|
|
#112
12-07-2004, 02:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why dont we start at the beginning
Utterly ridiculous. While it's too late now to do anything about it, but prior to the formation of Israel it's insane to suggest that would-be imigrants from across the world had the same right to the land of Palestine as the people who actually lived there and had been living there for hundreds of years.
And the only reason they were there was Arab imperialism, which conquered Israel in the 6th century. So again, this is about the return of Jewish refugees in exile to the rightful Jewish homeland. See, by choosing to start the clock at just before Zionism, you negate the existence of the Jewish homeland. I choose to start the clock at the beginning. Day 1. And Jews controlled Israel (with intermittent absences) from day 1 until about 576 AD. Then the Arab imperialists came and threw them out, allowing nomadic Arab tribes to take over. Then the Jews want back, and NOW you start history. Don't work that way sir. 
|
|
#113
12-07-2004, 02:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why dont we start at the beginning
NO,donkey riding migrants from Syria have much more of a right to the land. FYI most of these "palestinians" came to the land in the late 19th century to work for the burgeoning economy the Jews were creating(even top arab scholars admitted this when the debate hadnt slipped into this la la land phase ss Ed Said's book on his childhood.)
|
|
#116
12-07-2004, 03:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why dont we start at the beginning
oh and on the surface there may be nothing wrong with chechens fighting for indipendence against ruissia but when you enter a school and blow up 300 grade school kids you are nothing but a [censored] terrorist. complete scum that dont deserve to live, nevermind have an indipendent country
|
|
#117
12-07-2004, 05:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Impish today, are we
"...there was Arab imperialism, which conquered Israel in the 6th century."
A minor point, amidst all that crap of yours: You cannot call it "imperialism" by any stretch of the terminology. But exactitude was never your forte. (More like an anathema.)
|
|
#119
12-08-2004, 02:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Naturally.
Muslims dont want war?? They are only responding to aggression by Israel and AAmerica?? Ok lets let one of the top Imams in Saudi Arabia resolve our disagreement. Note: this text was originally in arabic and translated by my Algerian friend for a paper on Algerian civil war. If there is a request for a footnote Im pretty sure one can be arranged..BTW this is a very moderate quote and was delivered to approximately 75,000 people. The audience cheered wildly during breaks in the speech according to the article.
Paraphrased from Fridays sermon at the main mosque of Mecca 3rd week of the hajj 2002-- We know that what happened in New York was not injustice but rather perfect justice that only a benevolent and wise creator could meet out. The reason's for strife between the Umma and unbelievers is NOT manifold its origins come from one basic phenomenon. It is because we as Muslims have failed to clense (by war or conversion) the world of unbelievers. Our fathers and their fathers were wise bc they engaged in conquest. They understood conquest was necessary for the peace and enlightenment of all people. When Islam spread it flourished, this is because Islams spread gladdened the heart of G-d. When Islam stopped attempting to spread the Umma became stultified, our progress in all things regressed and the Umma shrunk in power and size. Now again the Muslims of the world are lead by the arabs to continue and complete what our fathers began. We must make war against those that offend G-d and who would destroy us. This is not only Israel and America...Yes we have conflict now with Jews and Americans but we will always have conflict with Non-Muslims. Non-Muslims and the Umma will be in constant conflict because they do not know the true face of G-d and we do. ............
|
|
#120
12-08-2004, 07:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why dont we start at the beginning
This is an incredibly stupid and irrlevant argument, but I will humour you.
"And the only reason they were there was Arab imperialism, which conquered Israel in the 6th century." The Arabs did not conquer Israel in the sixth century. The Arab conquests began after the Jews had been expelled from Palestine. I am sure you know this, and I don't know why you insist on making yourself look foolish. "See, by choosing to start the clock at just before Zionism" Try a thousand year before Zionism and you get the same thing. "Then the Arab imperialists came and threw them out, allowing nomadic Arab tribes to take over." No, they didn't; see above. The issue isn;t when the clock started, although if it were we can go back to a time when people other than the Jews lived there, but the fact that whoever was there first, noone has a right to turf out or reclaim land that people have lived on and made their homes on for centuries. As someone else posted, hundreds of peoples have occupied lands at different points in time; arguing about who was there first thousands of years ago is absurd. Incidentally, arguing that all the Jews in Israel should go home because it belinged to the Palestinians is also abusrd, although slightly less so; they too have made their homes there and are now too settled to leave. The point is that it was wrong at the time (just as it was wrong to expel the Jews in the 6th century) and given that there are still survivors alive, that the same state still exists and essentially the same legal system, and that people are still suffering from it, the state of Israel bears a lot of responsibility to help those that have suffered from it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
