.
Light and darkness, cannot exist together.
Light will drive away the darkness.

Or, the darkness will try to extinguish the light.
But they cannot co-exist.
It is an impossibility.

Light and darkness, and, goodness and wickedness.
They are separate, and by definition, they cannot co-exist.

And, atheists cannot see [or 'comprehend'] God, because the spirit of God will not 'touch' them.

Why not?
Because our God is Holy.
And God will not 'touch' those, who refuse to separate the good, from the evil.
...those who refuse to discern between good, and evil.

God has the power to heal us.

But why would God want to touch what is wicked, and heal it ???

Q.
And, can light, touch, darkness ???

A.
No.

Would God be just, to heal, the wilfully wicked?

God will heal the repentant soul, i believe.


Proverbs 9:10
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

Matthew 13:10
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11  He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12  For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13  Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14  And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15  For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
16  But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.



+++

God's message to all of mankind has always been the same.

God's message, was also Jesus message to mankind;

Isaiah 55:6
Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:
7  Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

Yadda,

Why do you reject the Enlightened Humanism of Christianity for the barbaric immorality and superstition that underpinns the ethics found in the Old testament?

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 11:48pm:

Yadda, Why do you reject the Enlightened Humanism of Christianity for the barbaric immorality and superstition that underpinns the ethics found in the Old testament?

LOL !!!!




Foolosophy,

You are a person who wishes to avoid all responsibility, for the consequences of your choices, imo.

But hey, you are in good company.

Probably 99% of mankind feel the same way, and will agree with your perspective/perceptions.



And, to answer your question,

I said more, here...
Ranking Ethics
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1292918320/24#24

Quote:

....IMO, refusing to condemn the wicked, so as to 'avoid conflict', and so as to promote 'social harmony', is not an ethical position. It is idiocy. IMO, 'humanism', teaches mankind, to abandon all spiritual discernment. IMO, such a position, teaches mankind, to embrace an empty, worldly, 'humanist' 'value' system, a 'religion', a political system, which uses the authority of a false 'righteousness', to rule over a 'blind', worldly directed mankind, imo.

and here...
Ranking Ethics
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1292918320/43#43

Quote:

...The OT Bible teaches and encourages altruism, through adoption of moral standards, and through [applied] judgements, made against a moral standard. [i.e. God's moral standard.] I am a student of the Bible. And IMO, the OT Bible does teach man ethical behaviour.

+++

No eyes to see, no eyes to see, no eyes to see.

Go your own way.

Walk your own path, wilfully.

And always turn away from truth.

Never, ever, be confronted by the truth.

Always reject it, and turn away.

Love the world, and delight in its unrighteousness.

All your choices.

Bear them.


"Then, on the Day of Judgment,.....Then would they offer submission (with the pretence), "We did no evil (knowingly)." (The angels will reply), "Nay, but verily [God] knoweth all that ye did;"
Koran 16.27

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:43pm: Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:34pm: EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people..... This is simply not true So now you are a mind reader of all the other religions of the world. Are you not aware of the Jewish axiom that there are 2 types of people on this planet? The Jews (GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE) and the gentliles (GODS CHOSEN SLAVES FOR THE JEWS) I dont know of any other religion that openly claims this racist theological bigotry as a fundamenal ethic. And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism. Its also why todays Judaic faith rejects CHristianity. In the streets of Israeli cities today, Orthodox Jews collect copies of the New Testament or Gospels and burn them publically. why is that?

I don't need to be a 'mind reader' to know how the other religions think.....
Even within Christianity it's fairly commonly known..
The Catholics think God loves them much more that He does the Anglicans or the Baptists etc, and according to Catholics, none of the other christians will go to heaven.....of course all the other christian faiths think the catholics will be sent straight to hell....

The basis of monotheistic religion is "God loves US more than anyone else"...

Judaism is simply the only one that states it out loud......which isn't any surprise, since it was THE first monotheistic religion.....

Quote:

And remember this was the reason why Jesus CHrist rejected Judaism. Its also why todays Judaic faith rejects CHristianity.

Wrong again...
Jesus did not reject Judaism...He was born, raised, educated, lived and died as a Jew, and was buried as a Jew too...

And the reason Modern Judaism disagrees with Christianity is because Christians see Jesus as the son of God, but Judaism regards him as a Prophet....

How does islam regard jews? This is how:


Quote:

A RADICAL Muslim preacher - who has likened Jews to pigs, denounced Christians and urged children to die for their religion - is teaching Islam to young followers in Sydney after years in exile in the Middle East. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sunday-telegraph/banned-sheik-feiz-mohammed-back-in-australia/story-e6frewt0-1226020408037

Quote:

How does islam regard jews? This is how:

Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews:

They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth."
They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine."
The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..."

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 10:31am:

Quote: How does islam regard jews? This is how: Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews: They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine." The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..."

Martin Luther was a madman.
Next.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 10:31am:

Quote: How does islam regard jews? This is how: Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews: They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine." The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..."

And what where his views on Islam???

"In 1542, Luther read a Latin translation of the Qur'an. He went on to produce several critical pamphlets on the Islamic faith, which he called Mohammedanism or the Turk. Though Luther saw the Muslim faith as a tool of the devil, he was indifferent to its practice: "Let the Turk believe and live as he will, just as one lets the papacy and other false Christians live." He opposed banning the publication of the Qur'an, wanting it exposed to scrutiny"

Martin Luther apparently didn't like ANY religion, except the one HE started....He seems to have hated Catholics and Muslims just as much as Jews....

Quote:

Martin Luther apparently didn't like ANY religion, except the one HE started....He seems to have hated Catholics and Muslims just as much as Jews....

And that has what to do with the point exactly?

If anything it further adds to the impact that there's some Christian leaders who are very hateful of all other religions, as the charge is being made against Islam.

You're actually more beneficial to my arguments than you are detrimental. Stick around.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 2:15pm:

Quote: Martin Luther apparently didn't like ANY religion, except the one HE started....He seems to have hated Catholics and Muslims just as much as Jews.... And that has what to do with the point exactly? If anything it further adds to the impact that there's some Christian leaders who are very hateful of all other religions, as the charge is being made against Islam. You're actually more beneficial to my arguments than you are detrimental. Stick around.

Well sort of....It's more of a highlight of the fact that you only half quote people who hate jews, to advance your hatred of jews, without realising they usually hate Islam just as much...

Since I don't hate Jews, nor any race for that matter, your comment is just baseless.

Unlike Judaism & Christianity, Islam abolished all kinds of racism. This is exemplified in many stories that abound about the statements of Muhammad (pbuh) and of his companions, such as when he rebuked an Arab one time for cursing a black man, to the point the Arab put his own head on the ground and demanded the black man step on his neck.

It's more of a highlight of the fact that you only half quote people who hate jews, to advance your hatred of jews, without realising they usually hate Islam just as much...

- Gizmo

You mean you've only JUST realised this?

Sheesh you're a tad slow lol :P

Naturally .. it will all be denied .. as per normal.

It's kinda like banging your head against the same bit of wall time after time after time .. EVERY time you attempt to hold the light into Abu's entrenched darkness.

Denial functions this way so it shouldn't come as any surprise. I know it isn't much of a surprise to the rest of us.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 4:02pm:

It's more of a highlight of the fact that you only half quote people who hate jews, to advance your hatred of jews, without realising they usually hate Islam just as much... - Gizmo You mean you've only JUST realised this? Sheesh you're a tad slow lol :P Naturally .. it will all be denied .. as per normal. It's kinda like banging your head against the same bit of wall time after time after time .. any time you attempt to hold the light into Abu's entrenched darkness. Denial functions this way so it shouldn't come as any surprise.

Oh no Lisa, I figured it out ages ago....Shortly after I joined this forum in fact...

Quote:

Since I don't hate Jews, nor any race for that matter, your comment is just baseless.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA yeah, right...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 4:06pm:

Quote: Since I don't hate Jews, nor any race for that matter, your comment is just baseless. HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA yeah, right...

LMAO! Didn't I tell you he'll deny it all!

See!!! WE ALL KNOW THE SCRIPT .. it's a tad like that of "Ground Hog Day" lol :P

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 10:31am:

Quote: How does islam regard jews? This is how: Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews: They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine." The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..."

I don't disagree with you. New Age Islam is the only true alleged religion and we can't stand jews. We will one day dominate the world and we will smite with the leg bone of a donkey those who don't have a copy of our book the holy nar'uq.

salad in wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 4:10pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 10:31am: Quote: How does islam regard jews? This is how: Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews: They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine." The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..." I don't disagree with you. New Age Islam is the only true alleged religion and we can't stand jews. We will one day dominate the world and we will smite with the leg bone of a donkey those who don't have a copy of our book the holy nar'uq.

Shouldn't it be the JAWBONE of an ASS???

New Age Islam is the only true alleged religion and we can't stand jews. We will one day dominate the world and we will smite with the leg bone of a donkey those who don't have a copy of our book the holy nar'uq.

- SALAD IN

The nic alone says it all lmao :)

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 4:17pm:

salad in wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 4:10pm: abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 10:31am: Quote: How does islam regard jews? This is how: Yeh as opposed to Christians, like the most influential man in Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther, who stated in his book "On the Jews & their lies" when describing the Jews: They are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine." The synagogue was a "defiled bride, yes, an incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..." I don't disagree with you. New Age Islam is the only true alleged religion and we can't stand jews. We will one day dominate the world and we will smite with the leg bone of a donkey those who don't have a copy of our book the holy nar'uq. Shouldn't it be the JAWBONE of an ASS???

You with me G guy? Lisa's radar has picked up my signal. You with me G guy?

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 3:58pm:

Unlike Judaism & Christianity, Islam abolished all kinds of racism. This is exemplified in many stories that abound about the statements of Muhammad (pbuh) and of his companions, such as when he rebuked an Arab one time for cursing a black man, to the point the Arab put his own head on the ground and demanded the black man step on his neck.

Really Abu ???

IMAGE
http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/god-bless-hitler.jpg

And no good moslem ever exhibits racist tendencies ???

Why don't you WAKE UP Abu, and start telling the truth ???

AN EXAMPLE OF THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT ABU CLAIMS,;

Quote:

April 21, 2007 How a British jihadi saw the light Ed Hussain, once a proponent of radical Islam in London, tells how his time as a teacher in Saudi Arabia led him to turn against extremism ...A non-Saudi black student I had met at the British Council accompanied me. “Last week a woman gave birth here,” he said, pointing to a ramshackle cardboard shanty. Disturbed, I now realised that the materials I had seen those women carrying were not always for sale but for shelter. I had never expected to see such naked poverty in Saudi Arabia. At that moment it dawned on me that Britain, my home, had given refuge to thousands of black Africans from Somalia and Sudan: I had seen them in their droves in Whitechapel. They prayed, had their own mosques, were free and were given government housing. Many Muslims enjoyed a better lifestyle in non-Muslim Britain than they did in Muslim Saudi Arabia. At that moment I longed to be home again. All my talk of ummah seemed so juvenile now. It was only in the comfort of Britain that Islamists could come out with such radical utopian slogans as one government, one ever expanding country, for one Muslim nation. The racist reality of the Arab psyche would never accept black and white people as equal. ...Racism was an integral part of Saudi society. My students often used the word “black person” to describe black people. Even dark-skinned Arabs were considered inferior to their lighter-skinned cousins. I was living in the world’s most avowedly Muslim country, yet I found it anything but. I was appalled by the imposition of Wahhabism in the public realm, something I had implicitly sought as an Islamist.

original timesonline link, now dead;
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/book_extracts/article1685726.ece#
Google;
"How a British jihadi saw the light"


Abu,

You claim that Mohammed was a fair, unbiased person [<--- that is the implication of your words].

Do you remember how Mohammed 'and his companions' went to speak to local [Arabian] Jews ???

And do you remember how Mohammed told those local [Arabian] Jews that they must sell all of their property to moslems, because Mohammed was going to exile them [i.e. expel the Arabian Jews from Arabia] ???

And that Mohammed was expelling them from Arabia, BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS [i.e. not moslems] .

I can find the Hadith refs for you.

In fact, i am certain that i have already posted the account of that incident, here on OzPol.


Quote:

"While we were in the mosque, Allah's Apostle came out to us and said, "Let us proceed to the Jews." So we went along with him till we reached Bait-al-Midras (a place where the Torah used to be recited and all the Jews of the town used to gather). The Prophet stood up and addressed them, "O Assembly of Jews! Embrace Islam and you will be safe!" The Jews replied, "O Aba-l-Qasim! You have conveyed Allah's message to us." The Prophet said, "That is what I want (from you)." He repeated his first statement for the second time, and they said, "You have conveyed Allah's message, O Aba-l-Qasim." Then he said it for the third time and added, "You should Know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to exile you from,,, this land, so whoever among you owns some property, can sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle." "

"Israel begins sell-off of refugees’ land"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1250746280/6#6


So Abu, when moslems take over Australia, will moslems make the same ultimatum to Australians ???

"You should Know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to exile you from,,, this land,.."

Following the example of Mohammed, when moslems take over Australia, will moslems, tell Australians that they will expel Australians, unless they adopt/embrace ISLAM ???

THAT, is what Mohammed did.

Because the whole world, belongs to moslems, and Allah.

Isn't that so Abu ???

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 3:58pm:

Unlike Judaism & Christianity, Islam abolished all kinds of racism. This is exemplified in many stories that abound about the statements of Muhammad (pbuh) and of his companions, such as when he rebuked an Arab one time for cursing a black man, to the point the Arab put his own head on the ground and demanded the black man step on his neck.

Abu,

If what you expressed above, is indeed true, please tell us all,
WHERE IS THE BEST EXAMPLE IN THE MOSLEM WORLD, OF WHERE SUCH HIGH IDEALS ARE BEING OPENLY EMBRACED BY GOOD MOSLEMS ???

e.g.
Where in the moslems world, are Jewish people treated without bias and discrimination ????

IMAGE
http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/god-bless-hitler.jpg








"Ye [moslems] 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."
Koran 3.110

Google;
maid abuse, saudi arabia

Quote:

And no good moslem ever exhibits racist tendencies ???

I don't recall saying no Muslim ever exhibits racism, in fact the story I brought before showed that an Arab did exhibit racism, but that he was severely rebuked for it.

Just as if I ever saw any Muslim carrying signs like that, I'd rebuke them also.


Quote:

AN EXAMPLE OF THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT ABU CLAIMS

"Ed" Hussein is just another of the long line of opportunists, who saw a chance to make a quick buck selling off his religion, and had no qualms in doing so. His experience in the British-founded kingdom of Saudi Arabia is probably true, that country is a despicable racist tyranny, no arguments from, nor from the vast majority of Muslims there. We are the ones who oppose Saudi Arabia, you are the ones who established it, and who continue to prop it up. Don't you think it's a little rich that you want to use your own puppet kingdom as an example of why you believe Islam is bad?


Quote:

Do you remember how Mohammed 'and his companions' went to speak to local [Arabian] Jews ???

Ahhh, do you mean the Jews who agreed to be his citizens, and then assisted invading armies to attack their city? Yes I remember those swine quite well. They got everything they deserved. Tell me Yadda, if Aussie-Muslims assisted Indonesia or another Muslim country to invade Australia and the army was eventually repelled, how would you and other Aussie-Christians deal with the Muslims in the aftermath? I think it would be far worse than how Muhammad (pbuh) did with the traiterous Jews.


Quote:

So Abu, when moslems take over Australia, will moslems make the same ultimatum to Australians ???

Muslims never made this ultimatum to lands they took over. They made it to people who aided and abetted invading armies.


Quote:

THAT, is what Mohammed did.

Don't you feel any shame at all in being such an open liar and fabricator? Doesn't your religion teach you anything about truth? Don't you fear a day when you'll be raised up and called to account for all the garbage and hate you speak about others?


Quote:

WHERE IS THE BEST EXAMPLE IN THE MOSLEM WORLD, OF WHERE SUCH HIGH IDEALS ARE BEING OPENLY EMBRACED BY GOOD MOSLEMS ??

I've stated countless times before the historical FACT that Islam has not been implemented anywhere since the demise of the Ottoman Caliphate. Since you are an open liar and fabricator, it doesn't surprise me that you would refuse to acknowledge this, since first and foremost you are deceptive to your own self.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 8:53am:

I don't recall saying no Muslim ever exhibits racism, in fact the story I brought before showed that an Arab did exhibit racism, but that he was severely rebuked for it. Just as if I ever saw any Muslim carrying signs like that, I'd rebuke them also.

Of course you would.

But please tell us Abu, why is it that so, so, many people who refer to themselves as moslems, fail to exhibit the high ideals of anti-racism which you claim Mohammed professed, and which you claim ISLAM embraces ???

i.e.
What i am asking Abu, is,
Why do so many of those people, who refer to themselves as good moslems, so misunderstand Mohammed's 'good' example ???
Abu,
Why are so many of those people who refer to themselves as moslems, such raging hypocrites in their open conduct in the world ???
Abu,
Why are so many people [self declaring moslems] so mistaken as to how they interpret ISLAM ???

Abu,
Why do so many moslem, who refer to themselves as moslems, fall so short of Allah's description of moslems ???

e.g. Saudi moslems, Iranian moslems, Iraqi moslems, Afghani moslems, Pakistani moslems ???

"Ye [moslems] 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."
Koran 3.110

Abu,
Everytime i point to the misdeeds of who refer to themselves as moslems, you claim they are moslem 'hypocrite's [as per the description in the Koran].

Abu,
Where are all of the good, the very best examples of moslems ???

Why don't you point to some of those communities of good moslems, so that we 'unbelievers', may admire these true moslem paragons of virtue, who walk this earth ???

Where are all of those people who are paragons of virtue, who call themselves moslems ???



And why aren't they 'Jihading' against those hypocrites, who refer to themselves as moslems ???

Oh sorry, sorry!

Of course, they are 'Jihading' against those hypocrites, who refer to themselves as moslems!

Google;
Iraq bombing in market kills dozens

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 8:53am:

"Ed" Hussein is just another of the long line of opportunists, who saw a chance to make a quick buck selling off his religion, and had no qualms in doing so. His experience in the British-founded kingdom of Saudi Arabia is probably true, that country is a despicable racist tyranny, no arguments from, nor from the vast majority of Muslims there. We are the ones who oppose Saudi Arabia, you are the ones who established it, and who continue to prop it up. Don't you think it's a little rich that you want to use your own puppet kingdom as an example of why you believe Islam is bad?

NEWSFLASH Abu.

Saudi Arabia, is not a colony of Britain.



Abu,

Your response to the bad behaviour of moslems is so, so, typical.

#1,
Deny all responsibility for the consequences of their own choices.
#2,
Project all of the guilt, for the misdeeds of moslems, onto others [i.e. non-moslems].


Q.
When will moslems ever, ever, accept responsibility,
#1,
for their own choices ???,
#2,
for the consequences of their own choices ???

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 8:53am:

Ahhh, do you mean the Jews who agreed to be his citizens, and then assisted invading armies to attack their city? Yes I remember those swine quite well. They got everything they deserved. Tell me Yadda, if Aussie-Muslims assisted Indonesia or another Muslim country to invade Australia and the army was eventually repelled, how would you and other Aussie-Christians deal with the Muslims in the aftermath? I think it would be far worse than how Muhammad (pbuh) did with the traiterous Jews.

More typical moslem projection of guilt.

Moslems are always good.

And, whenever moslems commit any reprehensible act, moslems will always project all of the blame for the 'justified' moslem actions [atrocities against the victims of moslem aggression], onto their victims.



EXAMPLE #1

Quote:

"......In public interviews Bakri condemned the killing of all innocent civilians. Later when he addressed his own followers he explained that he had in fact been referring only to Muslims as only they were innocent: Yes I condemn killing any innocent people, but not any kuffar."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1724541,00.html


EXAMPLE #2

Quote:

April 19, 2004 "We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and unbelievers. And the life of an unbeliever has no value. It has no sanctity." [one time UK moslem community leader, Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad]

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/19/1082326119414.html



REGARD FOR LIFE...
AS PER MOHAMMED'S PRONOUNCEMENTS...

"The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." "
bukhari/ #004.052.256

Here, clearly, Mohammed expressed no care, whatsoever, for the 'welfare', or safety, of non-combatants [women and children, who were non-moslems].

And why?

Because they are only 'from them', non-moslems.

....the bottom line is the post 1967 occupation of Palestinian territory, the illegal erection of security barriers, the illegal settlement constructions and illegal kidnapping and detention of Palestinians.

Not to mention the war crimes perpetrated by the Israeli State and its refusal to abide by UN resolutions (you know the ones tha the USA vetoes)

So my friends until these issues are tackled in an honest and open manner, there will never be a peaceful resolution for both the Palestinians and the Israeli populatons.

AS we know from recently leaked documents concerning the so called peace process and road maps, it seems that Israel has NO will to obtain a peacefull outcome but rather to stall the process and continue the occupation and settlement building.

Yadda wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 3:58pm: Unlike Judaism & Christianity, Islam abolished all kinds of racism. This is exemplified in many stories that abound about the statements of Muhammad (pbuh) and of his companions, such as when he rebuked an Arab one time for cursing a black man, to the point the Arab put his own head on the ground and demanded the black man step on his neck. Abu, If what you expressed above, is indeed true, please tell us all, WHERE IS THE BEST EXAMPLE IN THE MOSLEM WORLD, OF WHERE SUCH HIGH IDEALS ARE BEING OPENLY EMBRACED BY GOOD MOSLEMS ??? e.g. Where in the moslems world, are Jewish people treated without bias and discrimination ???? IMAGE http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/god-bless-hitler.jpg "Ye [moslems] 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." Koran 3.110 Google; maid abuse, saudi arabia

YOU should know that facts don't matter to Abu. They get in the way.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 8:53am:

Muslims never made this ultimatum to lands they took over. They made it to people who aided and abetted invading armies.

As per usual;
When you confront moslems with their own misdeeds, moslems will always project all of the guilt, for the misdeeds of moslems, onto others [i.e. non-moslems].

IMAGE
http://www.jihadwatch.org/Arab%20Wave.jpg

Image source;
ISLAM 101
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html

Yes those poor moslems, with their lands being invaded by infidels all of the time.
/sarc off

From 650 AD through 1100 AD moslem armies tried to take over the known world.

Abu,
What gave moslems the right, to invade other countries ???
What gave moslems the right, to spread ISLAM by the sword ???

Oh that's right, it is ISLAM itself, which justifies moslem expansionism, and conquest.




Because, the whole world belongs to moslems;
According to Allah....

"Or have they gods that can guard them from Us? They have no power to aid themselves, nor can they be defended from Us.
Nay, We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"
Koran 21:43-44

"And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things."
Koran 33:27

OUCH! Too much truth .. too many facts. We can't have that you know.

Islam was spread by the sword.
People were murdered in it's name.

It seems that just about all religions except Buddism
are used to justify murdering people.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 11:14am:

It seems that just about all religions [have been] used to justify murdering people.

I won't make any argument against that assertion.

It is true, imo.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 11:14am:

Islam was spread by the sword. People were murdered in it's name. It seems that just about all religions except Buddism are used to justify murdering people.

Google;
buddhists take up arms

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:43pm: Foolosophy wrote on Mar 12th, 2011 at 4:34pm: EVERY religion thinks they are their god's CHOSEN people..... This is simply not true So now you are a mind reader of all the other religions of the world. Are you not aware of the Jewish axiom that there are 2 types of people on this planet? The Jews (GODS CHOSEN PEOPLE) and the gentliles (GODS CHOSEN SLAVES FOR THE JEWS)

Only individuals can choose to believe the above or not.
Either way, the only peoples who still carry out the ancient practice of human trafficking and slavery in 2011 is the Muslims.

Yadda wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 12:03pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 14th, 2011 at 11:14am: Islam was spread by the sword. People were murdered in it's name. It seems that just about all religions except Buddism are used to justify murdering people. Google; buddhists take up arms

What's your point Yadda???

None of the links are about buddhists taking up arms to spread the religion, they're all about buddhist using force to defend their country, or religion...Chalk and cheese..

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 2:42pm:

What's your point Yadda??? None of the links are about buddhists taking up arms to spread the religion, they're all about buddhist using force to defend their country, or religion...Chalk and cheese..

My point is that whether it is Buddhism, or any other religion, the devotees are human, i.e. flawed.

We all are.

e.g.
Google;
buddhist monk rape charge



p.s.
I concede, that Buddhism the philosophy, does not condone such conduct, ...the bad conduct which some Buddhists have been seen, to have engaged in, or have been accused of.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 10:32am:

....the bottom line is the post 1967 occupation of Palestinian territory, the illegal erection of security barriers, the illegal settlement constructions and illegal kidnapping and detention of Palestinians. Not to mention the war crimes perpetrated by the Israeli State and its refusal to abide by UN resolutions (you know the ones tha the USA vetoes) So my friends until these issues are tackled in an honest and open manner, there will never be a peaceful resolution for both the Palestinians and the Israeli populatons. AS we know from recently leaked documents concerning the so called peace process and road maps, it seems that Israel has NO will to obtain a peacefull outcome but rather to stall the process and continue the occupation and settlement building.

And of course they are even less inclined to give away land for peace whilst missiles are still landing in Sderot and other Israeli towns.
And don't get too caught up in those UN Resolutions.
The wars perpetrated by the Arabs wiped out those non binding Resolutions long ago.
Just like the Arab League gave their opinion of the 2 state solution in 1948 when they attacked Israel the first time round.
The Islamics can lay down their arms tomorrow and their will be peace.
Israel lays down it's arms tomorrow and their will be no more Israel.

Quote:

As per usual; When you confront moslems with their own misdeeds, moslems will always project all of the guilt, for the misdeeds of moslems, onto others [i.e. non-moslems]. IMAGE

Nice map Yadda. Just out of curiosity can you explain to me where "Christendom" began? And if it wasn't "spread all over Europe" from day 1, exactly how did it become so? Specially I'd like to know about the various crusades and campaigns against the "heathen" that the early Christian leaders conducted in order to "earn" their place in heaven. As well as the various inquisitions and the like that resulted in all non-Catholic variations being almost completely wiped off the map too.